[wkraus]

There are no sharpening artefacts in the bokeh. This is a * lens with Aero Bright and HD.

There are some, even if not too obvious. Bright lines along single black hairs for instance.

[D1N0]

There is a lot more sharpening to be had from these pics. I downloaded a jpeg and tried.

[Heie]

There are some, even if not too obvious. Bright lines along single black hairs for instance.

Talk about a literal splitting of hairs.

If Pentax makes a crappy lens (which if you take a look at the lens timeline, arguably hasn't happened in a really long time), Pentax is even more doomed than it oh-so-obviously was before.

If Pentax makes a phenomenal, (potentially) industry-leading lens worthy of the * label, there must be foul play involved.



-Heie

[aurele]

At the same time I must admit that the lens (or is it due to the PP?) is TOO sharp for portrait photos. :P

there is some sharpening artefacts on the first picture, on the phone of the girl taking selfies.

But i'll take that sharp

[monochrome]

Talk about a literal splitting of hairs.

If Pentax makes a crappy lens, Pentax is even more doomed than it oh-so-obviously was before.

If Pentax makes a phenomenal lens worthy of the * label, there must be foul play involved.



-Heie

Someone always has to say it ain't so.

[wkraus]

Talk about a literal splitting of hairs.

If Pentax makes a crappy lens (which if you take a look at the lens timeline, arguably hasn't happened in a really long time), Pentax is even more doomed than it oh-so-obviously was before.

If Pentax makes a phenomenal, (potentially) industry-leading lens worthy of the * label, there must be foul play involved.

-Heie

Please be so kind as to read things in context. I did not say a word about the lens, which I trust is phenomenal. There was a comment that it is TOO sharp for portraits, and I pointed out that there is also is some unnecessary sharpening involved in the shots in question. So please calm down.

[D1N0]

Please be so kind as to read things in context. I did not say a word about the lens, which I trust is phenomenal. There was a comment that it is TOO sharp for portraits, and I pointed out that there is also is some unnecessary sharpening involved in the shots in question. So please calm down.

That's just your opinion. I don't think so

---------- Post added 18-03-16 at 14:09 ----------

Shipping in the US now too: Pentax HD PENTAX D FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 ED DC AW Lens 21330 B&H

---------- Post added 18-03-16 at 14:13 ----------

and some more goodies:
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57453044
DFA* 70-200mm - Seventh set - Street fashion again: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

---

Last edited by D1N0; 03-18-2016 at 05:18 AM.

[Mistral75]

HD PENTAX-D FA★ 70-200mm F2.8 - Third set of images - Pentax SLR Talk Forum - Digital Photography Review

DFA★ 70-200mm - Sixth set of images from outside the Toronto Fashion show tent - Pentax SLR Talk Forum - Digital Photography Review

DFA★ 70-200mm - Eight and last set from the Fashion Show - Pentax SLR Talk Forum - Digital Photography Review

[ffking]

HD PENTAX-D FA★ 70-200mm F2.8 - Third set of images - Pentax SLR Talk Forum - Digital Photography Review

DFA★ 70-200mm - Sixth set of images from outside the Toronto Fashion show tent - Pentax SLR Talk Forum - Digital Photography Review

DFA★ 70-200mm - Eight and last set from the Fashion Show - Pentax SLR Talk Forum - Digital Photography Review

there's some pretty sensationally sharp images amongst these - it's interesting, and perhaps a little unfortunate how with a really sharp lens a tiny focus miss shows up

[zapp]

If Pentax makes a phenomenal, (potentially) industry-leading lens worthy of the * label, there must be foul play involved.

Looks like a nice lens, but class leading includes other features, Pentax has no ultrasonic AF, is 300g heavier than competition. And the 70-200 is quite alone at the monet, surrounded by Tamron designs and old Pentax stuff.

[thibs]

LOL seems to me you ate too much of this Ultrasonic marketing.

The AF drive of 70-200 is modern. Wake up.

[wkraus]

Looks like a nice lens, but class leading includes other features, Pentax has no ultrasonic AF, is 300g heavier than competition. And the 70-200 is quite alone at the monet, surrounded by Tamron designs and old Pentax stuff.

Optical quality is a strong argument for class leading. Think Otus.

[Winder]

Looks like a nice lens, but class leading includes other features, Pentax has no ultrasonic AF, is 300g heavier than competition. And the 70-200 is quite alone at the monet, surrounded by Tamron designs and old Pentax stuff.

The DC AF is a fast modern AF motor. The optics appear to be very good wide open at all focal lengths. The Tamron 15-30 and the 24-70 are both better than the Nikon versions and you will see a lot of Nikon users with these two lenses. Yes, Ricoh has work to do, buy you seem to be pretty uninformed about what they currently have to offer.

[robjmitchell]

Looks like a nice lens, but class leading includes other features, Pentax has no ultrasonic AF, is 300g heavier than competition. And the 70-200 is quite alone at the monet, surrounded by Tamron designs and old Pentax stuff.

Just like ultrasonic, DC has both ring and micro type motors. The ring Motors have more torque and are thus faster, especially if you have large elements to move. The 70-200 has a ring type DC motor, so AF speed is no issue.

[phoebus]

Lucky enough to have a play with a pre-production K1 and production 70-200 a couple of days ago. No SD card allowed, so I can't comment on optical quality, but focus speed and noise level was IMO comparable with Pentax 18-135 (also DC driven) and Sigma 18-35 (HSM). Not a bad effort, considering the extra focus element(s) mass to move in a lens that size.

Nice combination, but not for casual use on long walks... ...and I'm very glad I put my pre-order in for the K1 on day 1- handling it didn't disappoint : it was better than I had hoped ;-)