[i83N]

Can an AA filter applied to a lens, like one of opticale elements/counting/screw-on ?

[Digitalis]

In short: no - because they have to be specifically manufactured to attenuate frequencies that approach and exceed the nyquist limit of the sensor. Besides the birefringent materials that are commonly used to make them are actually rather fragile, and can be scratched quite easily.

[i83N]

in a nutshell: no - because they have to be manufactured to attenuate frequencies that approach and exceed the nyquist limit of the sensor. Besides the birefringent materials that are commonly used to make them are actually rather fragile, and can be scratched quite easily.

But it could be sealed inside of the lens made by sensor manufacture. Special lens for this body, say 35mm f2,8 plasticky kit.

[Digitalis]

Inventive solution but if you are going to do that It would be much easier to just put the AA filter in the camera and just call it a day.

[i83N]

Inventive solution but if you are going to do that It would be much easier to just put the AA filter in the camera and just call it a day.

But what if I don't want always AA on just sometimes, lens would be much more cheep and potable than second body.

[Digitalis]

but setting up a separate production line for a "special" lens would cost pentax money and R&D the cost for it would be passed on to the users, I really can't imagine there would be enough demand to make producing a lens like that commercially viable.

[Gashog]

Years ago, I removed the AA filter from my F-700 because I wanted to see what effect it would have on a non Bayer sensor.
The AA filter is nothing more then a blur filter made from a piece of laser cut tempered glass. They are very hard.
The focal length of the AA lens is whatever the thickness of the filter happens to be...like a fraction of a mm so putting one on the lens wouldn't do the same thing.

You don't want more AA blurring anyway.