[Jeff]

I've got the chance to get an smc coated 77 for a decent price - basically unused for about £250 (about $354) under the list price of a new HD coated 77...

Or do pay the extra for the new coatings? Will they magically make purple fringing a thing of the past when shooting wide open? Or will the improvements be marginal? I don't mind some reflection from the lens elements, and I'm not that bothered with rounded aperture blades. Purple fringing I don't care for, but I suspect that new coatings are not going to take care of that - I think the lens design means that purple fringing is inherent in the lens when used wide open...

Always grateful for your thoughts!

[Mr. B]

For that price, I'd get it no matter what

[Fogel70]

You can probably expect the same type of improvements like on DA Limiteds when they went HD.
HD vs. SMC Pentax Limited Primes Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

So I believe it is mostly seen in improved contrast and resistance to flare.
I do not think that lens coating is going to make much difference for fringing.

[Jeff]

Thanks for your responses. I looked at the article on the differences between HD and SMC coatings and their conclusion was that one could only tell the differences subjectively...save for a couple of very specific instances. I'm not that good that I should need the marginal gains that HD coatings will bring!

[microlight]

Hi Jeff. Do you shoot jpgs or raw? If the latter, you can deal with the fringing in post.

[Jeff]

Hi Jeff. Do you shoot jpgs or raw? If the latter, you can deal with the fringing in post.

I shoot both. I'm guessing a won't need to PP every image. I don't have to with my 43 - which I know doesn't have the same issues as the 77. I will stop down also to avoid the worst if there is unavoidable back lighting. It can't be so bad otherwise it wouldn't have been voted best ever lens! It seems that it is slightly less fringe-y (new word!) on APS-C than on the K-1, from what I have managed to gather.

[texandrews]

I'd say that under certain conditions it might have a significant impact---but that those conditions are ones I usually try to avoid! Maybe because I have a lot of older glass....

BTW---is your avatar a Richard Prince Marlboro Man? It's too small for me to be able to tell....

[Jeff]

I'd say that under certain conditions it might have a significant impact---but that those conditions are ones I usually try to avoid! Maybe because I have a lot of older glass....

BTW---is your avatar a Richard Prince Marlboro Man? It's too small for me to be able to tell....

Thanks and yes it is.

I'd like to have thought of the idea of photographing photographs before he did but I was young and callow then...

[bdery]

I've got the chance to get an smc coated 77 for a decent price - basically unused for about £250 (about $354) under the list price of a new HD coated 77...

For that price, get the SMC.

I'm finishing the comparison review of the SMC vs HD right now. Flare and ghosting is significantly improved, but for the rest differences are minimal. At the same price I'd get the HD, but I'll be keeping my SMC 43 and 77.

[texandrews]

Thanks and yes it is.

Aaaaand, Tex for the score!

I'd like to have thought of the idea of photographing photographs before he did but I was young and callow then...

Well, I'm in the contemporary art biz. The only thing I think I can say positive about him is that I like his "project" in this regard better than Sherrie Levine's, and some of his more painterly things are ok. As far as young and callow is concerned, it's more like you had trouble thinking of something so negative(photo pun)ly decadent, which speaks to your character.

[Jeff]

For that price, get the SMC.

I'm finishing the comparison review of the SMC vs HD right now. Flare and ghosting is significantly improved, but for the rest differences are minimal. At the same price I'd get the HD, but I'll be keeping my SMC 43 and 77.

Thanks for the reply and for your insight - very much appreciated!

I had been saving patiently for the DFA* 85mm 1.4 but it's just too heavy - half a pound or 250g heavier than the 50 DFA* which I own, and that in itself is a big beast. But I'm happy to go with my decision to get the 77 (and the 31) for not as big an outlay as the 85 would be...

[stevebrot]

How much better will the new HD FA Limiteds really be compared with smc coatings?

Will they magically make purple fringing a thing of the past when shooting wide open?

As bdery noted above, the improvements will be what might be expected from what is expected to be an upgrade in coating. That said, the "ghostless" ("smc" is just the label on the lens) coatings on the non-HD FA Limiteds is nothing to sniff at.

In regards to PF...despite comments and expectations from users here at Pentax Forums (the other PF), there is no reason to expect a decrease in purple fringing with a change in coatings. PF is a sensor artifact that is related to, but not the same as longitudinal CA (LoCA).* Many fast high performance primes have residual LoCA and most (all?) of those will fringe on digital if given a chance. Unless Ricoh/Pentax changed the optical designs, one would not expect a change in PF behavior.

BTW...£250 is a killer price if the FA 77 Limited is in decent condition.


Steve

* PF (malignant purple/blue fringing) is something that does not present with film captures, even when the lens is severely provoked (slightly misfocused, overexposed, electronic flash on crumpled foil). Yes, I have tried.

[Jeff]

As bdery noted above, the improvements will be what might be expected from what is expected to be an upgrade in coating. That said, the "ghostless" ("smc" is just the label on the lens) coatings on the non-HD FA Limiteds is nothing to sniff at.

In regards to PF...despite comments and expectations from users here at Pentax Forums (the other PF), there is no reason to expect a decrease in purple fringing with a change in coatings. PF is a sensor artifact that is related to, but not the same as longitudinal CA (LoCA).* Many fast high performance primes have residual LoCA and most (all) of those will fringe on digital if given a chance. Unless Ricoh/Pentax changed the optical designs, one would not expect a change in PF behavior.

BTW...£250 is a killer price if the FA 77 Limited is in decent condition.


Steve

* PF (malignant purple/blue fringing) is something that does not present with film captures, even when the lens is severely provoked (slightly misfocused, overexposed, electronic flash on crumpled foil). Yes, I have tried.

Thanks Steve. The price is about £554 - its about £349 less than the retail price of the a new SMC 77mm - they are going for £949 new.

The updated HD coated ones are £799 in the UK - and this 'used but unused' lens is still £250 less than that.

[ehrwien]

PF is a sensor artifact that is related to, but not the same as longitudinal CA (LoCA).

Do lenses that produce more LoCa also produce worse PF? What is the relation between the two kinds?

[stevebrot]

Do lenses that produce more LoCa also produce worse PF?

Good question...I don't have any lenses displaying pronounced LoCA. What I do know is that the severity of PF is highly disproportionate to the LoCA on the lenses in my shelf that do PF.


Steve