[UncleVanya]

It's not your first post of this kind. I recall another similar post a few months ago showing how much better was Z7 + voigt combo compared to Pentax. IF you already own a z7, good for you. But what are you trying to achieve with such post? What's your goal?

I'm not sticking my head in the sand and asking people not to tell me about faults and nether are you, we just want more than words to go by. I concur with the request to see side by side shots - preferable raw images that we can all look at and understand. It's too easy to dismiss someone's opinion that doesn't match our experience (I've used my FA 31 on my Sony A7RIII and my previous A7RII but I don't have the Voitlander to compare with nor the HD 31. I found things that lined up with the review on Phillip Reeve's site which were well within reason given the SMC coating and legacy lens status. I am really curious about the HD and how it behaves - I can't imagine why it would fall short of the SMC given all the other reviews of other lenses with HD coating giving very minimal differences mostly positive. Even the few FA 31 reviews seemed to echo this.

[BigMackCam]

I'm not sticking my head in the sand and asking people not to tell me about faults and nether are you, we just want more than words to go by. I concur with the request to see side by side shots - preferable raw images that we can all look at and understand. It's too easy to dismiss someone's opinion that doesn't match our experience (I've used my FA 31 on my Sony A7RIII and my previous A7RII but I don't have the Voitlander to compare with nor the HD 31. I found things that lined up with the review on Phillip Reeve's site which were well within reason given the SMC coating and legacy lens status. I am really curious about the HD and how it behaves - I can't imagine why it would fall short of the SMC given all the other reviews of other lenses with HD coating giving very minimal differences mostly positive. Even the few FA 31 reviews seemed to echo this.

Exactly, Brad. This isn't about blindly defending the HD FA31, but understanding why the OP's results differ so markedly from reviews and other user experiences. Comparison to the Voigtländer lenses is irrelevant to me (however nice they may be) - but I'm absolutely open to criticism of the Pentax Limited lenses if we can see for ourselves that it's warranted...

EDIT: It would also be helpful to know the make and model of adapter being used, how well it's blackened or flocked internally (a major contributor to flare / internal reflection performance), and whether other Pentax lenses perform without apparent de-centering and flare issues on this same adapter. My own experience of using adapters on my Sony A7 MkII is that they vary enormously in terms of axial and focal plane alignment, and internal reflections...

[luftfluss]

I've owned all five DA Limited primes in both SMC and HD versions, and under no circumstance have I ever seen an HD version with "Ugly yellow colour balance".

In this review of the HD 31 Ltd, the author successfully used the lens on a Sony A7R IV: Pentax HD FA 31mm F1.8 Limited Review | PCMag

[stevebrot]

I will weigh in very briefly...

For the OP:

• Explain lens dynamic range. That is a new one for me.
• Could you provide examples of color cast with EXIF intact. Usually this is a matter of white balance vs. lighting.
• Poor sharpness might be missed focus. How have you been doing fine focus with this lens?

In general:

• There is an old saying that some things are a matter of taste and that there is no accounting for taste. Some statements in the original post definitely fall into the category of taste.
• Whether the original post is "click bait" or trolling is hard to say.
• When noting deficiencies with an adapted lens, the adapter should always be considered as a source of the deficit. (Personal experience with adapted M42 to K-mount.)
• The suggestion of submitting a formal review on PF is a good one. One of the advantages of a negative review is that there is no mechanism to directly refute the reviewer's claims.

Disclaimer: I have not been a 31/1.8 Limited owner (either version) and have no strong opinions regarding the lens or its recent HD variant.


Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 01-22-2022 at 03:24 PM. Reason: Additional stuff

[Digitalis]

Is this click bait?

Yes, this is clickbait, he could have posted a review in the designated place like everyone else does, but he elected not to. So this guy thinks the FA31 sucks? let him prove it. As for me: I have had my FA31 for well over 10 years now, it is a solid gem of a lens. I have had many high performance lenses with similar focal lengths and zoom lenses as well, any of which could have taken its place - but those lenses are gone, and the FA31 retains in its place in my camera bag.


I have worked with Voigtländer lenses before on my rangefinders and in Nikon F mount, strange that I found their flare resistance to be slightly worse than a mid 1970's Takumar. I agree their build quality is superb - about on par with a Takumar come to think of it, Cosina really went all out with that. But optically, Voigtländer lenses have a reputation among leicaphiles to produce images that are flatter and have less contrast than Leica or Zeiss Glass, and among RF aficionados are often seen as a poor man's alternative to Leica or Zeiss* as their physical finish is comparatively inferior. In Nikon F mount I have the legendary Voigtländer 125mm f/2.5 SLII APO Lanthar and the Topcor inspired 58mm f/1.4 SLII - save for the VL125mm which I can only praise for its exquisite qualities the Voigtländer 58mm f/1.4 is optically and physically outclassed by the Zeiss OTUS 55mm f/1.4 in every conceivable metric.


At present I'm comparing the Voigtländer 20mm f/3.5 SLII Vs the new Pentax D-FA HD 21mm f/2.4 ED ASPH - As well built and svelte as the Voigtländer 20mm is: the distortion and field curvature it suffers from is making it hard for me to make a fair comparison, also the DFA21s flare resistance is vastly superior to the Voigtländer. While the D-FA 21 has a warmer colour cast than the Voigtländer lens (and the FA*24mm f/2 too come to think of it) it's purely a matter of taste and can be altered if you care to set the white balance to a cooler value.

* But not as bad as M mount Konica-Hexanon lenses, which are considered the spawn of the devil.

[pschlute]

Hi guys just thought I would post my experience with the 31mm hd lens in one word disappointed
the first one a got was badly de centred so I thought try another and the same thing again I also got the 43mm HD and compared it to my smc 43mm and to my surprise my old lens is much sharper and I prefer the colours from the smc to the HD I also got the 77mm and compared to my voitlander 65mm APO and my 75mm 1.5 both on Nikon z7 there is a massive difference the new voitlanders are better more contrasty sharper and just made so well like tanks
the quality control on the 31mm was dreadful I didn’t even want to try a 3rd one the 31mm is a great lens if you haven't tried the voitlander lenses but trust me the voits are the best lenses Ive ever owned I am sure there will be lots of people on here arguing over this but I thought it was worth mentioning


My conclusion aboutthe hd31 is that is has:

* Ugly yellow colour balance.
*HD coating is terrible with stray light
See HDhere:HD vs. SMC Pentax FA Limited Lenses Review - Flare and Ghosting | PentaxForums.com Reviews
SeeMUCH better SMC here:HD vs. SMC Pentax FA Limited Lenses Review - Flare and Ghosting | PentaxForums.com Reviews
*HD has uglier starbursts
* Bad sharpness
* Bad qualitycontrol
* HD coating killed the pop (3d) too, by over-improvingdynamic range. Pictures are flat and boring.

10 months ago you showed you had very little experience in even knowing how to use a DSLR and get sharp focus....help 43mm ltd front focus - PentaxForums.com

Forgive me if I find your comments naive and pointless.

[DonV]

Sorry,
but a post with no punctuation and no capitals cannot be taken very seriously. JMHO

[carlb]

Sorry,
but a post with no punctuation and no capitals cannot be taken very seriously. JMHO

I'm glad it wasn't only me thinking this

Do they even teach grammar and punctuation in schools any more?

[BigMackCam]

Maybe it is just me, but it is "Voigtlaender" and "Voigts".

but a post with no punctuation and no capitals cannot be taken very seriously. JMHO

In essence, Don, you're declaring the post "null and voigt"?

[cxdoo]

It happens that I just got a silver HD FA31 a few days ago after years of coveting, so this is probably the right place and time to ask, is this a lemon?



Though it looks rather sharp to me

[AfterPentax Mark II]

I'm glad it wasn't only me thinking this

Do they even teach grammar and punctuation in schools any more?

It seems that photography and debating was not on the curriculum either.

[AfterPentax Mark II]

It happens that I just got a silver HD FA31 a few days ago after years of coveting, so this is probably the right place and time to ask, is this a lemon?

They certainly are, in my country we have a saying "knollen voor citroenen verkopen" (sell tubers for lemons), which is a bit problematic if one has not seen a lemon before .

[zbrueningsen]

I thought I was going to find this when I clicked on the link:

You Tube

You Tube

[andy271]

First off I am not interested in people who comment about punctuationand capital letters I am just pointing out what happened in mysituation so your best going to another post that may interest you ongrammar I am extremely busy so when I get the chance I will postimages

---------- Post added 01-23-22 at 07:02 AM ----------

i am limited to 15 photos on this post so will try and get the best examples i can

---------- Post added 01-23-22 at 07:07 AM ----------

Strange. It is perhaps the sharpest lens I've ever seen but and this is a big but compared to if you havent seen or used the voigtlander there is no reference point the voigtlander lenses are better made the caps never come off they are optically better and have thats superb japanese build and quality control

im not saying the pentax lenses are bad im saying im dissapointed with the new HD versions

[normhead]

What is that supposed to show? The lack of depth of field at ƒ/2?

The strength of the 31 is smooth backgrounds and transitions in out of focus areas. I'm not sure single focal plane shooting has ever been considered a strength.

There is nothing here to suggest any other lens is better. It takes two photos to show that, one from each camera with the same set up.

If you want sharp single focal plane focus, try macro lenses.