Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-13-2010, 02:59 PM   #1
Senior Member
fourmiX's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 137
Short comparaison 100mm Macro D-FA vs NEW D-FA WR

First; the new SMC Pentax D-FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro WR
















and only for the beauty of the light reflection in the coating


02-13-2010, 03:15 PM   #2
Pentaxian
LeDave's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,904
Nice comparison. At the f/2.8 comparison you can clearly see the hexagonal circles on the non-WR compared to the clean circles produced by the WR version.
02-13-2010, 03:16 PM   #3
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,685
I'm really impressed that they added WR and actually decreased the diameter a smidgeon. I assumed the new version would be bigger.

Do you see a difference in IQ? I can't see any significant difference looking at these photos. Maybe something more bokeh oriented would show more?

Thanks for the comparison.
02-13-2010, 03:34 PM   #4
Veteran Member
Steinback's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: GTA, ON, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,673
Other than the highlights the images look pretty much the same to me. Do you have to decide which one to keep?

02-13-2010, 04:38 PM   #5
Pentaxian
LeDave's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,904
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
I'm really impressed that they added WR and actually decreased the diameter a smidgeon. I assumed the new version would be bigger.

Do you see a difference in IQ? I can't see any significant difference looking at these photos. Maybe something more bokeh oriented would show more?

Thanks for the comparison.
It's actually lighter too despite having a full metal body and WR. They are pretty much exactly identical in terms of optics and number of blades, so there are very minimal to no difference in IQ at all. The only difference is the bokeh. The WR with circular shaped blades remains circular at wide-open, while the non-WR would need to be stopped down to to achieve the same effect due to it's hexagon shaped blades.
02-13-2010, 04:42 PM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter
imtheguy's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Virginia Beach
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,950
Really nice post. Thank you for your efforts. I'm sure this will be a very popular read. As far as differences, if LeDave had not pointed out the hexagonal circles my eyes would have have said the two lenses are the same for all intents and purposes. I would be happy with either. Again, great post.
02-13-2010, 06:03 PM   #7
Veteran Member
Jodokast96's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Erial, NJ USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,132
Didn't notice the circles either. But to me, it does seemt the the WR has just the slightest bit more contrast.
02-13-2010, 06:51 PM   #8
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,452
QuoteOriginally posted by imtheguy Quote
...As far as differences, if LeDave had not pointed out the hexagonal circles my eyes would have have said the two lenses are the same for all intents and purposes...
Me thinks those are octogons...

Steve

02-13-2010, 06:59 PM   #9
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,452
In reference to the diaphragm blades, the new WR has the same number of blades, but Pentax have changed the contour of the blade to a compound curve. The affect is to cast a more circular profile at wider apertures. Very cool idea!

Steve
02-13-2010, 07:07 PM   #10
Pentaxian
LeDave's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Minneapolis - St. Paul
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,904
Lol yeah those are octagons then (I'm one of those dumb people who don't know the difference between octagon and hexagon :P ). Also I am mistaken, the more wide-open it is, the less differences are seen between the circle and octagon, but when stopped down, it becomes more visible. Makes more sense since light scatters much more at a larger aperture opening which doesn't show the octagonal shape from the blades, compared to allowing less light going through at a smaller opening. So the WR version retains its circular bokeh when stopped down while the non-WR loses it, light is more controlled when stopping down, and that's also explains why fast primes are sharper when stopped down.

Last edited by LeDave; 02-13-2010 at 07:12 PM.
02-14-2010, 02:38 AM   #11
Senior Member
fourmiX's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 137
Original Poster
Thanks guys

Opticaly they are the same lenses.
Only changed the circular blades, the WR and the "limited" aluminium body (wich is very, very nice; looks like a long 77, about same feeling.
The focus ring is really pleasant.
02-14-2010, 02:48 AM   #12
emr
Guest




Great work, thanks. To my eyes it seems they're virtually identical excluding the slightly different shape of aperture blades and bokeh.
02-14-2010, 07:11 PM   #13
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
QuoteOriginally posted by LeDave Quote
...The only difference is the bokeh. The WR with circular shaped blades remains circular at wide-open, while the non-WR would need to be stopped down to to achieve the same effect due to it's hexagon shaped blades.
I think you got it the other way round.
At maximum aperture, for the non-WR DFA version, all the aperture blades would be retracted so there would be a round oof highlights.
As you use smaller apertures, the DFA oof highlights become progressively smaller and more distinct with the octagons becoming more obvious, not less.
The feel of the WR focusing ring when focusing manually is even better than the FA Limiteds.
02-21-2010, 12:26 AM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 180
Is this lens a 1:1 macro like the old A series?

Might be an alternative to me chasing down a Vivitar 105mm
02-21-2010, 12:34 AM   #15
Veteran Member
Jasvox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,110
Nice shots. When I look closely, I likes the results of the older version better. They seem clearer and more detailed to me.

Jason
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!
100mm, d-fa, k-mount, macro, pentax lens, slr lens, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
100mm f2.8 macro FA vs new 100mm mavro f2.8 DA stemked Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 08-23-2010 01:34 PM
Comparaison 10-24 vs18-55-vs17-70 bobmaxja Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 1 05-09-2010 12:36 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax SMC M 100mm f4 Macro (M100/4 Macro) (Worldwide) C2H4 Sold Items 1 05-02-2010 09:06 PM
Macro performance on long vs. short lenses harmonica2 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 03-20-2010 10:22 AM
Short review of ‘jiakgong’ 4-way macro focusing rails jfsavage Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 9 06-17-2009 08:20 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:51 PM. | 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