Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-12-2008, 02:59 PM   #46
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
I'll be honest, whilst the corners are spectacular i have not seen what the 31 can do over the 35/2. Apart from absolute corner sharpness the 35 has it covered and is smaller/lighter by some margin.

12-12-2008, 03:11 PM   #47
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40-55'-44" N / 73-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,102
QuoteOriginally posted by Alfisti Quote
I'll be honest, whilst the corners are spectacular i have not seen what the 31 can do over the 35/2. Apart from absolute corner sharpness the 35 has it covered and is smaller/lighter by some margin.
It was this post [#61] that was the final deciding factor for me. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/32664-theory-d...ver-tag-5.html. Difference than taken with the 35 in previous posts is slight, but subjectively what I prefer.
12-12-2008, 06:43 PM   #48
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
Again though, that is the 35 2.8 macro not the 35/2 FA which has a similar rendering to the 31 IMHO. In that thread someone mentioned the "feeling" from FA lenses and as poor as the 50/1.4 is wider than f/2.8, it has that same dreamy (there must be a better word) rendering the FA77 and FA35 have.

I am almost prepared to say that the 35/2 is a better lens than the 77/1.8. It has far less abberations and it is staggeringly sharp from the get go.
12-12-2008, 07:11 PM   #49
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
Part of a lens experience is the build quality and how it feels when you use it. The 35/2 certainly appears to be a bargain, but I don't think I'd care for the look and feel of it (I'm assuming it is on par with the 50/1.4). For some people that aspect isn't very important, for others it is. "Value" has different meanings for different people, as does "performance."

12-12-2008, 07:57 PM   #50
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
Forget the $$$. I agree it's "agricultural" but it's way smaller and lighter. It's nicer than the 50 because the manual focus ring is rubberised and smoother.
12-12-2008, 09:00 PM   #51
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40-55'-44" N / 73-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,102
um ...lol...
Does it (focus ring) have a much longer throw than the 50? I don't like the FA 50's throw one bit. Anyway, thread's not about the 35/2.
12-13-2008, 07:14 AM   #52
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: CT / NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 822
Hey guys,

all Alfist is saying is, try the FA 35/2 in a store at the same time, and if you have your mind open to really judge the results, you could possibly discover that the 35/2 delivers a very damn close result.



But, of course, it seems like the lower price tag and the looks of the lens already created some bad image of it for you, very unfortunate...


And for me, i never had the chance to use the legendary 31 LTD, and again, after exploiting the 35/2 in every possible situation and confirming its merits, i would very much LOVE to see bothh in the ring, side by side in a test.

I have a 77 LTD, and i know its construction has VALUE. but i just cant imagine how much better the IQ can be on the 31 LTD to be worth almost 3x the 35/2.

Honestly more like a curiosity factor than anything else. Hecka, i have no plans on buying anything else, so this could bring life back to me: selling the 35/2 and getting the 31 LTD...
12-13-2008, 09:25 AM   #53
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40-55'-44" N / 73-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,102
QuoteOriginally posted by BBear Quote
i would very much LOVE to see bothh in the ring, side by side in a test.
It has happened, on here here & there (not real 'tests' just casual comparos), and there's photozone.de. In all honesty hating the high-CA aspect of my DA 12-24 has a lot to do with forming my opinion and guiding my desire. Please all, enjoy your lens. Something that increases CA as I stop down is not for me for a prime @ that focal length; I've have enough of purple colored halos at the edge of high contrast surfaces (say tree trunks against the sky, which is most often what plagues my 'ruined' shots ) with the lenses that I have that do it. I just don't want to chance it. Hope you all can live with that. For me, The Tamron zoom is "ok enough" for that focal length for now; if I get a (AF) prime @ that length it's going to be something special.

12-13-2008, 09:30 AM   #54
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
You are in the wrong mount then, I will be flamed for this but IMHO Pentax lenses are the worst for CA's of any of the 5 mainstream manufacturers. Not just purple either, but Cyan and magenta ... particularly cyan on FA lenses.
12-13-2008, 09:31 AM   #55
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40-55'-44" N / 73-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,102
QuoteOriginally posted by Alfisti Quote
You are in the wrong mount then, I will be flamed for this but IMHO Pentax lenses are the worst for CA's of any of the 5 mainstream manufacturers. Not just purple either, but Cyan and magenta ... particularly cyan on FA lenses.
No flame from me... But I will add there's plenty of lenses where it's well controlled. ...so, I look for that. (and found it in the 31)
12-13-2008, 09:51 AM   #56
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toronto (for now)
Posts: 1,749
This solves all my problems ......

Shay Stephens Photography
12-13-2008, 11:04 AM   #57
Veteran Member
Eaglerapids's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Idaho,USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,588
One thing I've not seen mentioned here is the 31Limited's unbelievable flare control shooting into the sun. I've never used the FA 35/2 so I wonder if it can even play in the same league as the 31Limited in this regard. I wondered, myself, what could justify the high cost of the 31 and my questions were answered after I bought and used one. The only quibble I have ever been able to mark against it is a bit of CA fringing, if forced, most noticeable viewed at 200%! And on that note the 31 Limited is the only lens I've used that can consistently produce pictures that look GOOD at 200%, if solidly supported, not that I pixel peep:-).
To my mind it's not this or that that sets the 31 Limited apart, it's the whole package combined into one incredible lens. It's a very special lens and priced accordingly.
12-13-2008, 10:05 PM   #58
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Eaglerapids Quote
One thing I've not seen mentioned here is the 31Limited's unbelievable flare control shooting into the sun. I've never used the FA 35/2 so I wonder if it can even play in the same league as the 31Limited in this regard. I wondered, myself, what could justify the high cost of the 31 and my questions were answered after I bought and used one. The only quibble I have ever been able to mark against it is a bit of CA fringing, if forced, most noticeable viewed at 200%! And on that note the 31 Limited is the only lens I've used that can consistently produce pictures that look GOOD at 200%, if solidly supported, not that I pixel peep:-).
To my mind it's not this or that that sets the 31 Limited apart, it's the whole package combined into one incredible lens. It's a very special lens and priced accordingly.
Yes, I noticed it's flare control also, but the DA 35ltd also has great luck shooting
into the sun, I found:

31ltd:



35ltd:

12-13-2008, 11:14 PM   #59
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
QuoteOriginally posted by BBear Quote
Hey guys,

all Alfist is saying is, try the FA 35/2 in a store at the same time, and if you have your mind open to really judge the results, you could possibly discover that the 35/2 delivers a very damn close result.

But, of course, it seems like the lower price tag and the looks of the lens already created some bad image of it for you, very unfortunate...
I get what he's saying, and he admits it is somewhat "agricultural." Sometimes close isn't enough. For me build quality and the feel of the lens is a significant part of the equation. It isn't about price, it is about "quality" (whatever that means) and the whole user experience. There is more to taking pictures than just iq of the glass or sensor specs. It is a process that is influenced by a lot of factors.

On a semi-related note I picked up a 43ltd tonight. Good gawd, amazing lens. On par with my 77ltd, and certainly a step above the 35ltd as a "walkaround" lens at least in my hands so far. There is something different about the way the FA ltds seem to work the light. And it certainly just feels right in my hand. I might have to try a 31ltd again and see.

Different strokes for different folks. Value is in the eye of the beholder. But i'd rather have a handful of *really* special lenses than a whole bunch of "good value" glass.
12-14-2008, 06:10 AM   #60
Veteran Member
pcarfan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,960
Look at those images with the 31mm...look at that tree and you can tell each leave apart, look at that dragon fly, looks more real than the real thing, look at that iron railing, it might as well me sitting in my computer, look at that cute baby (ok, he will look cute no matter what lens is used)....the 35 is no match for this...it's a new lens, and has that cache...in 5 to 10 years no one will pick the 35 over the 31 fro IQ, it will sell for its close focussing and price. Just my opinion, of course....

Last edited by pcarfan; 12-14-2008 at 06:21 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
the 77ltd doesn't suck either nostatic Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 04-23-2008 02:40 AM
DA35, FA31 resolution comparison, samples. thePiRaTE!! Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 37 04-08-2008 11:43 AM
why i love the 77ltd nostatic Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 0 03-27-2008 09:38 PM
A few with the new to me 77LTD :) vievetrick Post Your Photos! 8 11-13-2007 07:27 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:06 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top