[repaap]

FA lims' unique rendering is evident on crop sensors, too. Wide open the results on crop look better in respect to corner sharpness because there sharpness loss is not as pronounced as on full frame (though look not as epic as on full frame). On the other hand, if 40 lim could possess adequate corner sharpness on full frame at least from f5.6 (my version can't boast that even at f8), I would prefer it to 43 lim in most cases, it's much easier to use and more predictable.

I have DA40XS it will never have corners sharp, it looks okayish after f8... I have FA 43, stopped down even little and you get corner to corner sharp(same goes to ALL FA limiteds). I have DA*55 corners sharpen up around f 5,6. DA lenses are for crop sensor(DA*55 works well with FF too). Needless to say that I have DA40XS just for fun/to have one for my small collection. FA 43 I could take with me on paid gig and need not to worry

[BruceBanner]

FA lims' unique rendering is evident on crop sensors, too. Wide open the results on crop look better in respect to corner sharpness because there sharpness loss is not as pronounced as on full frame (though look not as epic as on full frame). On the other hand, if 40 lim could possess adequate corner sharpness on full frame at least from f5.6 (my version can't boast that even at f8), I would prefer it to 43 lim in most cases, it's much easier to use and more predictable.

Ok, a few things here. Let's all be honest for a minute. There are significant lens changing things happening when using a lens that is compatible on both FF and Crop. For those that have never used a FF lens this might be hard to understand, indeed I did not till the K-1 was in my hands. I will never forget the day I took the DFA100 and fired my first test shot of it with the K-1 (whereas before all it knew was the K-50). It wasn't the extra mega pixels that blew me away (I was jaw dropping purely from the rear of the Live View screen), it was what was happening in the seemingly amplified bokeh. The shot looked professional and I hadn't done anything, just took a boring shot of a household object

Bit of a poor example but look at this site; The ultimate portrait bokeh shootout - Crop vs full frame vs large format - DIY Photography

You will notice that the subject is always framed the same (and this is key). the crop shots look 'meh' compared to what FF and LF can achieve. To achieve a similar intense bokeh (on crop sensors) you have to move closer to the subject and that means compositional compromise. Nowhere is this stuff more important than shooting at the wider apertures. I'm not necessarily talking about f1.9, but even f2.5,-f4 can be a game changer with certain lenses on ff vs crop. Nowhere is this more important (imo) than with the FA Ltds. You can even see the FA killing it on crop when I compare the FA43 at F4 with the HD DA 20-40@f4 on the KP, so to take that extreme bokeh win that the FA43 has and plough it on the K-1... it's a different beast entirely.

We do also need to be fair however. Very few lenses do well on edge sharpness on any format wide open. This isn't a crop vs ff thing but rather a lens thing. There is really only one winner that is available for K mount that can hold that edge sharpness and that's the DFA50 (as shown previously before). Perhaps the Sigma Art 35/1.4 can have a good bash at it, but really what I'm saying is this is more about lenses and their optical properties than sensor.
The Fa's were never good in this competition, they vignette heavily and do all other sorts of things wide open, but that poor trade off also results in much goodness where you typically want it. I think it's quite rare that you want to shoot a group of people wide open at f1.4, I think Sandy's shot illustrates those moments its handy. Otherwise a lot of people are ok to trade off edge sharpness at wide apertures for the other sorta cool benefits it brings.

So I really see lenses in two classes. Optically clinically good vs 'artistically' good. The FA ltds would fall in the latter, the DFA50 in the former.

The DA40... is a nice value lens, but the XS version is actually quite horrible to use. Lens swapping it's not nice, manual focus is very loose, it's a little 'odd'. DA 40 is different granted, but I wouldn't call the DA 40 XS easier to use, give me a FA43 anytime, that thing feels very comfortable to use.

I have DA40XS it will never have corners sharp, it looks okayish after f8... I have FA 43, stopped down even little and you get corner to corner sharp(same goes to ALL FA limiteds). I have DA*55 corners sharpen up around f 5,6. DA lenses are for crop sensor(DA*55 works well with FF too). Needless to say that I have DA40XS just for fun/to have one for my small collection. FA 43 I could take with me on paid gig and need not to worry

But yes, people think the FA43 is some 'portrait only' kinda lens, suitable only for wide open stuff, not true. Stopping down and it does gain some wicked edge and corner sharpness. I'm sorry but I just don't see the DA 40 as a worthy rival at all*...

*But that doesn't mean I don't think the DA40 is a wonderful lens, you must always judge a lens by it's price point and the DA40 is a good value lens.

[gatorguy]

Ok, a few things here. Let's all be honest for a minute. There are significant lens changing things happening when using a lens that is compatible on both FF and Crop. For those that have never used a FF lens this might be hard to understand, indeed I did not till the K-1 was in my hands.

FWIW today I'll be receiving a K1 to use for the next week. I already have a good complement of FF-ready lenses to use for one in-studio portrait shoot and one beach-side scheduled in the next few days. I'll see if a K1 is meant for me.

[Coiseam]

I have DA40XS it will never have corners sharp, it looks okayish after f8... I have FA 43, stopped down even little and you get corner to corner sharp(same goes to ALL FA limiteds). I have DA*55 corners sharpen up around f 5,6. DA lenses are for crop sensor(DA*55 works well with FF too). Needless to say that I have DA40XS just for fun/to have one for my small collection. FA 43 I could take with me on paid gig and need not to worry

In general, on crop FAs and DAs have these advantages

FAs:

• brighter in comparence with DAs (77 f1.8 vs 70 f2.4)
• more distinguished picture

DAs:

• quicker AF
• lower CAs
• smaller, lighter and cheaper
• more "technical" picture, though

I mean I can justify using FAs on crop cameras just because they deliver that different picture, even if DAs in general are more convinient.

P. S. I always wanted to know what's the reason for unsharp edges on my DA 40 on K1 at f8, I got it second-hand and thought that, perhaps, it's just a not-that-good copy. Now I know it's OK

---------- Post added 06-07-19 at 08:44 AM ----------

Ok, a few things here. Let's all be honest for a minute. There are significant lens changing things happening when using a lens that is compatible on both FF and Crop. For those that have never used a FF lens this might be hard to understand, indeed I did not till the K-1 was in my hands. I will never forget the day I took the DFA100 and fired my first test shot of it with the K-1 (whereas before all it knew was the K-50). It wasn't the extra mega pixels that blew me away (I was jaw dropping purely from the rear of the Live View screen), it was what was happening in the seemingly amplified bokeh. The shot looked professional and I hadn't done anything, just took a boring shot of a household object

The same feelings. That spark of curiosity to observe how many interesting things were just our of frame on a crop camera with the same lense. And also different lense usage. On crop 43 lim is close to a portrait / tele lense, on full frame it's an all-around. I also have Zeiss 28; on crop it is something similar to 43 on full frame.

So I really see lenses in two classes. Optically clinically good vs 'artistically' good. The FA ltds would fall in the latter, the DFA50 in the former.

The most clinical lenses I know are for Fuji's crop. In comparence with them 40 lim is Salvador Dali

You will notice that the subject is always framed the same (and this is key). the crop shots look 'meh' compared to what FF and LF can achieve.

Yes, but also on full frame it's more evident how not sharp is 43 lim wide open, for example. And if an object in focus is near the borders of the frame... - just I try to avoid that not to be too disappointed

We do also need to be fair however. Very few lenses do well on edge sharpness on any format wide open. This isn't a crop vs ff thing but rather a lens thing.

I tried 40 lim and 70 lim on K1; the latter is quite usable, the former is unsharp even at f8, alas for group portraits and landscapes of every kind.

Actually my difficulty with 43 lim is that it suddenly and dramatically lose contrast not only when source of light is sonewhere in the front, but also, for example, when I am inside a room and light comes from a window on my left-back in a sunny day. Other lenses I own don't do that in that degree at least. But when it's all right with contrast 43 lim is just fantastic at f2.2-3.5.

---

Last edited by Coiseam; 06-07-2019 at 09:07 AM.

[repaap]

Actually my difficulty with 43 lim is that it suddenly and dramatically lose contrast not only when source of light is sonewhere in the front, but also, for example, when I am inside a room and light comes from a window on my left-back in a sunny day. Other lenses I own don't do that in that degree at least.

FA 43 has one weakness and that would be that. it is nowhere as bad as my Sigma EX 85/1,4 thou.

but if one is aware of that, there is no problemo.

my FA 43 is quite sharp from edge to edge, and produces nice funky shots. Just FA 31 has taken place of my favourite limited by now.

[BruceBanner]

In general, on crop FAs and DAs have these advantages

FAs:

• brighter in comparence with DAs (77 f1.8 vs 70 f2.4)
• more distinguished picture

DAs:

• quicker AF
• lower CAs
• smaller, lighter and cheaper
• more "technical" picture, though

I mean I can justify using FAs on crop cameras just because they deliver that different picture, even if DAs in general are more convinient.

P. S. I always wanted to know what's the reason for unsharp edges on my DA 40 on K1 at f8, I got it second-hand and thought that, perhaps, it's just a not-that-good copy. Now I know it's OK

---------- Post added 06-07-19 at 08:44 AM ----------


The same feelings. That spark of curiosity to observe how many interesting things were just our of frame on a crop camera with the same lense. And also different lense usage. On crop 43 lim is close to a portrait / tele lense, on full frame it's an all-around. I also have Zeiss 28; on crop it is something similar to 43 on full frame.

The most clinical lenses I know are for Fuji's crop. In comparence with them 40 lim is Salvador Dali

Yes, but also on full frame it's more evident how not sharp is 43 lim wide open, for example. And if an object in focus is near the borders of the frame... - just I try to avoid that not to be too disappointed

I tried 40 lim and 70 lim on K1; the latter is quite usable, the former is unsharp even at f8, alas for group portraits and landscapes of every kind.

Actually my difficulty with 43 lim is that it suddenly and dramatically lose contrast not only when source of light is sonewhere in the front, but also, for example, when I am inside a room and light comes from a window on my left-back in a sunny day. Other lenses I own don't do that in that degree at least. But when it's all right with contrast 43 lim is just fantastic at f2.2-3.5.

Not quite sure what you mean by this, if you care to provide an example I'd appreciate it.

Back to the example shots shown on the DIYphotography page, because the framing is the same for each shot it means that the crop shot had to be further back, this also leads to poorer IQ all over the frame compared to the FF version which allows the user to be closer to the subject. This fact coupled with the better DoF effect is what leads me to regularly pick up the K-1 over the KP (I shudder at my poor K-1's shutter count..).

AS for contrast I don't think I've really found that an issue yet. Perhaps my UV filter on the 43 helps? I do PP my shots heavily and know how to tackle a loss of contrast, but have a look at these shots (all of which were firing into the sun), contrast looks ok to me (and I'm even getting some lens flare which was much welcomed );







I have just found where best to possibly get out of f1.9 and down to f2.0, maybe it's my copy but things look significantly sharper by that slight change in aperture with no real loss to bokeh quality.

---------- Post added 06-08-19 at 10:36 AM ----------

FA 43 has one weakness and that would be that. it is nowhere as bad as my Sigma EX 85/1,4 thou.

but if one is aware of that, there is no problemo.

my FA 43 is quite sharp from edge to edge, and produces nice funky shots. Just FA 31 has taken place of my favourite limited by now.

Don't blame you, I only had one shot of the FA31 from a friend who used it with their K3. Suffice to say he was quite taken back by the single shot;



In a way he's been using a FA31 on crop which gives a similar vibe to a FA43 on FF. Putting that FA31 on FF and once again it becomes a different thing entirely. I will never leave the FF format, I'm utterly convinced by it and I do feel quite strongly that the FA Ltds in particular shine properly on this format. That doesn't mean it can't be used to good effect on crop at all!

It's not just FA Ltds tho, currently I am 'cheating' a lot with the HD DA 20-40 on FF mode on the K-1, again I am able to take advantage of that stronger pronounced DoF.

[Coiseam]

Not quite sure what you mean by this, if you care to provide an example I'd appreciate it.

Something like that - look at left-bottom. Window was on the left-back a bit above. No processing, opened and saved as it is in DxO PhotoLab. I didn't shoot the same scene with other lenses to compare, but I feel like it could be better.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[BruceBanner]

Something like that - look at left-bottom. Window was on the left-back a bit above. No processing, opened and saved as it is in DxO PhotoLab. I didn't shoot the same scene with other lenses to compare, but I feel like it could be better.

Interesting, I haven't noticed that on my copies. I mean you can't have it all, if you had a HD coating style FA Ltd then goodbye welcome flare rings (like what my previous examples showed), so some weakening of contrast is to be expected on such a lens that can do that. Was there anything very bright picking up sun reflection on the floor, bottom left looks like that might have been the case? Like I said, I shoot a lot with my copy and don't really get anything quite as severe as that with my copy (and I live in Australia where we get subjected to a lot of dynamic harsh lighting that can come in to the indoors).

[repaap]

Something like that - look at left-bottom. Window was on the left-back a bit above. No processing, opened and saved as it is in DxO PhotoLab. I didn't shoot the same scene with other lenses to compare, but I feel like it could be better.

That is not what I have seen before. Interesting. Could there be something causing haze from below. There is something bright/reflecting highlight?. Usually one can see things like this looking at OVF. Little extra shade/removing reflecting surface helps. It could be matter of centimeters.

---------- Post added 06-08-19 at 23:16 ----------

Interesting, I haven't noticed that on my copies. I mean you can't have it all, if you had a HD coating style FA Ltd then goodbye welcome flare rings (like what my previous examples showed), so some weakening of contrast is to be expected on such a lens that can do that. Was there anything very bright picking up sun reflection on the floor, bottom left looks like that might have been the case? Like I said, I shoot a lot with my copy and don't really get anything quite as severe as that with my copy (and I live in Australia where we get subjected to a lot of dynamic harsh lighting that can come in to the indoors).

Funny that we quoted same thing about the same time..

[BruceBanner]

That is not what I have seen before. Interesting. Could there be something causing haze from below. There is something bright/reflecting highlight?. Usually one can see things like this looking at OVF. Little extra shade/removing reflecting surface helps. It could be matter of centimeters.

---------- Post added 06-08-19 at 23:16 ----------



Funny that we quoted same thing about the same time..

Ha yeah! hehe

[BruceBanner]

FA43

[Coiseam]

FA 77 lim, f9, Pentax K-1

[Coiseam]

Was there anything very bright picking up sun reflection on the floor, bottom left looks like that might have been the case? Like I said, I shoot a lot with my copy and don't really get anything quite as severe as that with my copy (and I live in Australia where we get subjected to a lot of dynamic harsh lighting that can come in to the indoors).

That is not what I have seen before. Interesting. Could there be something causing haze from below. There is something bright/reflecting highlight?. Usually one can see things like this looking at OVF. Little extra shade/removing reflecting surface helps. It could be matter of centimeters.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Yes, it seems there was something there (that bright triangle on the left bottom) reflecting light. I don't quite remember what could that be, next time I would be more cautious with environment

[sundown]

K1/FA43/1.9
Also processed with an RNI filter. A lovely combo

[aaacb]

The FA 43 has been part of my default concert kit for the past year with the k3ii, together with the da 70 (and sometimes da 21). With this setup the focal length works better than the fa 35 or fa 50 (tried both before), and it's still fast enough for most terrible light situations (the examples before were relatively well lit).