[twilhelm]

To be honest, 24 mm is the perfect wide angle for me on the K1 or film. A 20mm would be great, but the K 15 would be just to round out the collection (if I ever finish the rest of it).

[noelpolar]

To be honest, 24 mm is the perfect wide angle for me on the K1 or film. A 20mm would be great, but the K 15 would be just to round out the collection (if I ever finish the rest of it).

I just missed out on a mint'ish SMC K15.... went for $300US... probally should have bid more on reflection.... oh well....

[Digitalis]

So the early FA43s are said to be "special" -- in that they had the lead in the glass and a different/better look.

I think this springs from a rumor started among Leicaphiles that the FA43 "special" has an aspherical element in it ( untrue) though there are a different number of aperture blades than the LTM* and K mount FA version, there is also a difference in lens coatings between the K mount LTM* versions. The directives for reduction of lead used in optical glass were issued around 2004 as far as I can recall - but it was public knowledge long beforehand that such rules were going to be put into effect.

Some early versions had a different color tint when looking on the front lens.

The coatings are different, i'm a bit unsure as to exactly when this happened.

In my OPINION as owner of silver FA43’s 0000831 and 0011208 there is no distinguishable variance in their image quality.

I have tested several FA43's on my optics bench - I can't recall the numbers off the top of my head but there were several low serial number ones that the owners were hopeful they would somehow outperform their peers...no luck there.

#831 seems to have a different, bluer coating cast, but is that attributable to glass tweaks, coating tweaks or imagination?

Coating tweaks - changing optical design parameters is a costly process.

*Leica M39 Thread Mount

[Eyewanders]

I think this springs from a rumor started among Leicaphiles that the FA43 "special" has an aspherical element in it ( untrue) though there are a different number of aperture blades than the LTM* and K mount FA version, there is also a difference in lens coatings between the K mount LTM* versions.



Again the coatings are different - not the optics.



I have tested several FA43's on my optics bench - I can't recall the numbers off the top of my head but there were several low serial number ones that the owners were hopeful they would somehow outperform their peers...no luck there.



Coating tweaks - changing optical design parameters is a costly process.

*Leica M39 Thread Mount

Ja. Pentax has shimmied their optic coatings about for decades without so much as a whisper let alone fanfare in almost every case. No one really knows what changed when. I think your findings are spot on.

[bassek]

Pentax has shimmied their optic coatings about for decades without so much as a whisper let alone fanfare in almost every case. No one really knows what changed when. I think your findings are spot on.

One would like to think that the modified coatings were an upgrade, not a downgrade...

Seb

[Digitalis]

One would like to think that the modified coatings were an upgrade, not a downgrade...

Let me put it this way, the Pentax LTM 43mm f/1.9 special has substantially more flare resistance than the Leica Summicron-M 50mm f/2 ASPH or the Summilux-M 50mm f/1.4 ASPH, when stopped down to f/5.6 the FA43 has resolution characteristic that rivals both Leica lenses which cost considerably more.

The LTM FA43 actually has a bit of a cult following among leicaphiles, and is favored by monochrom shooters due to its high contrast. The most common complaint about the FA43 is among Leicaphiles is the focal length of 43mm, which no current off-the-shelf rangfinder has built in framelines for such a focal length. SLRs - man, they ruin everything.