[Mistral75]

Those of you who seem to think there is a correlation between the rendering of out-of-focus areas, the smoothness (or lack thereof) of the transitions between in-focus and out-of-focus areas, etc. and the number and shape of the aperture blades, could you guess how many apertures blades the diaphragm of the lens that took the picture below is made of?

[beachgardener]

On the other hand, I'm pleased that Pentax sees merit in keeping compact quality lenses to compliment the new IQ monsters.

Absolutely yes, a cheaper f2 is most welcome, for others lets not forget the 35 f1.4 is still to come.
If the new f2 out does the current f2.4 I most likely will purchase.

[nocturnal]

Zero blades as it is wide open?... This is exactly what rounded blades try and replicate... Zero blades but a smaller circle.

[Mistral75]

Zero blades as it is wide open?... This is exactly what rounded blades try and replicate... Zero blades but a smaller circle.

No, not at all (if you are replying to my riddle above). Besides the picture is taken at a medium aperture.

[BigMackCam]

Zero blades as it is wide open?... This is exactly what rounded blades try and replicate... Zero blades but a smaller circle.

No, not at all (if you are replying to my riddle above). Besides the picture is taken at a medium aperture.

I think the point is, this photo looks great, including the out-of-focus rendering - so do we care how many aperture blades there are, and what shape they have?

[Mistral75]

The point is, the photo above was taken with a Rollei Carl Zeiss Planar HFT 85mm f/1.4 (1) (and a Canon EOS 5D Mark II, sorry for that ), famous non only for its bokeh but also for its triangular aperture.



(1) The Rollei Carl Zeiss Planar HFT 85mm f/1.4 is a lens made for 24x36 cameras in Rollei QBM mount (Quick Bayonet Mount): Rolleiflex SL35 / SL350 / SL35M / SL35ME / SL35 E, Voigtländer VSL 1 (BM) / VSL 2 Automatic / VSL 3-E and Rolleiflex SL2000F / SL3003 / SL3001.

It derives from the Carl Zeiss Planar T* 85mm f/1.4 in Contarex mount.

I'll add that the Rollei Carl Zeiss Planar HFT 85mm f/1.4 has six elements in five groups, like the FA 35mm f/2 .

[nocturnal]

No, not at all (if you are replying to my riddle above). Besides the picture is taken at a medium aperture.

OK I was. Obviously it depends on the lens, if you compare the bokeh etc. between the DA SMC and HD DA Limiteds it is an accurate comparison. There are comparisons out there on the net, maybe in PF.

What lens is that? An FA Limited I would guess? Sorry I seen your reply now, very nice indeed.

Merci

[Mistral75]

De rien !

By the way, had the photo been taken at f/1.4, the transitions between in-focus and out-of-focus areas would have been much more brutal.

The aperture used is something like f/4.

[lytrytyr]

I'll add that the Rollei Carl Zeiss Planar HFT 85mm f/1.4 has six elements in five groups, like the FA 35mm f/2 .

But unlike the FA 35mm f/2, they're all glass!

[Mountain Vision]

The alternate thinking is that a high res 36MP K1 camera is bought to get the most from it. A legacy lens from the film era cannot achieve this. For the landscape photographer who crops images and prints as biggest and best possible this 1999 design lens cannot deliver, he then questions why he bought into the K1 36MP system when the FA 35/2 AL was designed for 35mm film with an equivalent resolution of 10-12 MP.

A mismatch in technologies.

But you're choosing to look at it like this was a binary decision. Them refreshing this lens means there won't be a high res, over corrected monster that half the forum complains about being too big and way too expensive. When in reality, this is exactly what they should be doing. Pushing out refreshes of existing designs while simultaneously building ground up made for high resolution digital sensor designs. For instance, a lot of people are using the FA 20 with excellent results on the K-1. Why not push a HD FA 20 out the door as a refresh while designing a modern DFA 2Xmm?

[nocturnal]

Now wait until you see this... it is for those who say the rounded bladed HD Limiteds cannot do sunstars or sunbursts very well.

This is the HD DA 20-40 f2.8-f4 Limited @ 21mm f11

The strange particle effect (unintended) was from what must have been dust stuck to the front of the graduated filter and I had a circular polariser on as well as before I was at right angles to the sun. It was immensely difficult to photograph due to the huge contrast.[COLOR="Silver"]

[nocturnal]

Mistral is it fair to say those triangular blades are rounded?

---------- Post added 02-01-19 at 01:32 AM ----------

But you're choosing to look at it like this was a binary decision. Them refreshing this lens means there won't be a high res, over corrected monster that half the forum complains about being too big and way too expensive. When in reality, this is exactly what they should be doing. Pushing out refreshes of existing designs while simultaneously building ground up made for high resolution digital sensor designs. For instance, a lot of people are using the FA 20 with excellent results on the K-1. Why not push a HD FA 20 out the door as a refresh while designing a modern DFA 2Xmm?

I'm no fan of monster lenses either. I would like slower and smaller (cheaper) versions with the latest optical designs, for example, f4 versions of 24-70 and 70-200 but with stellar optics... Just like Nikon has f4 versions and in their mirrorless Z lenses, they are exactly what I describe, suitable for 45MP+ and uber sharp wide open but not 1kg+ monsters and are 1/2 the price. Check out the dpreview of the Nikon S 50mm f1.8 just to see what I mean. Not having to stop down to get rid of coma for astrophotography is a huge step forward and means you can do f1.8 instead of a stopped down f1.4.

I'm not a pixel peeping geek who posts photos on facebook and is complaining, I like to make very large prints of landscapes and this is why I'm thinking this way. So stellar f4 zooms instead of f2.8 versions. f2 vs f1.4 that are smaller, lighter, obviously cheaper but match the IQ of the monsters. I'd prefer this approach to recoating old lenses.

The monster ones should be available too for those who need f1.4 primes and f2.8 zooms. I'm not against them.

[lytrytyr]

If I switch to the new lens I get:

A smaller lens in every dimension
A considerably lighter lens
A lens which takes conventional filters
A PENTAX lens
A lens I can potentially keep warm in extreme environments

You just summed up why I like the 08 on the Q7,
and no heater needed for the last point.

Add the discretion factor for the times when that really matters.

[Sandy Hancock]

You just summed up why I like the 08 on the Q7,
and no heater needed for the last point.

Add the discretion factor for the times when that really matters.

Yep, it's a great lens for sure.







You do miss out on f/2.8, an acre or two of sensor area, and a lot of high-ISO performance though

[RGlasel]

I had no idea that people were still buying the old FA 35, but there must have been enough demand to justify a new production run. Technically speaking, changing the coatings is a simple operation and I think I remember a comment from Ricoh when they changed the coatings on the DA Limiteds that the process for applying HD coatings is actually cheaper than for SMC coatings. Maybe the equipment for making the old FA 35 lens barrel is kaput, so product brand management had a decision to make, discontinue the FA 35 or spend a small amount to rework the lens barrel and announce a brand new product. Announcing a new product always sells better than letting the old product fade away.


There is still a large aperture, single focus FF wide angle lens on the 2019 or later side of the roadmap, so the intention is still there to build a premium modern lens for the area currently occupied by the FA 31 and FA 35. The crew at Ricoh Imaging are still constrained by limited resources, but on the positive side, putting some fresh lipstick on the FA 35 and getting the factory to do a new run is much more encouraging than simply discontinuing the FA 35.

The DA * 11-18 announcement is even more positive. It's new technology in Pentax lenses, for the APS-C format; getting approval to bring this product to market at this point in time was a much more difficult task and is a clear sign the Ricoh upper management is not giving up on Ricoh Imaging. We should all be happy about that, the alternative is to become collectors of old, obsolete photographic equipment.