I want an FA 31 F1.8 LTD

nulla · 08-13-2008, 08:21 PM

Quote:

(I think what we're doing is against the Geneva Convention)

But this is the Pentax Convention

**Eaglerapids** · 08-13-2008, 09:11 PM

Also, it sucks rendering the color blue and it can't handle any bright highlights without collapsing.

**Eaglerapids** · 08-13-2008, 09:59 PM

Not much good for landscape style pics either (not sharp enough).

melander · 08-13-2008, 11:30 PM

Concider I will have to spend 1500 dollar to get it in sweden, 800 $ is a bargin.

BUY IT NOW

welshwizard645 · 08-14-2008, 12:11 AM

Considering I already have:

FA 28
FA 35
FA 50
FA* 85

I don't need:

FA 31 Ltd
FA 43 Ltd
FA 77 Ltd

But I want them...

Asahiflex · 08-14-2008, 12:14 AM

I'm on the run for the lens police. But I'll buy the 31 Limited though.

Mike Cash · 08-14-2008, 02:10 AM

As suggested by jsherman above....There is always the alternative of getting a nice Takumar 35/3.5 and saving yourself about 750 bucks.

Gotta focus it yourself, of course.

ChrisN · 08-14-2008, 02:47 AM

Originally posted by Jasvox

Talk me out of it, please...Jason

Terrible with B&W film, too.

roentarre · 08-14-2008, 03:27 AM

pschlute · 08-14-2008, 03:43 AM

It can't do flower pictures either.....

**rparmar** · 08-14-2008, 09:02 AM

Try these instead:
Super Takumar 35
FA 35
DA 35 macro Limited

Or any of a number of 28mm lenses. I'm soon testing four different ones.

You can buy all seven for the price of the FA 31. Keep the one you like and sell the rest off again.

You need a good lens. You need a very good lens. You do not need the "best" lens.

Jasvox · 08-14-2008, 12:04 PM

wow, all very convincing posts about the terrible quality of this lens.

I am glad I asked!

I think when I head to the States in a couple of months, I will try the FA35/2 side by side with the 31 Ltd...I wish I knew someone who had a Super-Tak 35. I am all about saving money, especially if the performance of the more affordable lens exceeds my expectations.

Thank you all.

Jason

nixcamic · 08-14-2008, 12:15 PM

Do any of the older cheap manual lenses get close to the F/1.8 or F/2 aperture offered by the FAs?

k100d · 08-14-2008, 12:29 PM

yes, the 35mm f2 design goes way back

Gooshin · 08-14-2008, 12:40 PM

since were on the subject

anyone know if the FA limiteds designs pre-date the regular FA/FA* lineup?

08-13-2008, 08:21 PM	#16
nulla Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 1,560	Quote: (I think what we're doing is against the Geneva Convention) But this is the Pentax Convention

08-13-2008, 09:11 PM	#17
Eaglerapids Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Idaho,USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,619	Also, it sucks rendering the color blue and it can't handle any bright highlights without collapsing.

08-13-2008, 09:59 PM	#18
Eaglerapids Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Idaho,USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,619	Not much good for landscape style pics either (not sharp enough).

08-13-2008, 11:30 PM	#19
melander Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Sweden, Umea Posts: 876	Concider I will have to spend 1500 dollar to get it in sweden, 800 $ is a bargin. BUY IT NOW

08-14-2008, 12:11 AM	#20
welshwizard645 Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Denbigh, Wales Posts: 62	Considering I already have: FA 28 FA 35 FA 50 FA* 85 I don't need: FA 31 Ltd FA 43 Ltd FA 77 Ltd But I want them...

08-14-2008, 12:14 AM	#21
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	I'm on the run for the lens police. But I'll buy the 31 Limited though.

08-14-2008, 02:10 AM	#22
Mike Cash Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Japan Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,950	As suggested by jsherman above....There is always the alternative of getting a nice Takumar 35/3.5 and saving yourself about 750 bucks. Gotta focus it yourself, of course.

08-14-2008, 03:27 AM	#24
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783

08-14-2008, 03:43 AM	#25
pschlute Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Surrey, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,202	It can't do flower pictures either.....

08-14-2008, 09:02 AM	#26
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	Try these instead: Super Takumar 35 FA 35 DA 35 macro Limited Or any of a number of 28mm lenses. I'm soon testing four different ones. You can buy all seven for the price of the FA 31. Keep the one you like and sell the rest off again. You need a good lens. You need a very good lens. You do not need the "best" lens.

08-14-2008, 12:04 PM	#27
Jasvox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 3,107 Original Poster	wow, all very convincing posts about the terrible quality of this lens. I am glad I asked! I think when I head to the States in a couple of months, I will try the FA35/2 side by side with the 31 Ltd...I wish I knew someone who had a Super-Tak 35. I am all about saving money, especially if the performance of the more affordable lens exceeds my expectations. Thank you all. Jason

08-14-2008, 12:15 PM	#28
nixcamic Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Guatemala Posts: 354	Do any of the older cheap manual lenses get close to the F/1.8 or F/2 aperture offered by the FAs?

08-14-2008, 12:29 PM	#29
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	yes, the 35mm f2 design goes way back

08-14-2008, 12:40 PM	#30
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	since were on the subject anyone know if the FA limiteds designs pre-date the regular FA/FA* lineup?