[Na Horuk]

Optically they're the same, based on everything I've read.

From the in depth review, it appears the optics are the same

The XS was marketed as having rounded blades, as was the HD version. The SMC version was not marketed as such, though I seem to remember a forum user claiming that there is no difference in bokeh between SMC and XS version. HD features newer coatings and the PF review claims it has even better contrast, flare resistance than the SMC. My XS is a little prone to fringing wide open, but it is quite sharp and good, even without lens hood, if you go above f3.2. I usually shoot at f5.6-f8 with it, but my recent f2.8 photos with it were really sharp with nice creamy bokeh.
The XS lacks QS, DoF scales, hood, and it has almost useless 27mm filter ring (though, you can still find some filters for this size, at really low costs). XS has plastic body, but the mount is metal (unlike DA 35mm f2.4 or the DA L kit lenses)
Some users claimed the XS is optically different because it has been recessed further into the body to make it even thinner. Pretty sure it is/was the thinnest DSLR lens produced (ignoring "pinhole" lenses, because these are not really lenses). The DXo reviews give really odd measurements, and sometimes show the XS as the sharpest one. I suspect this is due to either copy variation or sloppy test work. I would assume the HD is optically the best, even if the differences are imperceptible in most light conditions. I have not seen a direct comparison of a large sample of all three of these versions which would clear everything up. But I doubt anyone owns all three, because they are so similar.

Bottom line is, we don't actually know. The Pentax engineers are the only ones that know what exactly is different between versions. Coatings, optical tweaks, aperture blades, inner barrel.. lots of factors to consider and we simply do not have the info. Would I buy the HD? No, because I got a nice XS with the K-01. But I am sure the SMC and HD versions are optically so similar to the XS that I could safely recommend whichever one. Comes down to features and budget. If you are planning on shooting in extremely difficult light conditions, the HD might make sense. If you are planning on doing starburst/diffraction spike photography, the SMC might be best. If you want a super light travel prime, get the XS.

---

Last edited by Na Horuk; 01-04-2018 at 01:02 PM.

[aslyfox]

The XS was marketed as having rounded blades, as was the HD version. The SMC version was not marketed as such, though I seem to remember a forum user claiming that there is no difference in bokeh between SMC and XS version. HD features newer coatings and the PF review claims it has even better contrast, flare resistance than the SMC. My XS is a little prone to fringing wide open, but it is quite sharp and good, even without lens hood, if you go above f3.2. I usually shoot at f5.6-f8 with it, but my recent f2.8 photos with it were really sharp with nice creamy bokeh.
The XS lacks QS, DoF scales, hood, and it has almost useless 27mm filter ring (though, you can still find some filters for this size, at really low costs). XS has plastic body, but the mount is metal (unlike DA 35mm f2.4 or the DA L kit lenses)
Some users claimed the XS is optically different because it has been recessed further into the body to make it even thinner. Pretty sure it is/was the thinnest DSLR lens produced (ignoring "pinhole" lenses, because these are not really lenses). The DXo reviews give really odd measurements, and sometimes show the XS as the sharpest one. I suspect this is due to either copy variation or sloppy test work. I would assume the HD is optically the best, even if the differences are imperceptible in most light conditions. I have not seen a direct comparison of a large sample of all three of these variations which would clear everything up.

Bottom line is, we don't actually know. The Pentax engineers are the only ones that know what exactly is different between versions. Would I buy the HD? No, because I got a nice XS with the K-01. But I am sure the SMC and HD versions are optically so similar to the XS that I could safely recommend whichever one. Comes down to features and budget. If you are planning on shooting in extremely difficult light conditions, the HD might make sense. If you are planning on doing starburst/diffraction spike photography, the SMC might be best. If you want a super light travel prime, get the XS.

I think I will stay with the XS ( which I actually found with the K-01 at my local brick and mortar photography store )

I left the K-01 and bought the lens

an early effort with the lens: two photos, one cropped and pp and the other SOC

not a bad " telephoto "

[monochrome]

I think I will stay with the XS ( which I actually found with the K-01 at my local brick and mortar photography store )

I left the K-01 and bought the lens

an early effort with the lens: two photos, one cropped and pp and the other SOC

not a bad " telephoto "

This thread has been really good - like the old days of 2006 & 2007.

For an encore, start another ‘Is the K-01 worth the money?’ Thread

.:

[jddwoods]

I wouldn't buy the DA 40 limited if you own the XS. If you really like that focal length, the tactile experience of using the DA limited is better than using the plastic XS lens.

At the same time, if you are interested in getting a DA limited, I would look at one of the ones (15, 21,35, or 70) over the 40. A lot depends on your style of shooting (my impression is that you like longer lenses), but you could do a lot worse than pick up a used copy of the DA 15 limited.

Agree, if you want to get started with the limiteds the 15 is the best one to start with. Unless you have the DA14 f2.8 or the fisheye, it is wider than any other Pentax lens else. I find it is a good complement to the DA 16-85 zoom.

[angerdan]

Four Champions are Crowned - Pentax Lens Tournament | PentaxForums.com

After 21 days and thousands of Pentaxian votes, four champions have emerged:

• The DA 15mm F4 Limited is the Greatest Wide Angle
• The FA 31mm F1.8 Limited is the Greatest Normal
• The FA 77mm F1.8 Limited is the Greatest Short Tele

[BigMackCam]

Four Champions are Crowned - Pentax Lens Tournament | PentaxForums.com

After 21 days and thousands of Pentaxian votes, four champions have emerged:

• The DA 15mm F4 Limited is the Greatest Wide Angle
• The FA 31mm F1.8 Limited is the Greatest Normal
• The FA 77mm F1.8 Limited is the Greatest Short Tele

... and the fourth?

EDIT: Ah, it's the DA*300

[aslyfox]

Four Champions are Crowned - Pentax Lens Tournament | PentaxForums.com

After 21 days and thousands of Pentaxian votes, four champions have emerged: . . .

popularity contests may not be all that accurate [ or they may be very accurate ]

in other words

YMMV

and following the crowd may not be the right path to enlightenment

[mattb123]

I believe that the following Pentax lenses have great reputations:

SMC Pentax-FA 31mm F1.8 AL Limited

SMC Pentax-FA 43mm F1.9 Limited

SMC Pentax-FA 77mm F1.8 Limited

____________________

the following can be either HD or SMC

Pentax-DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited

Pentax-DA 21mm F3.2 Limited

Pentax-DA 35mm F2.8 Limited Macro

Pentax-DA 40mm F2.8 Limited

Pentax-DA 70mm F2.4 Limited

1 are they worth their reputations

2 I notice that the older FAs are faster, is that because of the different focal lengths or other reasons

3 if only one can be chosen, [ excluding the 40 mm, I have the 40mm XS ] which one would be the best?

I have the SMC 15, 40 Limited, and FA 77/1.8 and I love them all.

1. I'd say yes but they won't make you a better photographer.

2. Film era lenses. Now with digital bodies you can increase ISO more easily if needed. (doesn't address DOF but not a big deal IMO).

3. Depends on what/how you like to shoot. I'd say the 15 or 77 depending on if you prefer long or wide. The 15 was my first Limited and it has served me well. In fact it was my first non-kit lens for my K-x. The 77 is great for portraits and mine paid for itself almost immediately with a portrait project for the local hospital. Works great on the K-1 too!

[aslyfox]

between lusting for a SMC DA 21 limited and the SMC DA 15 limited

although if the price is right, I might choose the HD versions

as noted I don't really have a wide angle lens when the ASP- C camera bodies are considered

however I am not a fan of the " fish eye " look

any thoughts

can any one confirm the field of view I would have with those lenses on my K 3 and K 3 II

and thoughts about whether to go with the SMC or HD versions

[Na Horuk]

between lusting for a SMC DA 21 limited and the SMC DA 15 limited

can any one confirm the field of view I would have with those lenses on my K 3 and K 3 II

DA 21mm is kind of wide, but it is very useable. It is not awkwardly wide. It can be used for almost anything, but portraiture and architecture might not be the best choices because of the distortion. Nature, landscapes, travel photos, street photos, indoor would be great. I don't have DA 15mm, but I have another 14mm lens. That FoV is really wide. It is not fisheye, because it has some correction. Fisheye means that lines are not straight. When using fisheye lenses there is actually the danger that the tips your own feet will be in the shot. With non-fish UWA lenses, the lines might be bent a little, but not too much (and this can be fixed with lens profiles, in-camera or on computer).
IF you are not doing much wide photography, the DA 21mm might be more useable. DA 15mm has a FoV that is approaching extreme, so it has fewer uses, but it produces more stunning results when you get it right.
If you buy used you can sell it at a minimal loss, but I doubt you would regret it. They have the "limited" look - great colours, contrasts

[monochrome]

DA21
Field Field of View (Diag. / Horiz.)
APS-C: 68 ° / 59 °

DA15
Field of View (Diag. / Horiz.)
APS-C: 88 ° / 77 °

Pentax Lens Reviews are your friend. Nearly all the information and Commentary in this thread is available there. Sample photos for all 15 Limited lenses are available in the Archive. At a point you just have to make a decision and deal with it.

My take? DA21, then DA40, then DA70.

Alternate: DA20~40/2.8~4

[aslyfox]

. . .

Pentax Lens Reviews are your friend. Nearly all the information and Commentary in this thread is available there. . . .

true, true

no argument from me


but this is more fun

by the way, congrats on your latest acquistion

[mattb123]

The DA 15 Controls My Mind thread is full of good examples of how that lens renders.

[monochrome]

true, true

no argument from me


but this is more fun

by the way, congrats on your latest acquistion

I confess I had largely ignored the 20~40 considering a zoom that I have covered at either end by a superb prime just plain lens gluttony. The many posts on this thread extolling its virtues caused me to look more closely. Then B&H needed to clear some Year-end overstock. Lowest NIB price ever for that lens. $200 below street.

I’ll make first images tomorrow night of my grandchildren with the KP.

I think the FA24~90, all the Tamron Adaptalls and the duplicate film cameras (rear lens caps) will serve as source of funds for the purchase.

[Des]

The DA 15 Controls My Mind thread is full of good examples of how that lens renders.

If you look at the 15 thread and the DA 21 samples thread ( Pentax DA 21mm f/3.2 AL Limited samples - Page 3 - PentaxForums.com ) you'll want both.