Originally posted by bdery Why not go and read the review of each lens right here on pentaxforums?
Because DXO is neutral and compares all lenses on the same criteria. Whether or not we agree with the criteria is worth discussing, but isn't really a conversation that I'm interested in having. I appreciate the reviews here and they've definitely influenced my buying decisions. Again, I'm not interested in this from a consumer point of view, I'm just curious how they stack up on the technical side compared to competitors. The K1 hasn't been used in any of the lens testing, that I can see, for any of the older FA lenses. I'm just curious, that's all.
---------- Post added 06-26-2018 at 09:56 AM ----------
Originally posted by Aslyfox Because this is a community passionate about their system. That's helpful inside the group, but I'm interested in a comparative analysis. Again, the point of my initial inquiry is that I'm simply curious how the DA Ltds would measure on DXO tests with updated crop sensors, since I've seen big jumps in lens performance between various cameras in other systems.
---------- Post added 06-26-2018 at 10:00 AM ----------
Originally posted by northcoastgreg Yes, that's right. And so there are lenses out there from other brands that are "sharper." But here's the rub. To make lenses "sharper," (i.e., so they do better on resolution tests) manufacturers have to ratchet up the accutance. That causes the lens to render the edges of objects against a background with a very hard edge, which looks unnatural and causes the image as a whole to look flat. The limiteds give up a little bit of measurable resolution to provide a more natural sharpness, one that renders detail in a way that's closer to human perception.
Broadly speaking, lens characteristics can be broken down into two categories: the technical and measurable, and the pictoral and qualitative. Lenses that are high in both technical and pictorial qualities tend to be quite expensive: think Leica. Or they're ridiculously large: think Olympus SHG lenses or the new DFA* primes. The limiteds are high in pictorial qualities, they're compact, and they're relatively affordable (especially when compared to Leica), but the trade-off is they not the best lenses in terms of technical measurable specifications. They're a little less sharp than the best lenses out there and, at least in my experience (with the DA 15, DA 21, and DA 35), they're not all that sharp away from the center at longer distances.
I totally get that. The DA Ltds are really great for the price. No doubt about that. I'm just curious to see how much of a sharpness jump they'd see with higher resolution or different camera sensors. In the one I referenced above, the variable sharpness readings of the same lens on different cameras appears to be corrolated directly to the resolution of the camera.
---------- Post added 06-26-2018 at 10:31 AM ----------
Sony FE 50mm F1.8 on Sony A5000 vs Sony FE 28mm F2 on Sony A5000 vs Pentax HD DA 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited on Pentax K-S1
For further illustration of what I'm interested to see, I've compared two different Sony lenses (50/1.8 & 28/2) that have excellent marks on the A7rii, but tested them on the a5000, which has a similar sensor as the K-s1 (as far as I can tell--20mp aps-c.) When tested on the a5000 those lenses score 19 & 21 respectively. The DA HD 35mm Ltd scores 19 on the K-s1. But when stepped up to the larger, higher resolution sensor on the A7Rii the sony lens scores jump to 37 & 40 respectively. So, my curiosity is to how the Ltds might fare on better sensors. I know that's not offered at the moment, but I'm curious nonetheless.