[robgski]

FA-77mm [IMG][/IMG]

[clackers]

I am getting the itch to buy a SUPER sharp lens for my K-70. Among the lenses I now have the only one I consider to be real sharp is my 100mm 2.8 macro.

The 35mm f2.8 Macro and DFA 50mm f2.8 Macro are super sharp, too, 54Bravo.

By the time your bank account's recovered you may be able to buy the upcoming DA*11-18 so you're happy right through the focal length range.

[dbs]

Hi 54bravo

I just had a look at the lens clubs for your lenses,which ones aren't sharp again ?

Dave

[SSGGeezer]

Even the modern DA 55-300 PLM is extremely sharp out to about 260-270 mm. There are some classic FA*zooms that are pretty sweet also if you want to drop a bit more cash. Most of us here are happy to get other people spending their money!

[Qman]

If you look at tests at websites like opticallimits and lenstip you will find that the DA 35mm 2.4 ranks as one of the sharpest lenses, and the DA 50mm 1.8 isn't too far behind it. I know my DA 35mm is very sharp on the K70. Based on the tests, the 43mm is sharp at the center, and gets better at wider apertures, but you shouldn't see a huge difference between it and the DA 35.
As already suggested, there may be focusing issues with these lenses. Try the in-camera focus adjustment for each lens and see if that helps.

[pres589]

The DA 35 f2.4 is so sharp as to be boring.

[jimr-pdx]

I thought the DA 35mm F2.4 and DA 50mm F1.8 were sharp until I bought the DA Limiteds (15mm F4, 21mm F3.2, 35mm F2.8 macro, 40mm F2.8 & 70mm F2.4).
I thought the DA Limiteds were sharp until I bought the FA Limiteds (31mm F1.8, 77mm F1.8 and to a lesser extent the 43mm F1.9).

Cannot afford the FA types, but for small and talented the DA40 and DA70 and their HD cousins are atop my budget list. Especially when excellent used copies are available! On a K-70 size camera they make the entire kit feel so much easier to take along everywhere.

[ZombieArmy]

I think the 43mm is very sharp stopped down, and commendable wide open. I'm always impressed by the detail when you nail focus with it.

Here's a close crop of a heron up in a tree I took recently.

[iheiramo]

Instead of simply buying more expensive glass, it might be usefull to check that you get everything out of the data you have. Considering both program and technique. I changed my PP program to Capture One, because it produced better results than my previous program. Thought expensive I thought it to important to have all pieces of process optimized before buying expensive lenses or cameras in order to get the best out of them. I Haven't tested all softwares, so don't know if it's the very best, but it suits me.

[savoche]

SMC PENTAX DA 1:2.4 35MM AL Too soft for me. I do not like soft images unless it is a wedding.
SMC PENTAX DA 1:1.8 50MM About equal to 35MM except for focal length

I suspect you need to check focus adjustment for these. I'm sure these lenses have some weaknesses, but lack of sharpness shouldn't be one of them. Both of mine are among the sharpest I have (out of some 40 lenses in total). When I prefer using other lenses (like the FA Limiteds) it's because of other qualities rather than (just) sharpness.

[Des]

I suspect you need to check focus adjustment for these. I'm sure these lenses have some weaknesses, but lack of sharpness shouldn't be one of them. Both of mine are among the sharpest I have (out of some 40 lenses in total). When I prefer using other lenses (like the FA Limiteds) it's because of other qualities rather than (just) sharpness.

+1. I've got the DA 35 f2.4 and used to have the DA 50 f1.8 and both are right up there in sharpness (when stopped down a little anyway). Either is sharper in the corners than the FA 43 Ltd (although they don't have that 3D quality that the Ltds produce). If you don't find them sharp, there's something wrong.

For pure resolving power across the frame, I doubt you can beat a macro. I've got the DFA 100 f2.8 WR and the FA 50 f2.8 macro and both are razor sharp.

But there's a lot more to image quality than just sharpness. There comes a point where sharp enough is sharp enough. Image quality is more than just a numbers game. The DA 20-40 Ltd, for example, isn't as sharp as the DA 35 f2.4 (I compared them side by side), but I prefer the images from the Ltd for the colours, the contrast and the quality of the rendering. For the same reason, I tend to get more pleasing images from the FA 43 Ltd than the FA 50 macro. That's a purely subjective judgment of course, but I suspect I'm not alone in that view.

[mikesbike]

I am getting the itch to buy a SUPER sharp lens for my K-70. Among the lenses I now have the only one I consider to be real sharp is my 100mm 2.8 macro. The rest do not impress. My biggest issue is the images are far too soft for my liking. I have heard praises for the 43MM limited and a while back downloaded a picture of a frog on a branch that was supposedly taken with a 43mm Limited that is truly awesome when it comes to IQ. IMHO. I hesitate to post it here as it is not my picture. Is this lens as fantastic as claimed? I am not interested in the 77MM. Too close to the 100MM I already have.

I have only owned a Pentax for a few months and I am hoping someone here can point me in the right direction. I know I can buy one and send it back if I am not pleased but really would prefer not to.

Thank

If you are referring to images shot right out of the camera, be sure to implement "Fine Sharpening" in the Custom Image menus in your K-70. Very important for good fine detail in your images. The FA 43mm f/1.9 is a very sharp lens, especially in the central area of the image, and at f/2.8 +. There are, however, a number of very sharp lenses available. But always remember that sharpness can only be achieved through accurate focus, good steadiness, adequate shutter speed, and good processing. If using a very large, wide-open aperture where the depth of field becomes very shallow, the point of focus becomes very specific for sharpness and ever more iffy to achieve, especially with closeup photography or with longer telephoto. Middle apertures will generally produce greatest possible results, f/4-11 depending on focal length, distance, etc.
This is true regardless of brand.

[robgski]

Cannot afford the FA types, but for small and talented the DA40 and DA70 and their HD cousins are atop my budget list. Especially when excellent used copies are available! On a K-70 size camera they make the entire kit feel so much easier to take along everywhere.

I agree, I own both the DA 40mm LTD and the DA 40mm XS, both are very sharp, and compact. They stay on my K-5 for days if not weeks at a time. The DA 70mm is another sharp lens, if I did not already own the FA 77mm, I would own this lens, too. On the wider end, the DA 21mm LTD is also very sharp, and its MFD allows fro some very close shooting.

The OP should be aware that there are PF threads devoted to each of these lenses, with hundreds of examples for each.

[MrB1]

54bravo, you have written that you like the 100 Macro, you don't want the 77 Ltd, and you are interested in the 43 Ltd. Even though you want a lens for your new K-70, is the implication of mentioning these three that you want to buy only full-frame lenses?

If you are happy to stay with APS-C for a while, it is doubtful that you would be disappointed with any of the DA Limited lenses - they are all beautifully constructed and all pin-sharp. Read both the User Reviews and the In-Depth Reviews for each lens here on Pentax Forums: Pentax DA Prime Lenses - Reviews and Specifications - SLR and Interchangeable Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

You could start by obtaining the 35 Limited, then get the 21 Limited - you might get both for your $800 if you can find them second-hand - then later you might like to add the 70 Limited. A camera bag with the K-70 and those four lenses, 21, 35, 70 and 100, would be a very powerful photography toolkit.

Philip

[54bravo]

FA-77mm [/url][/IMG]

That is sharp.