Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-21-2008, 12:33 PM   #61
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,237
Original Poster
FA 31ltd

.


Walked to the same place yesterday afternoon to try to test the FA 31ltd
in similar situations. Here's my synopsis:

The FA 31ltd holds it's own when entering the DA 35ltd's territory - close focus -
just as the DA 35 holds it's own in the 31ltd's territory - portrait and infinity, or
'walkabout'.

The 31ltd has a special rendering that is extremely pleasing under the right
conditions - something that the technically-perfect DA 35ltd doesn't quite
match. The 31ltd gives a visceral thrill, and it brings a certain... film feeling
to the images. In other words, not perfect, but in the imperfections lie some
of the beauty.


Here's an attempt to re-create the sky/plane shot I took with the DA 35
the day before - as you can see, pretty nice:



Here's the tree shot re-created - I think I stepped a little closer to fill the
frame more to match the 35ltd FOV, which is another little advantage of the
31ltd - wider:



When cropped, the 31ltd can approach the 35 macro's capability, due to
it's incredible resolution:








I prefer (slightly) the bokeh of the FA 31:




The following shots might show what I mean when I say 'film feel' - the 31ltd
can be less consistent than the 35ltd, but occasionally gives you a work of art:





















08-22-2008, 11:48 AM   #62
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 885
QuoteOriginally posted by deuces Quote
If the lens is great, why does the fact that it's macro capable bother you? I understand all your other concerns, but I see really only one compromise for the macro ability, and that's one stop. For that one stop, it's crisply sharp wide open, and you can focus as close as you want. I understand if you don't like how the lens renders, but if you do like how it renders, should the fact that it's macro negatively affect your evaluation?
I basically disagree that the lens is great.
Its macro ability is great but its effectiveness is considerably limited by the fact that it is too short as a macro lens. When u do macro say for critters/insects, would you want to be 2 inches away from the subject? Really great macros lens like F/FA100mm, Sigma 105, 150 & 180mm F or A200mm are all of a lot longer FL.

For non-macro use, it is great to be sharp for the subject. But it is close to impossible to render the background unsharp (creamy , dreamy, buttery) because at 35mm its DoF is generally big. That is why great bokeh or portrait lens like 77mm or 85mm are fast and of longer focal length.

Daniel
08-22-2008, 11:54 AM   #63
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,911
thanks for the comparison Jay, reminds me i need to use the FA31 more.

the DA35 will never be anyone's primary macro lens, but offers the ability to get closeup when required.
08-23-2008, 04:17 PM - 1 Like   #64
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,948
It's About the Versatility

Then it's a flower macro lens. Probably 10x more photos are take of flowers than bugs (check Flickr), so it hits a market sweet spot.

It's still a macro lens with a lot of other virtues. It's an interesting balance of sharp, rich contrast and colour, and flexibility. It's a small, very portable piece of glass. At 35mm it fits the "normal" range for the sensors in 35mm lingo. Therefore it meets a lot of expectations for that perspective.

It's a jack-of-many-trades lens. unique, interesting and versatile. For anyone on a budget, this is a very good lens.

The photos here show it helps make terrific images in a number of common situations.

QuoteOriginally posted by danielchtong Quote
I basically disagree that the lens is great.
Its macro ability is great but its effectiveness is considerably limited by the fact that it is too short as a macro lens. When u do macro say for critters/insects, would you want to be 2 inches away from the subject? Really great macros lens like F/FA100mm, Sigma 105, 150 & 180mm F or A200mm are all of a lot longer FL.

For non-macro use, it is great to be sharp for the subject. But it is close to impossible to render the background unsharp (creamy , dreamy, buttery) because at 35mm its DoF is generally big. That is why great bokeh or portrait lens like 77mm or 85mm are fast and of longer focal length.

Daniel


08-23-2008, 10:19 PM   #65
Senior Member
architorture's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 152
odd macro

it's a macro for shooting architectural models! actually, for that i'd want my 12-24 to do macro, and be uber sharp at f22 for max dof

i think in addition to a testament to this lens, all of these positive comments really indicate something about the k20d (as others have mentioned). jsherman999's shots with the 31 are amazing - the bug crop is yikes-inducing sharpness and detail mixed with smooooth background blur.

reading carl/mikes review was really exciting thinking about what it means for pentax - but then i heard there's a tokina version: d'oh!
09-01-2008, 05:15 PM   #66
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Slovenia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 258
Well, here are a couple of my shots with the 35mm f/2.8 macro at a Pentax get together here in Slovenia a while ago.

Shots taken April 23rd 2008, default in camera settings JPG, no post processing other than resize:
http://www.fejker.net/Pentax/IMGP3318.JPG

http://www.fejker.net/Pentax/IMGP3313.JPG

http://www.fejker.net/Pentax/IMGP3312.JPG

I'm getting the lens this month (when I get paid) and I think it will be a great lens for "different kind of" portrait shots and stitched landscape panoramas with my K10D (I use the DA12-24 extensively for that ATM).

This is not a usual macro lens but I think some people here are mistaking macro for bug shooting - there is so much more than bugs and flowers in that word. And the thing with this lens is that you're not limited when composing a shot because you can get as close to the subject as you want. I simply loved it when I tried it.
09-01-2008, 06:56 PM   #67
Veteran Member
heatherslightbox's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gainesville, FL
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,599
The 35 is a great lens! Here are a couple of examples I took today with my K10D. If it works this well with the K10D, then I can only imagine what it will do with a K20. Both shots are straight out of the camera, converted in LR.





Just my 2¢...
Heather

09-01-2008, 07:07 PM   #68
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,377
Here is a couple from Saturday with the DA35mm and k200d. There is no processing or cropping. These were under century live oaks and canopies and the day was bright.



09-01-2008, 07:20 PM   #69
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,795
And here's a couple from me. For a while I was not sure about some aspects of this lens, as I mentioned in another thread. But now I'm thinking I was temporarily on drugs. In any case its near field characteristics are beyond reproach. And I cannot get it to PF.

Self-Destruct Sequence Completed




Demento Dog

(Colours here are artistically chosen. Not a lens flaw!)

09-02-2008, 01:41 AM   #70
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bremen, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3
One of my first shots with the DA35!


09-02-2008, 02:53 AM   #71
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sweden, Umea
Posts: 876
Some from my K20D pentax DA 35/2,8 macro ltd.

It can go from this



To this, whitout doing anything but AF

09-02-2008, 04:14 AM   #72
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Flyover America
Posts: 4,469
QuoteOriginally posted by augustmoon Quote
If you want to differ, that's fine with me, you don't need to beg. I was very subjective in my post and I made that very clear and that this is my opinion and my preference.

That's exactly what I meant when I said "unless you like that look", obviously you do, that's fine for you. I don't, that's why I shoot people with the FA ltds and the DA*50-135. For my preference (and a lot of people whom I know) that's a very saturated shot, and even if someone looked similar to that in real life, I'd be better off having a more neutral shot to begin with, one that has some room in the shadows left, and one that lends itself to post, as without post, its only going to get darker and more saturated by print time.
I agree this particular shot is anything but "natural". I have never seen anyone glow like this shot.

However it was very easy to fix in PP indicating to me that any shortcomings of this particular picture has more to do with camera setting and other factors and says very little about the ultimate quality of the lens.

Last edited by wildman; 12-26-2008 at 01:00 PM.
09-02-2008, 08:09 AM   #73
Veteran Member
gnaztee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 772
Strange, I guess I'll have to look up what "natural" means. I thought it meant what the scene ACTUALLY LOOKED LIKE. Unfortunately, you took that right out of my picture. You can manipulate it to fit what you "think" is natural all you want, but this is not what the scene looked like when I took the photo.
09-02-2008, 09:55 AM   #74
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,237
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by gnaztee Quote
Strange, I guess I'll have to look up what "natural" means. I thought it meant what the scene ACTUALLY LOOKED LIKE. Unfortunately, you took that right out of my picture. You can manipulate it to fit what you "think" is natural all you want, but this is not what the scene looked like when I took the photo.

Apparently the guy's color wasn't 'correct'. You should tell him that right away, he may need to see a specialist.

09-06-2008, 08:01 PM   #75
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,237
Original Poster
.

A couple from the FA 31ltd from today - all at f/1.8 or f/2, showing
the bigger apertures - one thing you can't get from the DA 35ltd macro:







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!
35mm, beetle, da, da 35mm ltd, flickr, images, indoors, k20d, lens, lenses, macro, macro shots, mark, pentax, pentax lens, photo, photos, pm, post, sensor, shasta, spider, thread, wonder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Theory/Engineering question on lens max aperture Michael Barker Photographic Technique 9 07-26-2010 07:45 PM
Vivitar lens with PK-A/R tag need help to use it with K-7 Chaitanya Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 01-28-2010 02:14 PM
Conspiricy Theory Billgscott Pentax News and Rumors 23 05-01-2009 10:21 AM
disappointed in the rag-tag-ness of my lens collection :( Gooshin General Talk 33 09-12-2008 06:57 PM
Conspiracy...Perhaps. Just a Theory benjikan General Talk 6 05-05-2007 07:39 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:00 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