[house]

QuoteOriginally posted by MossyRocks Quote
Also the biggest thing is to avoid cases where fringing would be a problem and this should be taken as good general advice anyway as it usually indicates you are shooting in strong midday sun with things being overexposes in the bright highlights next to things in deep harsh shadows so the image would already have a lot going against it to begin with. I try to avoid shooting in those situations because the pictures kind of suck anyway.
That's probably the best advice of any in this whole thread

hmmm

I have to work with the conditions of the visit and preferably come away with a sequence of images covering various aspects. I will often have one visit this lifetime as pre covid I've photographed buildings on four continents.

So I have once in a lifetime access to a building, on a different continent, that is not available to the public. There is an important wall/roof connection that sets the whole expression of the building. You suggest I should not take the photograph leaving a critical gap in the series of photographs?

I'm not suggesting what you should, or shouldn't take pictures of, but I would suggest that rather than being dismissive of people who are trying to help you, perhaps have a look at the help they are trying to give.

I very grateful for the help I've recieved by email as well as on this forum. Some people have made huge effort! I just incredible how most people claiming it doesn't fringe use it in ways and show examples of photos that are not under the conditions that the lens is suspected of fringing and still proceed saying that it performs well, just as good as any other modern glass etc. The people who have used in under more difficult circumstances as well as reviews show that it can produce very, very strong fringing more so that a lot of glass from the 60's apparently. Thing is that those with issues are the ones using the lens under the conditions stated in the OP. I always strive to avoid excessive contrast, architecture is best photographed when it's overcast but I need to take that photo regardless and then I've come to realize 100 000 photos later than it's worth avoiding lenses that fringe in those situations.

Aside from the DFA100, there's really not much choice of AF prime lenses in K-mount at or around this focal length, and none are apochromats - so they'll all suffer from axial CA to some extent.

That is indeed a big problem. However lateral CA is worse for me as I tend to stop down. But again I'm not after apochromats a well performing lens is enough and there is by now a lot of evidence that the DFA 100 can produce spectacular fringing under certain circumstances. Way more fringing that most other lenses regardless of date of manufacture or focal length. That PCMAG image is very extreme, and so is the raduvja image.

Thing is. I might still get the DFA 100mm. Not very gladly but the size, focal length, resolution and flatness of field are also important to me. There have been many attempts to play down the fringing. Why I cannot imagine. But as with the DA lenses on FF I've found, the hard way, that Pentaxforums members are very, very likely to underplay faults with their gear. It just makes no sense to underplay CA in tough situations when all those other features are great. Cearly most of you point the dfa100 down.

---

Last edited by house; 05-06-2020 at 01:30 AM.

[BigMackCam]

So I have once in a lifetime access to a building, on a different continent, that is not available to the public. There is an important wall/roof connection that sets the whole expression of the building. You suggest I should not take the photograph leaving a critical gap in the series of photographs?

I know this reply was to another member, but I'll comment anyway.

You're on vacation, on a beautiful beach in Australia, and you have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to surf there, but sharks have been spotted in the area. If you go in the water, there's a good chance you might be attacked. Would you choose to go surfing? Most would answer "no", but if you answer "yes", then you have to accept the risks and consequences of surfing in those conditions.

If you have a once-in-a-lifetime chance to take a photo, even if all the good, professional photographic advice and common sense says it's the wrong time of day with harsh lighting that's going to result in a poor shot, then by all means take the shot if you wish, or if you need to. But you'll have to accept that - sometimes - those conditions are going to be challenging for your chosen lens, and you'll have more work to do in post as a result.

I very grateful for the help I've recieved by email as well as on this forum. Some people have made huge effort! I just incredible how most people claiming it doesn't fringe use it in ways and show examples of photos that are not under the conditions that the lens is suspected of fringing and still proceed saying that it performs well, just as good as any other modern glass etc. The people who have used in under more difficult circumstances as well as reviews show that it can produce very, very strong fringing more so that a lot of glass from the 60's apparently. Thing is that those with issues are the ones using the lens under the conditions stated in
Pentax K-3II, K-3, K-5, K10D, *ist DL, Q7, Q
Samsung GX-10 (K10D) x 3, GX-1L (*ist DL2) the OP. I always strive to avoid excessive contrast, architecture is best photographed when it's overcast but I need to take that photo regardless and then I've come to realize 100 000 photos later than it's worth avoiding lenses that fringe in those situations.

That is indeed a big problem. But again I'm not after apochromats a well performing lens is enough and there is by now a lot of evidence that the DFA 100 can produce spectacular fringing under certain circumstances. Way more fringing that most other lenses regardless of date of manufacture or focal length. That PCMAG image is very extreme, and so is the raduvja image.

Thing is. I might still get the DFA 100mm. Not very gladly but the size, focal length, resolution and flatness of field are also important to me. There have been many attempts to play down the fringing. Why I cannot imagine. But as with the DA lenses on FF I've found, the hard way, that Pentaxforums members are very, very likely to underplay faults with their gear. It just makes no sense to underplay CA in tough situations when all those other features are great.

I'm closing this thread, and I'll explain why.

You're repeatedly drawing conclusions and making statements that could quite easily discourage others from acquiring what is a very fine and well-performing lens. You're drawing those conclusions from opinions and evidence represented by the minority rather than the majority, and with no personal experience of the lens itself. You're choosing to believe and make exaggerated claims from this minority evidence, whilst simultaneously claiming that members here are playing down the fringing aspect (in effect, accusing them of acting dishonestly). We are not. I, certainly, am not. Without wishing to sound dismissive, we don't care whether you buy the lens or not. We're merely presenting you with our opinions and evidence based on actual experience with our own copies of the lens. If you believe we typically underplay issues with our gear, or you didn't want our opinions and advice, then - with respect - you shouldn't have asked in the first place. If you only wanted feedback that confirmed what you seem to want to believe, that's not how it works here.

I've already explained - and demonstrated by means of a 200% crop from an appropriate image I took specifically for this discussion, and posted publicly for everyone to see - that only minor fringing remains at f/5.6 in a well-exposed photograph. If you shoot certain subject matter in certain lighting conditions at wider apertures, especially wide open, and especially if you over-expose elements of the scene with high contrast borders, you're going to experience more fringing.

You're at liberty to accept or discard whatever advice and evidence you wish, and I bid you good luck with whichever lens you choose

-----------

EDIT: In response to your PM, let me make absolutely clear to anyone reading this thread that it is neither PentaxForums policy, nor my personal intention, to "protect" sales of Pentax equipment, nor is there some imagined "Pentax cult" behaviour at work here Any suggestion to the contrary would be both inaccurate and inflammatory. I have been, and will continue to be, openly but constructively critical of Pentax products... when I feel it's justified.