FA 31mm LTD vs FA 35mm comparison

Robert S Donovan · 05-03-2009, 11:11 AM

I was lucky enough to get my hands on an FA 31mm f/1.8 AL Limited for a few days. It is a truly remarkable lens. While I had it I did a few unscientific FoV and IQ tests between it, my FA 35mm f/2 AL and my MK I 18-55mm kit lens. I know there are probably a lot of people here (like me) who have to be very choosy in how they spend their LBA dollars and are wondering if the FA 31 LTD is all that.

I'm not even going to attempt to answer that question. Instead, I proffer up my latest blog article for your perusal. Give it a look over, make your own assessment and share your thoughts for others to use as they wish in their own opinion-making.

BTW, for anyone here who has been following my blog, please make note that I have moved my blog from booleansplit.com to robertsdonovan.com.

Cheers!

cooldude14es · 05-03-2009, 11:25 AM

Thank you very much for the test and for sharing it. I try to check as many comparisons as I can between those lenses.

k100d · 05-03-2009, 11:37 AM

is it just me or is your blog taking forever to load

**monochrome** · 05-03-2009, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by k100d

is it just me or is your blog taking forever to load

a/o 1:39 pm, it is just you

Darren M · 05-03-2009, 11:43 AM

I would agree with your findings for the most part, having owned both lenses. There are two areas you didn't cover though, both of which are really important to me and both of which vastly favor the 31. When it comes to bokeh and how the lens handles out of focus highlights, it just isn't close. The 35 is prone to hard looking bokeh IMO and it more often creates crescent shaped highlights in out of focus flare spots, which I just find eye catching and frustrating. There is not a doubt to me that the 31 far outshines the 35. I love the 31, while I have to admit that I never really took to the 35. Personally, for my style of shooting, I do find a very noticeable FOV difference between the two, but that is mostly because I tend to work from in really close most times.

nulla · 05-03-2009, 12:01 PM

Thanks for these tests and your blog... well done

My new FA 31 arrived last week and I am loving it, it has not come off the camera yet.

Cheers

Neil

k100d · 05-03-2009, 12:08 PM

Originally posted by monochrome

a/o 1:39 pm, it is just you

ah it works now, thanks for the test rob. there are some pretty obvious differences there. better than the test that i did.
the FA31 is a champ for landscape stuff wide open

Robert S Donovan · 05-03-2009, 12:39 PM

Originally posted by Darren M

I would agree with your findings for the most part, having owned both lenses. There are two areas you didn't cover though, both of which are really important to me and both of which vastly favor the 31. When it comes to bokeh and how the lens handles out of focus highlights, it just isn't close. The 35 is prone to hard looking bokeh IMO and it more often creates crescent shaped highlights in out of focus flare spots, which I just find eye catching and frustrating. There is not a doubt to me that the 31 far outshines the 35. I love the 31, while I have to admit that I never really took to the 35. Personally, for my style of shooting, I do find a very noticeable FOV difference between the two, but that is mostly because I tend to work from in really close most times.

Good point. I did shoot plenty of bokeh shots with it but since I'm usually shooting wide open I didn't notice much of a difference between the 31 LTD and the FA 35. Stopped down I'm sure the 31 LTD's bokeh will be better than the FA 35's (based solely on aperture blade count). I did take some DoF comparison shots that I'll look back through and add to my post if their is anything noteworthy to share.

Thanks!

Robert S Donovan · 05-03-2009, 12:40 PM

Originally posted by k100d

is it just me or is your blog taking forever to load

You probably caught me while editing the original post ;-)

k100d · 05-03-2009, 02:23 PM

while you have them both, you might want to do some bokeh CA tests to see the results of cyan fringing in backgrounds. i've had some nasty stuff come out of the FA31 before wide open.

roentarre · 05-03-2009, 02:55 PM

Originally posted by Darren M

I would agree with your findings for the most part, having owned both lenses. There are two areas you didn't cover though, both of which are really important to me and both of which vastly favor the 31. When it comes to bokeh and how the lens handles out of focus highlights, it just isn't close. The 35 is prone to hard looking bokeh IMO and it more often creates crescent shaped highlights in out of focus flare spots, which I just find eye catching and frustrating. There is not a doubt to me that the 31 far outshines the 35. I love the 31, while I have to admit that I never really took to the 35. Personally, for my style of shooting, I do find a very noticeable FOV difference between the two, but that is mostly because I tend to work from in really close most times.

Darren, really glad to see you posting. Your opinion is always appreciated.

With your daily use of Fa 31mm, it is not hard to know that you love this prime. Most of all, you are a hard critic on lenses.

Despite little differences comparing these two primes, it seems that Fa 31mm ltd does shine in real life shooting for some reasons.

For you, I know skin tone rendering and clipping is a taboo in your shooting. (Sorry that I use the word rendering

) I believe that Fa 31mm has to be in some ways different from 35mm f2 to charge that kind amount of money.

Fa 35mm f2 is more prone to crescent shaped specular highlights with incredibly CA to manage under Australian sun.

Robert S Donovan · 05-03-2009, 03:12 PM

Originally posted by k100d

while you have them both, you might want to do some bokeh CA tests to see the results of cyan fringing in backgrounds. i've had some nasty stuff come out of the FA31 before wide open.

Thanks for pointing that out. I updated the blog post and added comparisons showing the fringing characteristics of the 31 LTD, FA 35 and kit lens. Unfortunately, I seem to have trashed my bokeh comparison shots between the 3 lenses

Robert S Donovan · 05-03-2009, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by roentarre

Darren, really glad to see you posting. Your opinion is always appreciated.

With your daily use of Fa 31mm, it is not hard to know that you love this prime. Most of all, you are a hard critic on lenses.

Despite little differences comparing these two primes, it seems that Fa 31mm ltd does shine in real life shooting for some reasons.

For you, I know skin tone rendering and clipping is a taboo in your shooting. (Sorry that I use the word rendering

) I believe that Fa 31mm has to be in some ways different from 35mm f2 to charge that kind amount of money.

Fa 35mm f2 is more prone to crescent shaped specular highlights with incredibly CA to manage under Australian sun.

I agree that the 31 LTD's bokeh quality is almost magical. I wish I had had more time to shoot with it. But, as it was, I had to travel while I had the lens in my possession and I didn't take it with me. I don't like traveling with a lens that isn't mine and that I can't afford to replace

ftpaddict · 05-03-2009, 03:39 PM

After having seen the comparison, there is no doubt in my mind that I would go for the 31 Ltd.

On a side note, you may want to find a better host, Robert. Or upgrade your Internet Connection if you're doing the hosting yourself. It takes time to load over here in Europe...

Robert S Donovan · 05-03-2009, 03:50 PM

Originally posted by ftpaddict

After having seen the comparison, there is no doubt in my mind that I would go for the 31 Ltd.

On a side note, you may want to find a better host, Robert. Or upgrade your Internet Connection if you're doing the hosting yourself. It takes time to load over here in Europe...

That's too bad...my host is in Europe

The post loads the full-sized images even though you only see the scaled-down versions in the post. That, and the fact that I have been doing a lot of work on my blog today, may make the load times a bit slower than they should be. Also, I'm seeing a lot of traffic at the moment for some reason.

Thanks for letting me know, though!

05-03-2009, 11:11 AM	#1
Robert S Donovan Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Anderson, SC Photos: Gallery Posts: 361	FA 31mm LTD vs FA 35mm comparison I was lucky enough to get my hands on an FA 31mm f/1.8 AL Limited for a few days. It is a truly remarkable lens. While I had it I did a few unscientific FoV and IQ tests between it, my FA 35mm f/2 AL and my MK I 18-55mm kit lens. I know there are probably a lot of people here (like me) who have to be very choosy in how they spend their LBA dollars and are wondering if the FA 31 LTD is all that. I'm not even going to attempt to answer that question. Instead, I proffer up my latest blog article for your perusal. Give it a look over, make your own assessment and share your thoughts for others to use as they wish in their own opinion-making. BTW, for anyone here who has been following my blog, please make note that I have moved my blog from booleansplit.com to robertsdonovan.com. Cheers!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FA 31mm f/1.8 versus FA 35mm /f2 - That old debate again	pentaman	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	21	11-28-2009 02:47 AM
Full Length Portraits 31mm or 35mm	candgpics	Photographic Technique	9	09-25-2009 06:51 AM
Comparison: 35mm, APS-C (lots of pics)	zplus	Pentax DSLR Discussion	36	09-08-2009 10:20 AM
Comparison - APS-C, 35mm, 645MedFmt	architorture	Pentax DSLR Discussion	13	06-01-2009 04:04 AM
Interesting comparison - DA lenses on 35MM	straightshooter	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	08-12-2008 01:14 PM

05-03-2009, 11:25 AM	#2
cooldude14es Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Barcelona, Spain Posts: 264	Thank you very much for the test and for sharing it. I try to check as many comparisons as I can between those lenses.

05-03-2009, 11:37 AM	#3
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	is it just me or is your blog taking forever to load

05-03-2009, 11:41 AM	#4
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by k100d is it just me or is your blog taking forever to load a/o 1:39 pm, it is just you

05-03-2009, 11:43 AM	#5
Darren M Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Taipei, Taiwan Posts: 130	I would agree with your findings for the most part, having owned both lenses. There are two areas you didn't cover though, both of which are really important to me and both of which vastly favor the 31. When it comes to bokeh and how the lens handles out of focus highlights, it just isn't close. The 35 is prone to hard looking bokeh IMO and it more often creates crescent shaped highlights in out of focus flare spots, which I just find eye catching and frustrating. There is not a doubt to me that the 31 far outshines the 35. I love the 31, while I have to admit that I never really took to the 35. Personally, for my style of shooting, I do find a very noticeable FOV difference between the two, but that is mostly because I tend to work from in really close most times.

05-03-2009, 12:01 PM	#6
nulla Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 1,560	Thanks for these tests and your blog... well done My new FA 31 arrived last week and I am loving it, it has not come off the camera yet. Cheers Neil

05-03-2009, 12:08 PM	#7
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	Originally posted by monochrome a/o 1:39 pm, it is just you ah it works now, thanks for the test rob. there are some pretty obvious differences there. better than the test that i did. the FA31 is a champ for landscape stuff wide open

05-03-2009, 12:39 PM	#8
Robert S Donovan Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Anderson, SC Photos: Gallery Posts: 361 Original Poster	Originally posted by Darren M I would agree with your findings for the most part, having owned both lenses. There are two areas you didn't cover though, both of which are really important to me and both of which vastly favor the 31. When it comes to bokeh and how the lens handles out of focus highlights, it just isn't close. The 35 is prone to hard looking bokeh IMO and it more often creates crescent shaped highlights in out of focus flare spots, which I just find eye catching and frustrating. There is not a doubt to me that the 31 far outshines the 35. I love the 31, while I have to admit that I never really took to the 35. Personally, for my style of shooting, I do find a very noticeable FOV difference between the two, but that is mostly because I tend to work from in really close most times. Good point. I did shoot plenty of bokeh shots with it but since I'm usually shooting wide open I didn't notice much of a difference between the 31 LTD and the FA 35. Stopped down I'm sure the 31 LTD's bokeh will be better than the FA 35's (based solely on aperture blade count). I did take some DoF comparison shots that I'll look back through and add to my post if their is anything noteworthy to share. Thanks!

05-03-2009, 12:40 PM	#9
Robert S Donovan Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Anderson, SC Photos: Gallery Posts: 361 Original Poster	Originally posted by k100d is it just me or is your blog taking forever to load You probably caught me while editing the original post ;-)

05-03-2009, 02:23 PM	#10
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	while you have them both, you might want to do some bokeh CA tests to see the results of cyan fringing in backgrounds. i've had some nasty stuff come out of the FA31 before wide open.

05-03-2009, 02:55 PM	#11
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783	Originally posted by Darren M I would agree with your findings for the most part, having owned both lenses. There are two areas you didn't cover though, both of which are really important to me and both of which vastly favor the 31. When it comes to bokeh and how the lens handles out of focus highlights, it just isn't close. The 35 is prone to hard looking bokeh IMO and it more often creates crescent shaped highlights in out of focus flare spots, which I just find eye catching and frustrating. There is not a doubt to me that the 31 far outshines the 35. I love the 31, while I have to admit that I never really took to the 35. Personally, for my style of shooting, I do find a very noticeable FOV difference between the two, but that is mostly because I tend to work from in really close most times. Darren, really glad to see you posting. Your opinion is always appreciated. With your daily use of Fa 31mm, it is not hard to know that you love this prime. Most of all, you are a hard critic on lenses. Despite little differences comparing these two primes, it seems that Fa 31mm ltd does shine in real life shooting for some reasons. For you, I know skin tone rendering and clipping is a taboo in your shooting. (Sorry that I use the word rendering ) I believe that Fa 31mm has to be in some ways different from 35mm f2 to charge that kind amount of money. Fa 35mm f2 is more prone to crescent shaped specular highlights with incredibly CA to manage under Australian sun.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-03-2009, 03:12 PM	#12
Robert S Donovan Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Anderson, SC Photos: Gallery Posts: 361 Original Poster	Originally posted by k100d while you have them both, you might want to do some bokeh CA tests to see the results of cyan fringing in backgrounds. i've had some nasty stuff come out of the FA31 before wide open. Thanks for pointing that out. I updated the blog post and added comparisons showing the fringing characteristics of the 31 LTD, FA 35 and kit lens. Unfortunately, I seem to have trashed my bokeh comparison shots between the 3 lenses

05-03-2009, 03:32 PM	#13
Robert S Donovan Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Anderson, SC Photos: Gallery Posts: 361 Original Poster	Originally posted by roentarre Darren, really glad to see you posting. Your opinion is always appreciated. With your daily use of Fa 31mm, it is not hard to know that you love this prime. Most of all, you are a hard critic on lenses. Despite little differences comparing these two primes, it seems that Fa 31mm ltd does shine in real life shooting for some reasons. For you, I know skin tone rendering and clipping is a taboo in your shooting. (Sorry that I use the word rendering ) I believe that Fa 31mm has to be in some ways different from 35mm f2 to charge that kind amount of money. Fa 35mm f2 is more prone to crescent shaped specular highlights with incredibly CA to manage under Australian sun. I agree that the 31 LTD's bokeh quality is almost magical. I wish I had had more time to shoot with it. But, as it was, I had to travel while I had the lens in my possession and I didn't take it with me. I don't like traveling with a lens that isn't mine and that I can't afford to replace

05-03-2009, 03:39 PM	#14
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,666	After having seen the comparison, there is no doubt in my mind that I would go for the 31 Ltd. On a side note, you may want to find a better host, Robert. Or upgrade your Internet Connection if you're doing the hosting yourself. It takes time to load over here in Europe...

05-03-2009, 03:50 PM	#15
Robert S Donovan Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Anderson, SC Photos: Gallery Posts: 361 Original Poster	Originally posted by ftpaddict After having seen the comparison, there is no doubt in my mind that I would go for the 31 Ltd. On a side note, you may want to find a better host, Robert. Or upgrade your Internet Connection if you're doing the hosting yourself. It takes time to load over here in Europe... That's too bad...my host is in Europe The post loads the full-sized images even though you only see the scaled-down versions in the post. That, and the fact that I have been doing a lot of work on my blog today, may make the load times a bit slower than they should be. Also, I'm seeing a lot of traffic at the moment for some reason. Thanks for letting me know, though!