HD or not to HD - 43mm Limited

vijaykishan · 04-29-2021, 06:46 AM

Originally posted by JPT

I don't think 150 euros difference is enough to be rushed into making a decision before seeing a more detailed comparison.

Agree - I dont tend to buy/sell lenses that often, and 150 Euros is a function of time that the lens is going to be used. I fear that whenever I see a bad flare or a not-so-pleasant bokeh, I'll prolly be cursing myself for not going to the HD instead.

Originally posted by JPT

The 43mm is the one that stands to gain the most from the upgrade because it was the oldest and didn't have the rounded aperture blades.

This is a bit of a double edged sword - I do like the sun-stars that the smc has and AFAIK, this is likely to be culled in the HD, well one cant have both - Good Bokeh + Sun star + Ltd .

The smc is going back. Thanks everyone for helping me decide

jct us101 · 04-29-2021, 09:44 AM

The original limiteds have a really terrible purple fringing problem since they were made for film cameras - my 77ltd was more purple than you could imagine when shooting with the bright sky was involved. Sure it's easy to remove, but it's annoying to need to. Not sure how bad the 43mm is in this regard though.

Kozlok · 04-29-2021, 10:26 AM

Don't get me wrong, I have stitched with the 43 a few times. I've just not always found it successful. Here's one I shot at f2 and managed to pull off. I had no tripod, so had to do it hand-held. There is a wider version on my hard drive, but I didn't like it as well. This is about 3 shots wide.

**mikesbike** · 04-29-2021, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by RICHARD L.

Tests comparing HD vs non-HD Limited lenses appear somewhere on this Forum (done by M. Bernard Déry, an optical engineer from here in Canada, if I'm right). Most lenses had very similar rendering, not sufficiently different to trash the older SMC coated optics, in my view. Personally, I used the original version of the DA 55-300 mm f/4-5.8 on a K5 with good results but it proved not up to snuff on a K3. Eventually I purchased a used HD DA 55-300 mm f/4-5.8 ED WR on eBay from Japan to replace my defunct FA 80-320 mm zoom and I was astounded at the difference of rendering between the two 55-300 mm DA zooms. The new HD version has strong contrast, enhanced resolution and produces excellent pictures on the K3, one would say it is a totally different design, so much so the performance is superior.

Regards

I had the exact same experience. I replaced my original DA 55-300mm due to the filter threads having been damaged by an accidental bump, and also wanted WR. I was very surprised how much better the WR version was with the HD coatings.

I did see a thread a while back showing comparisons between scenes taken with certain DA Limiteds in the original and HD versions, which showed better contrast in some scenes. Kind of reminded me of using a good haze filter. The protective coating for easier cleaning is also a practical consideration, but these differences are not usually meaningful enough to spend the money giving up a perfectly good lens to get the HD version. The DA 55-300mm might be an exception. I gave away my original version along with my K-r to friends who are unlikely to ever put a filter on it anyway, and I am glad I went for the HD version regarding this lens only.

---------- Post added 04-29-21 at 03:39 PM ----------

Originally posted by Kozlok

The edge performance just isn't up to it. If you want a landscape lens, send the 43 back and get the DA40, assuming you are shooting APS-C.

Yep, I have both, but non-HD. Edge-to-edge is definitely better with the DA 40. Great on my KP. But I like my FA 43 for convenient general purpose on my K-1 II, and good in low light situations.

Last edited by mikesbike; 04-29-2021 at 03:40 PM.

vijaykishan · 04-30-2021, 01:56 AM

Originally posted by jct us101

The original limiteds have a really terrible purple fringing problem since they were made for film cameras - my 77ltd was more purple than you could imagine when shooting with the bright sky was involved. Sure it's easy to remove, but it's annoying to need to. Not sure how bad the 43mm is in this regard though.

I found it did have purple fringing esp when shooting into the sun; and you are right that although it is easy to remove, I'd rather have not to. Now that the lens is going back, I'm looking forward to what I see on the HD (I'm yet to place an oder).

jct us101 · 04-30-2021, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by vijaykishan

I found it did have purple fringing esp when shooting into the sun; and you are right that although it is easy to remove, I'd rather have not to. Now that the lens is going back, I'm looking forward to what I see on the HD (I'm yet to place an oder).

Post some samples! I'm torn on the DA 40 or this as well.

robjmitchell · 04-30-2021, 03:43 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by DWS1

I may be wrong, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that the HD coating uses a somewhat different application process involving some sort of chemical bonding resulting in a more durable coating.

SMC is quite durable, the problem is that it’s costly, and the vapour deposition process is not as precise causing nano-distortion in the optical surface the results in loss of contrast.

HD is similar to other nano particle processes (essential silica particles) but uniquely it is bonded to produce a firm and consistent surface. It can also be used as the top layer on SMC for the Aerobright II coating. Because it is painted on it is also much cheaper than multiple rounds of vapour deposition used in SMC.

vijaykishan · 05-01-2021, 04:41 AM

Originally posted by robjmitchell

SMC is quite durable, the problem is that it’s costly, and the vapour deposition process is not as precise causing nano-distortion in the optical surface the results in loss of contrast.

HD is similar to other nano particle processes (essential silica particles) but uniquely it is bonded to produce a firm and consistent surface. It can also be used as the top layer on SMC for the Aerobright II coating. Because it is painted on it is also much cheaper than multiple rounds of vapour deposition used in SMC.

Thank you and very interesting indeed. Would appreciate a link or document reference to learn more.

---------- Post added 1st May 2021 at 13:44 ----------

Originally posted by jct us101

Post some samples! I'm torn on the DA 40 or this as well.

I already have the DA40, and using it on the K5, The DA40 is an OK-ish lens what does its job without fuss and just a little bit thicker than the 43mm Lens cap. It produces a decent Bokeh and sharp enough for anything >F4 so for most landscapes this would be good fit on the APSc, on the K1 it induces heavy vignetting and is unusable at open apertures.

---------- Post added 1st May 2021 at 13:47 ----------

Originally posted by Kozlok

Don't get me wrong, I have stitched with the 43 a few times. I've just not always found it successful. Here's one I shot at f2 and managed to pull off. I had no tripod, so had to do it hand-held. There is a wider version on my hard drive, but I didn't like it as well. This is about 3 shots wide.

Would you be able to enlighten me why ? Since I'm looking at this lens as a part landscape lens for pano, your experience would be valuable for to avoid pitfalls. - thanks in advance

Kozlok · 05-01-2021, 10:03 AM

The 43 is generally poor in the corners. If you have enough frames, the software seems to be able to work around it and choose only bits and pieces from the centers of the frames. If I don't have enough overlap, then the edges have to get used, and that's when the stitching software seems to have problems and you get tears and blurry bits here and there. Sometimes it's easy to fix, sometimes not.

The pano I shared is only 3 frames wide, but I probably have 6 shots with 50% overlap to do it.

vijaykishan · 05-01-2021, 10:54 AM

Originally posted by Kozlok

but I probably have 6 shots with 50% overlap to do it.

Thanks so much for sharing this. 50% overlap sounds a lot, I can usually get away with a bit less than 25% on the smc 50mm Macro when turned over the NPP. What F-stop are you using ? if I may ask. AFAIK the 43mm is notorious for soft corners for anything bigger than F5.6 aperture. Now if you say that you are finding that you need 50% overlap at anything smaller than F8 aperture, then this lens is a no-go for me HD or No-HD. Thanks once again.

Kozlok · 05-02-2021, 02:30 PM - **1 Like**

I think it depends on the scene. The one I posted from San Francisco at night was at f2.0.

I found another one I did in South Dakota which is at f8. I am uploading the pieces to my secondary Flickr account. You can find them at Flickr/kozlok2. You can examine the corners, download them, do whatever you want. I think it will help you make a decision.

It looks like I did around 50% overlap again with this one, but you can experiment with stitching smaller segments.

bdery · 05-02-2021, 05:23 PM

Originally posted by jct us101

The original limiteds have a really terrible purple fringing problem since they were made for film cameras - my 77ltd was more purple than you could imagine when shooting with the bright sky was involved. Sure it's easy to remove, but it's annoying to need to. Not sure how bad the 43mm is in this regard though.

Not that bad, actually!

Not perfect, of course.

I would say that the circular apertures are a drawback for the 43mm, it's such a fantastic lens for starbursts! And bokeh is already superb.

vijaykishan · 05-03-2021, 01:26 AM

Just a short update -I did a small experiment at home and tried to do a panorama with 8 frames(single row) stitched with various % overlap with the 43mm smc. The minimumI could achieve a pano without manually placing control points is 10% overlap (at apertures F8 and smaller ie., F8 to F22).Do note, given that there are many straight lines with bookshelves and all athome, the stitching might be relatively easy for the S/W, in the field esp. innature, this might prove to be a tad more difficult. What I did find is that atapertures larger F5.6 the lens-field-curvature affects sharpness significantly(for flat targets at least). For apertures smaller than F8, the sharpness isgood enough for a stitch with just 15% overlap. In essence, this seems to be theexact lens I was hoping it to be, sharp only centre (5%-10%) at wider apertures and pin sharp corner to coner at F8-F16 for pano stiching. Now I'll repack the smc and wait for a nice deal on the HD. Thanks everyone for chiming in, was a great help.

---------- Post added 3rd May 2021 at 10:29 ----------

Originally posted by bdery

Not that bad, actually!

Not perfect, of course.

I would say that the circular apertures are a drawback for the 43mm, it's such a fantastic lens for starbursts! And bokeh is already superb.

Do you already have the new HD 43mm in your possession ? If yes, would you mind sharing one Bokeh frame... please ? I like the 43mm starbursts, but the Bokeh was not to my taste. In the end I favour bokeh and flare control more than Starbursts (for my work at least) hence moving to HD (hoping that these are addressed) . Thanks in advance.

**pres589** · 05-03-2021, 01:53 AM

Are there any good discussions with examples of HD lenses actually producing less CA than the former SMC version? The brief amount of reading I've done on the subject makes me believe it's a lens design & construction issue which doesn't change with the switch from SMC to HD.

It would be interesting to see which is easier to deal with; fixing CA in post with the FA 43, or fixing vignetting of the DA 40's.

**Rondec** · 05-03-2021, 02:34 AM

I will say that for my K-1 I chose to go with the DA *55. I thought the spacing between it and the 31 mm/77mm (I now have the DFA *85 in place of the 77mm) was better than the 43 and I like its rendering better. I think edge sharpness is pretty decent from f4 on on full frame. It does produce nice star bursts too and has less fringing. Just something to think about.

05-02-2021, 02:30 PM - 1 Like	#41
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	I think it depends on the scene. The one I posted from San Francisco at night was at f2.0. I found another one I did in South Dakota which is at f8. I am uploading the pieces to my secondary Flickr account. You can find them at Flickr/kozlok2. You can examine the corners, download them, do whatever you want. I think it will help you make a decision. It looks like I did around 50% overlap again with this one, but you can experiment with stitching smaller segments. Last edited by Kozlok; 05-02-2021 at 02:37 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
HD Pentax 31mm F1.8, 43mm F1.9 and 77mm F1.8 Limited lenses dilemma.............	i_trax	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	52	05-04-2022 09:13 PM
HD DA 21mm Limited vs. HD DA 20-40mm Limited	seachongo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	05-09-2015 11:18 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax 43mm limited(Silver) and 77mm limited(Silver) and more	pighead	Sold Items	17	03-14-2009 11:35 AM

04-29-2021, 06:46 AM	#31
vijaykishan Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2021 Photos: Gallery Posts: 999 Original Poster	Originally posted by JPT I don't think 150 euros difference is enough to be rushed into making a decision before seeing a more detailed comparison. Agree - I dont tend to buy/sell lenses that often, and 150 Euros is a function of time that the lens is going to be used. I fear that whenever I see a bad flare or a not-so-pleasant bokeh, I'll prolly be cursing myself for not going to the HD instead. Originally posted by JPT The 43mm is the one that stands to gain the most from the upgrade because it was the oldest and didn't have the rounded aperture blades. This is a bit of a double edged sword - I do like the sun-stars that the smc has and AFAIK, this is likely to be culled in the HD, well one cant have both - Good Bokeh + Sun star + Ltd . The smc is going back. Thanks everyone for helping me decide

04-29-2021, 09:44 AM	#32
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	The original limiteds have a really terrible purple fringing problem since they were made for film cameras - my 77ltd was more purple than you could imagine when shooting with the bright sky was involved. Sure it's easy to remove, but it's annoying to need to. Not sure how bad the 43mm is in this regard though.

04-29-2021, 10:26 AM	#33
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	Don't get me wrong, I have stitched with the 43 a few times. I've just not always found it successful. Here's one I shot at f2 and managed to pull off. I had no tripod, so had to do it hand-held. There is a wider version on my hard drive, but I didn't like it as well. This is about 3 shots wide.

04-29-2021, 03:26 PM	#34
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,547	Originally posted by RICHARD L. Tests comparing HD vs non-HD Limited lenses appear somewhere on this Forum (done by M. Bernard Déry, an optical engineer from here in Canada, if I'm right). Most lenses had very similar rendering, not sufficiently different to trash the older SMC coated optics, in my view. Personally, I used the original version of the DA 55-300 mm f/4-5.8 on a K5 with good results but it proved not up to snuff on a K3. Eventually I purchased a used HD DA 55-300 mm f/4-5.8 ED WR on eBay from Japan to replace my defunct FA 80-320 mm zoom and I was astounded at the difference of rendering between the two 55-300 mm DA zooms. The new HD version has strong contrast, enhanced resolution and produces excellent pictures on the K3, one would say it is a totally different design, so much so the performance is superior. Regards I had the exact same experience. I replaced my original DA 55-300mm due to the filter threads having been damaged by an accidental bump, and also wanted WR. I was very surprised how much better the WR version was with the HD coatings. I did see a thread a while back showing comparisons between scenes taken with certain DA Limiteds in the original and HD versions, which showed better contrast in some scenes. Kind of reminded me of using a good haze filter. The protective coating for easier cleaning is also a practical consideration, but these differences are not usually meaningful enough to spend the money giving up a perfectly good lens to get the HD version. The DA 55-300mm might be an exception. I gave away my original version along with my K-r to friends who are unlikely to ever put a filter on it anyway, and I am glad I went for the HD version regarding this lens only. ---------- Post added 04-29-21 at 03:39 PM ---------- Originally posted by Kozlok The edge performance just isn't up to it. If you want a landscape lens, send the 43 back and get the DA40, assuming you are shooting APS-C. Yep, I have both, but non-HD. Edge-to-edge is definitely better with the DA 40. Great on my KP. But I like my FA 43 for convenient general purpose on my K-1 II, and good in low light situations. Last edited by mikesbike; 04-29-2021 at 03:40 PM.

04-30-2021, 01:56 AM	#35
vijaykishan Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2021 Photos: Gallery Posts: 999 Original Poster	Originally posted by jct us101 The original limiteds have a really terrible purple fringing problem since they were made for film cameras - my 77ltd was more purple than you could imagine when shooting with the bright sky was involved. Sure it's easy to remove, but it's annoying to need to. Not sure how bad the 43mm is in this regard though. I found it did have purple fringing esp when shooting into the sun; and you are right that although it is easy to remove, I'd rather have not to. Now that the lens is going back, I'm looking forward to what I see on the HD (I'm yet to place an oder).

04-30-2021, 09:34 AM	#36
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	Originally posted by vijaykishan I found it did have purple fringing esp when shooting into the sun; and you are right that although it is easy to remove, I'd rather have not to. Now that the lens is going back, I'm looking forward to what I see on the HD (I'm yet to place an oder). Post some samples! I'm torn on the DA 40 or this as well.

04-30-2021, 03:43 PM - 1 Like	#37
robjmitchell Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Melbourne Aus Posts: 1,776	Originally posted by DWS1 I may be wrong, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that the HD coating uses a somewhat different application process involving some sort of chemical bonding resulting in a more durable coating. SMC is quite durable, the problem is that it’s costly, and the vapour deposition process is not as precise causing nano-distortion in the optical surface the results in loss of contrast. HD is similar to other nano particle processes (essential silica particles) but uniquely it is bonded to produce a firm and consistent surface. It can also be used as the top layer on SMC for the Aerobright II coating. Because it is painted on it is also much cheaper than multiple rounds of vapour deposition used in SMC.

05-01-2021, 04:41 AM	#38
vijaykishan Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2021 Photos: Gallery Posts: 999 Original Poster	Originally posted by robjmitchell SMC is quite durable, the problem is that it’s costly, and the vapour deposition process is not as precise causing nano-distortion in the optical surface the results in loss of contrast. HD is similar to other nano particle processes (essential silica particles) but uniquely it is bonded to produce a firm and consistent surface. It can also be used as the top layer on SMC for the Aerobright II coating. Because it is painted on it is also much cheaper than multiple rounds of vapour deposition used in SMC. Thank you and very interesting indeed. Would appreciate a link or document reference to learn more. ---------- Post added 1st May 2021 at 13:44 ---------- Originally posted by jct us101 Post some samples! I'm torn on the DA 40 or this as well. I already have the DA40, and using it on the K5, The DA40 is an OK-ish lens what does its job without fuss and just a little bit thicker than the 43mm Lens cap. It produces a decent Bokeh and sharp enough for anything >F4 so for most landscapes this would be good fit on the APSc, on the K1 it induces heavy vignetting and is unusable at open apertures. ---------- Post added 1st May 2021 at 13:47 ---------- Originally posted by Kozlok Don't get me wrong, I have stitched with the 43 a few times. I've just not always found it successful. Here's one I shot at f2 and managed to pull off. I had no tripod, so had to do it hand-held. There is a wider version on my hard drive, but I didn't like it as well. This is about 3 shots wide. Would you be able to enlighten me why ? Since I'm looking at this lens as a part landscape lens for pano, your experience would be valuable for to avoid pitfalls. - thanks in advance

05-01-2021, 10:03 AM	#39
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	The 43 is generally poor in the corners. If you have enough frames, the software seems to be able to work around it and choose only bits and pieces from the centers of the frames. If I don't have enough overlap, then the edges have to get used, and that's when the stitching software seems to have problems and you get tears and blurry bits here and there. Sometimes it's easy to fix, sometimes not. The pano I shared is only 3 frames wide, but I probably have 6 shots with 50% overlap to do it.

05-01-2021, 10:54 AM	#40
vijaykishan Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2021 Photos: Gallery Posts: 999 Original Poster	Originally posted by Kozlok but I probably have 6 shots with 50% overlap to do it. Thanks so much for sharing this. 50% overlap sounds a lot, I can usually get away with a bit less than 25% on the smc 50mm Macro when turned over the NPP. What F-stop are you using ? if I may ask. AFAIK the 43mm is notorious for soft corners for anything bigger than F5.6 aperture. Now if you say that you are finding that you need 50% overlap at anything smaller than F8 aperture, then this lens is a no-go for me HD or No-HD. Thanks once again.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-02-2021, 05:23 PM	#42
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,357	Originally posted by jct us101 The original limiteds have a really terrible purple fringing problem since they were made for film cameras - my 77ltd was more purple than you could imagine when shooting with the bright sky was involved. Sure it's easy to remove, but it's annoying to need to. Not sure how bad the 43mm is in this regard though. Not that bad, actually! Not perfect, of course. I would say that the circular apertures are a drawback for the 43mm, it's such a fantastic lens for starbursts! And bokeh is already superb.

05-03-2021, 01:26 AM	#43
vijaykishan Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2021 Photos: Gallery Posts: 999 Original Poster	Just a short update -I did a small experiment at home and tried to do a panorama with 8 frames(single row) stitched with various % overlap with the 43mm smc. The minimumI could achieve a pano without manually placing control points is 10% overlap (at apertures F8 and smaller ie., F8 to F22).Do note, given that there are many straight lines with bookshelves and all athome, the stitching might be relatively easy for the S/W, in the field esp. innature, this might prove to be a tad more difficult. What I did find is that atapertures larger F5.6 the lens-field-curvature affects sharpness significantly(for flat targets at least). For apertures smaller than F8, the sharpness isgood enough for a stitch with just 15% overlap. In essence, this seems to be theexact lens I was hoping it to be, sharp only centre (5%-10%) at wider apertures and pin sharp corner to coner at F8-F16 for pano stiching. Now I'll repack the smc and wait for a nice deal on the HD. Thanks everyone for chiming in, was a great help. ---------- Post added 3rd May 2021 at 10:29 ---------- Originally posted by bdery Not that bad, actually! Not perfect, of course. I would say that the circular apertures are a drawback for the 43mm, it's such a fantastic lens for starbursts! And bokeh is already superb. Do you already have the new HD 43mm in your possession ? If yes, would you mind sharing one Bokeh frame... please ? I like the 43mm starbursts, but the Bokeh was not to my taste. In the end I favour bokeh and flare control more than Starbursts (for my work at least) hence moving to HD (hoping that these are addressed) . Thanks in advance.

05-03-2021, 01:53 AM	#44
pres589 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Wichita, KS Photos: Albums Posts: 4,529	Are there any good discussions with examples of HD lenses actually producing less CA than the former SMC version? The brief amount of reading I've done on the subject makes me believe it's a lens design & construction issue which doesn't change with the switch from SMC to HD. It would be interesting to see which is easier to deal with; fixing CA in post with the FA 43, or fixing vignetting of the DA 40's.

05-03-2021, 02:34 AM	#45
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	I will say that for my K-1 I chose to go with the DA 55. I thought the spacing between it and the 31 mm/77mm (I now have the DFA 85 in place of the 77mm) was better than the 43 and I like its rendering better. I think edge sharpness is pretty decent from f4 on on full frame. It does produce nice star bursts too and has less fringing. Just something to think about.