[BruceBanner]

So here's a serious question for any traditional FA35/2 owner. With this new HD version, do we think the coating is actually going to improve the image quality, like somehow bring out the micro contrast which gives perceived increase in sharpness?

I've owned the HD DA 21, 15 and 35 macro and sold them all (that's just how I kinda operate, buy, try sell and move onto something else hehe). It's not that I wasn't impressed by them but if I feel there's something missing from the lens that niggles away at me then I typically sell on. In this case it was actually the HD coatings, they led to very unimpressive star bursts and I decided to get the regular non HD versions of those primes at a later date. (with the 35 it was being limited to f2.8 and non FF compatible, although it was almost just good enough for FF but yeah... I decided FA31 would be it's ultimate replacement (and I have macro lenses elsewhere)...

So with this HD version of the 35/2 I'm interested in it's IQ purely from a F2 standpoint. I know it's going to lack the star burst thing going in, but if it can deliver really nice sharp shots at F2 (that are significantly better than the older FA35/2 f2 shots) then I see value for money here.

Discuss?

[gaweidert]

Execs said they re coming, just not when.

And therein lies the source of my dilemma. Yesterday I priced out a few different Nikon setups at B@H. Since I move slow on such things I am just gathering data for future reference. I have a lot of money invested in some great Pentax gear and would hate to take a beating divesting myself of it.


At my age promises of "sometime in the future" simply don't cut it. I would even go for new Tamron, Tokina or Sigma teleconverters, but they have abandoned Pentax for any new offerings.


All my camera and lens purchases are on hold pending any real announcement from Pentax. One new lens and one older lens with new coatings is not much to hang your hopes on. Still hopeful though.

[BigMackCam]

So here's a serious question for any traditional FA35/2 owner. With this new HD version, do we think the coating is actually going to improve the image quality, like somehow bring out the micro contrast which gives perceived increase in sharpness?

I don't own the FA35/2, but I do own the FA50/1.4... and a bunch of other SMC lenses. Hopefully my input might still be useful...

I've owned the HD DA 21, 15 and 35 macro and sold them all (that's just how I kinda operate, buy, try sell and move onto something else hehe). It's not that I wasn't impressed by them but if I feel there's something missing from the lens that niggles away at me then I typically sell on. In this case it was actually the HD coatings, they led to very unimpressive star bursts and I decided to get the regular non HD versions of those primes at a later date.

This is nothing to do with the HD coatings, but rather the rounded aperture blades in the HD versions of the DA Limited lenses that result in an almost perfectly circular aperture at all settings. A circular aperture may improve the quality of out-of-focus rendering, while non-circular tends to be better for diffraction spikes ("star-bursts" on light points). That's the reason why the original non-HD version of the DA15 is so revered over the HD version - better diffraction spikes

From my own experience, the HD coatings give a sightly richer, more contrasty look than SMC. That's not necessarily a better thing in every situation... there are times where I've found lenses with less pronounced contrast to be helpful. But generally speaking, that bit of extra contrast is rather nice. And flare resistance is demonstrably better with HD, although the benefit depends on the photos you take. But I doubt images are actually any sharper.

The SP coating on the front element of the new lens is especially nice, though. It has proven to be very tough indeed... easily resilient enough to general cleaning, and far more serious abuse to boot.

[bobbotron]

I think the 11-18mm is pretty good news. It took a looong time to come, and I would have personally preferred the 12-28mm F/4 that seemed to be roadmapped for years, but no sweat. Having a sealed, high-performance ultra-wide can only be good for the line-up, even though it's not for me.

The HD FA 35mm seems like a missed opportunity, from over here. Give it WR (and quickshift and curved blades) and it suddenly becomes a super useful, distinctive lens in a line-up which could really use some sealed, light primes for people who want the strengths of WR without carrying around super heavy zooms. (Fuji did this for APS-C with the 23mm, 35mm and 50mm F/2 sealed lenses, for example.) As is, it's not a bad lens to have in the line-up, but for little extra development cost, it could have been a lot more, IMHO.

Now, I hope we hear *something* about the direction of APS-C bodies soon. I don't expect actual announcements, but some concrete idea of the direction Ricoh is headed towards in APS-C land would be welcomed - as opposed to just reading the tea leaves of lens releases.

I have little budget for expensive lenses these days, but I can super see the utility of the 11-18. If I had one, I could see it being brought around to an awful lot of photo opportunities as a super wide high performer. Just last night I documented some renos for a shop using the 8mm Rokinon fisheye. In it's own way it's an incredible lens, very sharp and so wide, but also limited by the one focal length.

[Zivelot]

A good advice for Pentax: try to get the licence of the discontinued Sigma 20-40mm and start producing it. No R&D needed and it is a hell of a lens that would sell like hot cake.

[Rondec]

So here's a serious question for any traditional FA35/2 owner. With this new HD version, do we think the coating is actually going to improve the image quality, like somehow bring out the micro contrast which gives perceived increase in sharpness?

I've owned the HD DA 21, 15 and 35 macro and sold them all (that's just how I kinda operate, buy, try sell and move onto something else hehe). It's not that I wasn't impressed by them but if I feel there's something missing from the lens that niggles away at me then I typically sell on. In this case it was actually the HD coatings, they led to very unimpressive star bursts and I decided to get the regular non HD versions of those primes at a later date. (with the 35 it was being limited to f2.8 and non FF compatible, although it was almost just good enough for FF but yeah... I decided FA31 would be it's ultimate replacement (and I have macro lenses elsewhere)...

So with this HD version of the 35/2 I'm interested in it's IQ purely from a F2 standpoint. I know it's going to lack the star burst thing going in, but if it can deliver really nice sharp shots at F2 (that are significantly better than the older FA35/2 f2 shots) then I see value for money here.

Discuss?

My guess is the big difference will be improved flare resistance and better contrast. Not sure that there will be much difference otherwise with regard to image quality between this and the older FA 35. You're probably better off getting an FA 31. You'll be happier with it (although your wallet won't be happier with you)...

[ogl]

So here's a serious question for any traditional FA35/2 owner. With this new HD version, do we think the coating is actually going to improve the image quality, like somehow bring out the micro contrast which gives perceived increase in sharpness?

HD coating doesn't effect on resolution and improve IQ in terms of better contrast and sharpness.

[reh321]

HD coating doesn't effect on resolution and improve IQ in terms of better contrast and sharpness.

What do you think the HD coating accomplishes.

[nocturnal]

So here's a serious question for any traditional FA35/2 owner. With this new HD version, do we think the coating is actually going to improve the image quality, like somehow bring out the micro contrast which gives perceived increase in sharpness?

I've owned the HD DA 21, 15 and 35 macro and sold them all (that's just how I kinda operate, buy, try sell and move onto something else hehe). It's not that I wasn't impressed by them but if I feel there's something missing from the lens that niggles away at me then I typically sell on. In this case it was actually the HD coatings, they led to very unimpressive star bursts and I decided to get the regular non HD versions of those primes at a later date. (with the 35 it was being limited to f2.8 and non FF compatible, although it was almost just good enough for FF but yeah... I decided FA31 would be it's ultimate replacement (and I have macro lenses elsewhere)...

So with this HD version of the 35/2 I'm interested in it's IQ purely from a F2 standpoint. I know it's going to lack the star burst thing going in, but if it can deliver really nice sharp shots at F2 (that are significantly better than the older FA35/2 f2 shots) then I see value for money here.

Discuss?

HD coatings have nothing to do with sun/starbursts. The aperture blade number, shape and f-number do!

[BigMackCam]

HD coating doesn't effect on resolution and improve IQ in terms of better contrast and sharpness.

I'd challenge the "contrast" part of your statement, based on my own (non-technical) assessments...

[Mistral75]

As implemented by Ricoh Imaging, [PLM] is only suited for lenses, the focus group of which is very light (few small elements).

They could put PLM in HD FA35/2, for example...

Precisely no since focusing the FA 35mm f/2 involves moving all the six lens elements.

[ogl]

What do you think the HD coating accomplishes.

I don't think so...

About HD Coating / Lenses / Products | RICOH IMAGING

It's technology for anti-reflection performance.

[reh321]

I don't think so...

About HD Coating / Lenses / Products | RICOH IMAGING

It's technology for anti-reflection performance.

Why do they put it on?
What does it accomplish??

[ogl]

HD coatings have nothing to do with sun/starbursts. The aperture blade number, shape and f-number do!

PF's articles say that you are not right...Really effect on reflection. Work against sun and starburst are reflections.

[ogl]

Why do they put it on?
What does it accomplish??

I'm not a engineer of Ricoh...

By the way, ABC coating is better if I understand right.