[UncleVanya]

three members have posted photos to the thread

I will eventually. I'm just crazy busy with work lately. I have a number of photos made with the SMC DA 40 f2.8 LTD.

[aslyfox]

Questions for those with the FA Limited series ( especially the 43mm Limited )

1 - have you tried them with both a SLR and DSLR

2 - does they still have the " pixie dust " when used on a DSLR

they were designed as a SLR lens ( film era cameras ) as opposed to the DA Limited Series designed for DSLR cameras

[steamloco76]

I own three limited series lenses, 15mm HD DA, 21mm SMC DA and 40mm SMC DA. The 15mm is truly outstanding. The 40mm is excellent except wide open at f2.8. Now, the 21mm, well it is just another lens. Maybe it is just the copy I own, but nothing about the 21mm is the least bit impressive. Small, yes. Super sharp, no way.

[ivanvernon]

Questions for those with the FA Limited series ( especially the 43mm Limited )

1 - have you tried them with both a SLR and DSLR

2 - does they still have the " pixie dust " when used on a DSLR

they were designed as a SLR lens ( film era cameras ) as opposed to the DA Limited Series designed for DSLR cameras

I have often heard people say that a lens was designed for film and not for DSLR (or digital anything for that matter). I know that coatings on modern DSLR lens are better than those for "designed for film" lenses, but of course coatings technology was going through various stages of improvement even before the dawn of the digital era. I think also that lenses designed for film often show seem to require less concern for flare and internal light refraction--using silver instead of black lens "petals," for instance, though it seems to me that better control of light would be a good idea for film as well as digital lenses. However, I have never heard anyone explain exactly what lens design parameters or characteristics should be different for a DSLR versus a film lens -- anybody have any ideas about that? My Pentax-FA 77 lens, the one my wife calls our magic lens, was designed for film but seems to perform in a truly outstanding fashion on my K-1, K-3, etc. Is there some different design element that could have been included to make the legendary 77mm even better for DSLR cameras? Inquiring minds want to know. ;>)

[aslyfox]

I have often heard people say that a lens was designed for film and not for DSLR (or digital anything for that matter). I know that coatings on modern DSLR lens are better than those for "designed for film" lenses, but of course coatings technology was going through various stages of improvement even before the dawn of the digital era. I think also that lenses designed for film often show seem to require less concern for flare and internal light refraction--using silver instead of black lens "petals," for instance, though it seems to me that better control of light would be a good idea for film as well as digital lenses. However, I have never heard anyone explain exactly what lens design parameters or characteristics should be different for a DSLR versus a film lens -- anybody have any ideas about that? My Pentax-FA 77 lens, the one my wife calls our magic lens, was designed for film but seems to perform in a truly outstanding fashion on my K-1, K-3, etc. Is there some different design element that could have been included to make the legendary 77mm even better for DSLR cameras? Inquiring minds want to know. ;>)

I don't know

I read a review ( not on PF ) about the 43mm Limited and the reviewer's opinion was that it was not as good on a ASP-C DSLR as on a SLR camera body

so that is why I was asking about experiences of others.

I have rented the FA 31 Limited but used it only on a K 3 or K 3 II

I have not tried the FA 43 Limited or the FA 77 Limited

[Alex645]

I have never heard anyone explain exactly what lens design parameters or characteristics should be different for a DSLR versus a film lens -- anybody have any ideas about that?

Here's a response from another forum:

Yes, lenses designed for digital sensors have several differences from their older film based camera lens counterparts. One of the primary differences is that digital sensors are more reflective than film, so anti-reflective coatings are applied to the rear element of a digital lens. This helps prevent reflections off the sensor that could result in image ghosting.

Additionally, digital sensors require light to travel down a narrow tube produced by the stack of filters (color, AA, etc) that lie directly in front of the actual photosites that convert the light energy hitting the sensor in to an electronic signal. This alters the way that the light needs to be directed to the sensor (it needs to come in from more straight on) and digital lenses may be designed to handle this better.

Finally, film didn't generally lie perfectly flat, while digital sensors do, so there is more emphasis on extreme levels of sharp resolving power on good digital lenses than film cared about.

It isn't generally a problem to use an old film lens as long as it is compatible with your camera mount system, but it is good to understand the caveats that they can have ghosting problems when shooting in to light, they often have lower sharpness and may have additional chromatic aberrations. They also tend to be older, so they may lack some of the more recent advantages in terms of focus motors and control.

lens - is there a real difference between "digital" and "film" lenses? - Photography Stack Exchange

This is often manifested in the internal design of the elements and groups. For example the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D (film) lens has 6 elements in 5 groups whereas the Nikon 50mm f/1.8G (digital) lens has 7 elements in 6 groups. Or the Pentax 50mm SMCP-FA f/1.4 (film) has 7 elements in 6 groups vs. the Pentax 50mm HD FA f/1.4 (digital) has 15 elements in 9 groups.

[aslyfox]

. . . the Pentax 50mm HD FA f/1.4 (digital) has 15 elements in 9 groups.

I'm confused

do you mean the SMC Pentax-FA 50mm F1.4

the FA lenses were developed for film

or do you mean the HD Pentax-D FA* 50mm F1.4 SDM AW lens?

[ZombieArmy]

I've used the 43 and the 40 xs (which is the same optical design as the ltd). They are both stunning lenses in my book, especially for the form factor. They allow themselves to be with you wherever you go while offering a unique look.

[Alex645]

I'm confused

do you mean the SMC Pentax-FA 50mm F1.4

the FA lenses were developed for film

or do you mean the HD Pentax-D FA* 50mm F1.4 SDM AW lens?

The latter; the HD 50mm DFA from the digital era. Note that I state the SMC FA is for film vs. the HD is for digital.

[aslyfox]

The latter; the HD 50mm DFA from the digital era. Note that I state the SMC FA is for film vs. the HD is for digital.

ok

and thanks for the other interesting info

[ivanvernon]

Here's a response from another forum:

Yes, lenses designed for digital sensors have several differences from their older film based camera lens counterparts. One of the primary differences is that digital sensors are more reflective than film, so anti-reflective coatings are applied to the rear element of a digital lens. This helps prevent reflections off the sensor that could result in image ghosting.

Additionally, digital sensors require light to travel down a narrow tube produced by the stack of filters (color, AA, etc) that lie directly in front of the actual photosites that convert the light energy hitting the sensor in to an electronic signal. This alters the way that the light needs to be directed to the sensor (it needs to come in from more straight on) and digital lenses may be designed to handle this better.

Finally, film didn't generally lie perfectly flat, while digital sensors do, so there is more emphasis on extreme levels of sharp resolving power on good digital lenses than film cared about.

It isn't generally a problem to use an old film lens as long as it is compatible with your camera mount system, but it is good to understand the caveats that they can have ghosting problems when shooting in to light, they often have lower sharpness and may have additional chromatic aberrations. They also tend to be older, so they may lack some of the more recent advantages in terms of focus motors and control.

lens - is there a real difference between "digital" and "film" lenses? - Photography Stack Exchange

This is often manifested in the internal design of the elements and groups. For example the Nikon 50mm f/1.8D (film) lens has 6 elements in 5 groups whereas the Nikon 50mm f/1.8G (digital) lens has 7 elements in 6 groups. Or the Pentax 50mm SMCP-FA f/1.4 (film) has 7 elements in 6 groups vs. the Pentax 50mm HD FA f/1.4 (digital) has 15 elements in 9 groups.

Thank you for the excellent information. It certainly improved my understanding. We are fortunate that the 31-43-77 Ltd trio perform as well as they do despite the fact that they were produced for film cameras.

[dbs]

maybe lenses designed with ' soul ' don't care what type of photographic medium you use .

soul ------ not just designed under computer specs only.

31 ltd its just different in a good way too me.


Dave

[microlight]

Yes indeed, 'soul'. The pixie dust in all Limiteds is to be found in the balanced inter-dimensional space between astigmatism correction and stunning bokeh, as they're designed for a specific quality of output. If I was looking for a prime, I'd be looking for a FA31/1.8...

[aslyfox]

and here I thought Pentax had done a " limited " deal with Walt

[microlight]

Hehe. Have you heard the old joke about what's the difference between Bing Crosby and Walt Disney? (You have to say this in a Scottish accent)

Bing sings but Walt Disney.

Perhaps Kerrowdown could demonstrate!