Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-19-2012, 06:55 PM   #661
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
Just looked at the database for Pentax FA lenses... darn, I wish Pentax will reissue most of these as DFA. The DA line is so... small.

06-22-2012, 09:38 AM   #662
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,550
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Alizarine Quote
Just looked at the database for Pentax FA lenses... darn, I wish Pentax will reissue most of these as DFA. The DA line is so... small.
A FF mirrorless is going to really pump up demand for older MF glass. With good focus peaking and a good EVF MF becomes very easy.

I would love to see many of the FA lenses brought back. Especially the 135mm A* F/1.8. Probably at the top of my list right now.
06-22-2012, 10:33 AM   #663
Pentaxian
Wired's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Edmonton, AB
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,497
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
A FF mirrorless is going to really pump up demand for older MF glass. With good focus peaking and a good EVF MF becomes very easy.

I would love to see many of the FA lenses brought back. Especially the 135mm A* F/1.8. Probably at the top of my list right now.
you and me both. IF Pentax FF (mirrorless or mirrored) comes out, the A* 135 1.8 will be the cherry on top for a divorce after she finds the Pentax FF in my bag. I still don't know how she's letting me get away with the D800 and G 1.8 85mm Nikkor.

Maybe because she *thinks* she will be able to inherit my K5 kit. She wants to learn, but is scared to use the K5. Little does she know I'm getting her a K5 of her own shortly. :P
06-22-2012, 06:22 PM   #664
gtl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 349
Not too sure if I am right but won't the FA series have terrible purple fringe considering they were all not designed for digital? Looking at the FA limiteds and DA limiteds, this is definitely true.

06-22-2012, 06:57 PM   #665
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,550
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by gtl Quote
Not too sure if I am right but won't the FA series have terrible purple fringe considering they were all not designed for digital? Looking at the FA limiteds and DA limiteds, this is definitely true.
Some will have this problem. Looking tat results for the A 50mm F/1.2 and the A* 135mm f/1.8 I think they will be fine. I do think some of the current FA glass will disappoint on a high res-FF sensor. But we will have to see.
06-22-2012, 08:19 PM   #666
Pentaxian
Sagitta's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,920
QuoteOriginally posted by gtl Quote
Not too sure if I am right but won't the FA series have terrible purple fringe considering they were all not designed for digital? Looking at the FA limiteds and DA limiteds, this is definitely true.
Out of curiosity I went in and looked at all my shots I've taken with my FA 28-90 (which feels about as cheaply built as you can imagine a lens being, and is generally trashed by the reviews on this site).

I've seen PF with my old manual lenses - a LOT of it. I get it with my Sigma 70-300 as well.

The cheap old 28-90? None. Seriously. I think I found what MIGHT be PF in an overexposed shot of a yellow road sign against a blue train in sunlight, but its hard to tell, it simply could be the sign itself.

If I'm seeing nothing with my 28-90 (and I usually don't use in camera correction either) then I'm fairly certain that FA's that actually cost something should fare better, and better than perfection should be... perfect.

EDIT: I did find some very, very minor PF in a few shots, but the fact I had to actively search to find it means it wasn't that noticeable to begin with.

Last edited by Sagitta; 06-22-2012 at 09:08 PM.
06-22-2012, 08:29 PM   #667
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
QuoteOriginally posted by Sagitta Quote
Out of curiosity I went in and looked at all my shots I've taken with my FA 28-90 (which feels about as cheaply built as you can imagine a lens being, and is generally trashed by the reviews on this site).

I've seen PF with my old manual lenses - a LOT of it. I get it with my Sigma 70-300 as well.

The cheap old 28-90? None. Seriously. I think I found what MIGHT be PF in an overexposed shot of a yellow road sign against a blue train in sunlight, but its hard to tell, it simply could be the sign itself.

If I'm seeing nothing with my 28-90 (and I usually don't use in camera correction either) then I'm fairly certain that FA's that actually cost something should fare better, and better than perfection should be... perfect.
The FA 77 definitively has PF. It's not a super-huge amount but it's definitely enough to make me have second thoughts about the lens.
06-22-2012, 09:13 PM   #668
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,181
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
The FA 77 definitively has PF. It's not a super-huge amount but it's definitely enough to make me have second thoughts about the lens.
That is not an exclusive problem to Pentax regarding lenses in this focal range. However, I have the 77 and am not worried about it at this point. I really don't see the FA 31 LTD having a problem. While the 40 is a nice lens, I still prefer the FA 43 or FA 50/1.4 over it.

06-22-2012, 09:40 PM   #669
Pentaxian
Sagitta's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,920
Just for gits and shiggles, I uploaded a bunch of shots from the 28-90 to my flickr that SHOULD be ripe for PF. On second glances, its there, but again, its hardly enough to worry about on a crop sensor. Unless you go in and peep like I did, its impossible to spot.

Pentax FA 28-89mm Purple Fringe Hunt - a set on Flickr
06-22-2012, 09:44 PM   #670
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
The FA 77 definitively has PF. It's not a super-huge amount but it's definitely enough to make me have second thoughts about the lens.
I had second thoughts too (based on my in-shop testing and huge PF presence when shot directly at fluescent lights ) - so I bought the Contax Zeiss 85/1.4, which I love, instead. However a few months later the 77 Ltd found it's way into my bag regardless and guess which one gets by far the most use ? I've yet to notice PF in any shots (though I do use it mostly for portraits, either family & friends or on the street) so it really is only in very specific, and for me rare, circumstances that the PF may be an issue. Otherwise, for me, it's just a perfect lens.
06-23-2012, 08:02 PM   #671
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
QuoteOriginally posted by Sagitta Quote
If I'm seeing nothing with my 28-90 (and I usually don't use in camera correction either) then I'm fairly certain that FA's that actually cost something should fare better, and better than perfection should be... perfect.
I've had the FA 28-90 before and I'm pretty much happy with it in terms of flare and PF. If the FA 28-105 PZ (which had even better PF control) didn't come along I wouldn't have sold the former. And somehow, my M 50 1.4 has less PF than my DA 35... or maybe I just shot wrongly, which I believe is the more acceptable reason.
06-23-2012, 08:10 PM   #672
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
Posts: 132
QuoteOriginally posted by gtl Quote
Not too sure if I am right but won't the FA series have terrible purple fringe considering they were all not designed for digital? Looking at the FA limiteds and DA limiteds, this is definitely true.
They would if it were a straight re-release, but couldn't Pentax update them with digital-era coatings but leave the optical formula intact? For example the 35mm f2.4 is based on the FA 35mm f2, but with newer coatings to reduce that lens's well-known PF in digital. The change in maximum aperture can, I think, be accounted for (rather cynically) by Pentax marketing not wanting to make the FA31 look overpriced.
06-23-2012, 08:30 PM   #673
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
QuoteOriginally posted by MrCynical Quote
The change in maximum aperture can, I think, be accounted for (rather cynically) by Pentax marketing not wanting to make the FA31 look overpriced.
I hope that's not the case... by build standard the FA31 stomps the DAL 35 by miles, even if the latter is well-built for its class.
06-24-2012, 03:39 AM   #674
JPT
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,202
I have the FA35, FA24-90 and FA100-300 (non power zoom) and none of them seem to be especially prone to PF. The lenses where I really notice PF are the M series. I'd especially like to see that FA24-90 updated. It's such a nice combination of range, weight and performance. If they gave it the WR treatment and DC motor, it would make a great mid-range lens for people who step up to FF.

As for being disappointing on a high-res FF sensor, I don't see why they would be any worse than a 16MP APS-C sensor. The pixel density would probably be lower. The difference is that we'll be seeing the edges of the frame again, so that might reveal weaknesses that have been hidden on APS-C.
06-24-2012, 03:57 AM   #675
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,836
QuoteOriginally posted by MrCynical Quote
(...)
The change in maximum aperture can, I think, be accounted for (rather cynically) by Pentax marketing not wanting to make the FA31 look overpriced.
I rather think it is because it allows for a less demanding, less precise, thus less costly, lens centring.
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!
aps-c, body, k-5, k-7, k-7/k-5, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, reason, sensor, sony
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Speculation: What if Pentax did not go FF but rather a 1.3x? brecklundin Pentax DSLR Discussion 36 08-13-2013 10:36 PM
Any speculation on how long... Tom S. Pentax K-5 10 12-16-2010 09:19 PM
K-x price speculation SylBer Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 10-13-2010 12:29 PM
Small rant + speculation ilya80 Pentax News and Rumors 35 04-20-2010 11:42 PM
speculation about FA lenses on FF DSLR lpfonseca Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 11-05-2009 10:34 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:32 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