[virgilr]

Christos-

Are you shooting on a K20D or a K10D? I'm still shooting on my lowly K100D super. I've read the CA is more of a problem on the K10D, which would put me in the same generation of sensor technology, but obviously not the same sensor.

[celetron]

Christos-

Are you shooting on a K20D or a K10D? I'm still shooting on my lowly K100D super. I've read the CA is more of a problem on the K10D, which would put me in the same generation of sensor technology, but obviously not the same sensor.

K20D

I used to own DS but the on board flash failed just before Christmas, so I thought it was time for a new body...however you shouldn't underestimate the K100D sensor. It is quite capable and can capture astonishing images...

[virgilr]

Actually I love my camera body! I just wish I had a ISO 1000 option... something between 800 and 1600 would be fantastic for the extra bit of low light handling.

Not too concered with the 6mp sensor area, either- genuine fractals on a deep (say 50%) crop can still give awesome 8x10 prints. So good enough for me for the now!

I just don't want to spend money on a lens that will give me problems because of the sensor design- I have a feeling the DA 35/2.8 was "tuned" for the K20D, but that's just after some reading, and no real world experience.

Did you see the shot from my K30/2.8? Ooosh- I took some GREAT pictures today with that lens... I don't know if I can part with it!

LENS ANGUISH!!

[celetron]

Actually I love my camera body! I just wish I had a ISO 1000 option... something between 800 and 1600 would be fantastic for the extra bit of low light handling.

Not too concered with the 6mp sensor area, either- genuine fractals on a deep (say 50%) crop can still give awesome 8x10 prints. So good enough for me for the now!

I just don't want to spend money on a lens that will give me problems because of the sensor design- I have a feeling the DA 35/2.8 was "tuned" for the K20D, but that's just after some reading, and no real world experience.

Did you see the shot from my K30/2.8? Ooosh- I took some GREAT pictures today with that lens... I don't know if I can part with it!

LENS ANGUISH!!

Yes I have seen some and it looks great lens... If you are happy with it then you shouldn't replace it. The only lens that would actually offer you enough stops is sigma 30/1.4. you won't see much of a difference with the one stop of f2 ...

[virgilr]

Christos-
Yeah, I know, in terms of keeping the lens.. I think I may look into a FA 35/2, if I can find one at the right price. Then I could keep the K30/2.

The one thing I do realize when shooting with the K is that in dim light, not ANY fun to get good focus- I often throw out 2 of 3 shots. So AF on any of the 35mm auto variants will be a godsend. Good light- interior/daytime: not a problem with MF.

I know I could invest in a katz eye or equivalent to help with MF, but in dim light on highly detailed subjects, would it really be of help? I'm not sure. However, that would surely open up possibilities for more M glass and useability. The only thing is the metering- I'm fine with it, but I can't just hand the camera to my wife with these manual focus lenses and expect her to get good shots: and she often times gets fantastic shots with AF lenses! We share our experience of art in life quite often.

However, when it gets down to it: the price of a FA 35/2 right now isn't exactly cheap- I'd probably have to buy from the U.S. (I'm in Canada), pay the exchange plus 1 tax coming in plus shipping- and wind up paying about 50.00 more for the DA 35/2 ltd.

Sorry I'm going on here everybody- but wondering if you were staring at buying a FA 35/2 or a DA 35/2.8 ltd, given both of their strengths/weaknesses, which way would you go, given the current pricing/availability? I can get either with a difference of around 50.00 more for the DA.

[Sailor]

Sorry I'm going on here everybody- but wondering if you were staring at buying a FA 35/2 or a DA 35/2.8 ltd, given both of their strengths/weaknesses, which way would you go, given the current pricing/availability? I can get either with a difference of around 50.00 more for the DA.

I currently have an FA 35/2 and have been musing about getting a DA 35 - so I have the same questions as you do. This morning I stumbled on to a website, All Tests / Reviews, which publishes objective data on a number of Pentax lenses including the two 35's. I'm sure everybody but me already knew about these guys and I'm certainly not promoting their website. Still, it might be worth your time to take a look at what they say about these lenses.

Jer

[virgilr]

Sailor-

Yep, googled reviews on both lenses, and had a good look at those tests on the site you've linked to.

Obviously, the conditions test photos were taken in weren't ideal, and I hate it when testers walk around outside at midday and shoot at f/8! Oh well... that's why I'm digging around here on the Pentax forums- I want to know how these lenses perform for the rest of the world by people who know them intimately!

Have to say- with a bit of PP in Lightroom, my tamron 28-200 at f/8 isn't a bad performer. OF COURSE there are distortions, CA, all kinds of trade offs, but when I'm outside and just want to shoot for the joy of it at f/8, I feel very good with this lens.

[Just1MoreDave]

...I know I could invest in a katz eye or equivalent to help with MF, but in dim light on highly detailed subjects, would it really be of help? I'm not sure. However, that would surely open up possibilities for more M glass and useability.

I think it does help. With highly detailed subjects, I would look at the microprism collar around the split prism. Even with some prism darkening in this area, the transitions between in focus or out of focus are much more magnified than on the matte screen.

My Katz-Eye was my best camera investment. Its price seems almost absurd for a tiny sliver of plastic, and you can easily talk yourself out of it. (I did, but I talked so much about it, my wife bought it for me.) My unscientific measurement of its effectiveness is that I don't get crosseyed after using MF lenses any more. And you can easily save the price of the screen by buying one MF lens instead of AF.

...Sorry I'm going on here everybody- but wondering if you were staring at buying a FA 35/2 or a DA 35/2.8 ltd, given both of their strengths/weaknesses, which way would you go, given the current pricing/availability? I can get either with a difference of around 50.00 more for the DA.

I chose the FA, but based on less/different data than is around today. When I chose, the DA was just out and more expensive than now, so it was FA at $300 vs. DA at $400+. There weren't so many beautiful DA example photos around. I had two 35mm f2 lenses (Pentax-M and S-M-C Tak) that I could sell, so I wanted a direct f2 replacement. And I already have too much macro equipment that I don't use to its full potential. I made the right choice for me.

[virgilr]

Dave-

Do you find metering to be a bit more accurate with the Katz eye? I usually have to hand dial down 3 shutter speed values to get proper exposure with my M50/1.7 and K30/2.8.

I could try and find like an A 35/2, but I know those are rare as hens teeth and darned expensive. Don't know if there's an M equivalent, but would like to have an A to avoid the manual exposure with the AE-L button all the time...

[Just1MoreDave]

Dave-

Do you find metering to be a bit more accurate with the Katz eye? I usually have to hand dial down 3 shutter speed values to get proper exposure with my M50/1.7 and K30/2.8.

I could try and find like an A 35/2, but I know those are rare as hens teeth and darned expensive. Don't know if there's an M equivalent, but would like to have an A to avoid the manual exposure with the AE-L button all the time...

I am not very picky about exposure, and less so before I switched screens. I didn't notice any difference between stock and Katz-Eye when I switched. This is with the *ist DS, and at the time (fall 2006), there were very few complaints about exposure errors with M lenses. There was a thread on dpreview about the Optibright treatment option causing some errors with all lenses, so I didn't mind saving money there. I haven't seen anything myself that would give me a reason to swap screens and test.

I had the Pentax-M 35/2, which was only affordable because it was mislabeled in an auction for a Ricoh camera. It is the same optical formula as the A version. I didn't do any head-to-head testing with the FA because I wanted to sell the M first, but the FA definitely is sharper wide open and probably at all apertures, with better contrast. I have seen very few M or A models for sale, which is always bad for bargain hunters. Mine sold for $150.