Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

DFA 100mm/2.8 vs DFA 100mm/2.8 WR · 09:56 AM

Well, I did the first comparison shots between both DFA 100/2.8, the WR and the non WR version.

(Warning: by clicking on the shot, you get to the full resolution photo)

K-7, f/2.8, 6s, 100iso

DFA 100/2.8

DFA 100/2.8 WR

K-x, f/5.6, 1/60s, 200iso, AF160FC

DFA 100/2.8

DFA 100/2.8 WR

K-x, f/11, 1/60s, 200iso, AF160FC

DFA 100/2.8

DFA 100/2.8 WR

K-x, f/8, 1/60s, 200iso, AF160FC

DFA 100/2.8

DFA 100/2.8 WR

All these shots are also under DFA 100/2.8 vs DFA 100/2.8 WR - a set on Flickr

It is quite difficult to get the same focus point when changing the lenses. I tried the best to get comparable shots. I do not really see differences between both lenses, apart from slight different focus points.

Buschmaster · 01-09-2010, 10:41 AM

Looks like all the optical quality was retained. With macro a difference in focus is completely understandable, no need to apologize there!!

Thanks for the comparisons!

creampuff · 01-09-2010, 04:28 PM

Shoot with specular highlights in the background and you'll see a difference.

arpaagent · 01-09-2010, 04:35 PM

Can you give a subjective report regarding the handling and build quality of the lens? Does it basically feel like a Limited lens, in terms of build quality and manual focus? Just curious because I might be interested in upgrading to this from F100 Macro since this has WR.

yeatzee · 01-09-2010, 04:47 PM

lets see a shot with it on the camera!!

tcom · 01-10-2010, 05:16 AM

Jim: the handling and overall feeling of this lens is much closer to the limited lens than to the "old" non WR DFA 100 plastic feeling.

I did an additional test this morning, I wanted to see the difference due to the rounded aperture blades of the new WR lens. I set the camera to MF, pointed the camera to a few red LEDs and set the focusing ring to about 1m, in order to have the LEDs well out of focus:

K-7, DFA 100/2.8, f/4.5

K-7, DFA 100/2.8 WR, f/4.5

OrenMc · 01-10-2010, 07:16 AM

Thanks for taking the time to do this.

arpaagent · 01-10-2010, 10:45 PM

Originally posted by tcom

Jim: the handling and overall feeling of this lens is much closer to the limited lens than to the "old" non WR DFA 100 plastic feeling.

I did an additional test this morning, I wanted to see the difference due to the rounded aperture blades of the new WR lens. I set the camera to MF, pointed the camera to a few red LEDs and set the focusing ring to about 1m, in order to have the LEDs well out of focus:

--images snipped--

Well those OOF highlights sure do look nice even stopped down a bit, that's pretty cool. Sigh...I'm not sure I can handle any more LBA.

Thanks for posting the tests. I want to see some real life examples too if you can manage to bring out the any differences that this makes in real world shooting.

tcom · 01-11-2010, 11:20 AM

Due to requests on several forums, I did another bokeh comparison series to see the effect of the rounded aperture blades at various apertures.

For the testing, I used two green LEDs, put the camera on a tripod, set DOF preview to optical. I set the aperture, set DOF preview, and turned the focusing ring until I was seeing two large spots in the viewfinder and took the photo.

Here are the results:

f/2.8
WR

non WR

f/4.5
WR

non WR

f/5.6
WR

non WR

f/8
WR

non WR

**Ash** · 01-11-2010, 02:10 PM

Wow, thanks for these experiments Dom.
The WR version seems to come out on top in terms of bokeh, but everything else seems to be comparable to the non-WR lens. Great real world results above - both are good lenses.
Perhaps we can now have it as a separate entry in the lens review database?

tcom
	View full profile
	Contact via private message
	Find other posts by tcom
	Find threads started by tcom
	Find threads in which tcom has posted

01-10-2010, 05:16 AM	#6
tcom Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Switzerland Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,293 Original Poster	Jim: the handling and overall feeling of this lens is much closer to the limited lens than to the "old" non WR DFA 100 plastic feeling. I did an additional test this morning, I wanted to see the difference due to the rounded aperture blades of the new WR lens. I set the camera to MF, pointed the camera to a few red LEDs and set the focusing ring to about 1m, in order to have the LEDs well out of focus: K-7, DFA 100/2.8, f/4.5 K-7, DFA 100/2.8 WR, f/4.5 Last edited by tcom; 01-10-2010 at 06:00 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DFA 100mm f/2.8 WR problem	emr	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	08-28-2010 05:05 PM
DFA 100mm vs. FA 100mm vs. Sigma 105mm	PentaxForums-User	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	08-22-2010 05:25 PM
For Sale - Sold: DFA 100mm/2.8 Macro	Septrain	Sold Items	0	12-28-2009 09:22 AM
uses of dfa 100mm macro?	dtra	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	09-06-2007 04:19 PM
Out and about with the DFA 100mm f2.8 macro	betsypdx	Post Your Photos!	6	02-18-2007 10:26 PM

01-09-2010, 10:41 AM	#2
Buschmaster Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 806	Looks like all the optical quality was retained. With macro a difference in focus is completely understandable, no need to apologize there!! Thanks for the comparisons!

01-09-2010, 04:28 PM	#3
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	Shoot with specular highlights in the background and you'll see a difference.

01-09-2010, 04:35 PM	#4
arpaagent Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Raleigh, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 803	Can you give a subjective report regarding the handling and build quality of the lens? Does it basically feel like a Limited lens, in terms of build quality and manual focus? Just curious because I might be interested in upgrading to this from F100 Macro since this has WR.

01-09-2010, 04:47 PM	#5
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	lets see a shot with it on the camera!!

01-10-2010, 07:16 AM	#7
OrenMc Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,901	Thanks for taking the time to do this.

01-10-2010, 10:45 PM	#8
arpaagent Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Raleigh, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 803	Originally posted by tcom Jim: the handling and overall feeling of this lens is much closer to the limited lens than to the "old" non WR DFA 100 plastic feeling. I did an additional test this morning, I wanted to see the difference due to the rounded aperture blades of the new WR lens. I set the camera to MF, pointed the camera to a few red LEDs and set the focusing ring to about 1m, in order to have the LEDs well out of focus: --images snipped-- Well those OOF highlights sure do look nice even stopped down a bit, that's pretty cool. Sigh...I'm not sure I can handle any more LBA. Thanks for posting the tests. I want to see some real life examples too if you can manage to bring out the any differences that this makes in real world shooting.

01-11-2010, 11:20 AM	#9
tcom Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Switzerland Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,293 Original Poster	Due to requests on several forums, I did another bokeh comparison series to see the effect of the rounded aperture blades at various apertures. For the testing, I used two green LEDs, put the camera on a tripod, set DOF preview to optical. I set the aperture, set DOF preview, and turned the focusing ring until I was seeing two large spots in the viewfinder and took the photo. Here are the results: f/2.8 WR non WR f/4.5 WR non WR f/5.6 WR non WR f/8 WR non WR

01-11-2010, 02:10 PM	#10
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Wow, thanks for these experiments Dom. The WR version seems to come out on top in terms of bokeh, but everything else seems to be comparable to the non-WR lens. Great real world results above - both are good lenses. Perhaps we can now have it as a separate entry in the lens review database?

Macro DFA 100mm/2.8 vs DFA 100mm/2.8 WR

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!