[Sandy Hancock]

All three of my old FA Limiteds give classic spiky starbursts, so if the blades are rounded, it's not by much.

It will be very interesting to see if the rounded blades of the new lenses improve the bokeh, compared to lenses which are already highly regarded for that.

[stevebrot]

If that's true, then DPReview just misreported it.

I don't see the issue. The previous versions have curved blades (visible in the in-depth reviews for all three lenses). The new versions are claimed to provide "completely round-shaped" opening at all apertures with the same blade count. Edit: The struck-out text refers to the press release. See quote below for the special site statement... I take that to mean they adjusted the blade contour to improve the "roundness". Of course, it is all a matter of degree and FWIW, very few lenses have truly straight blades.

Edit: A more realistic claim from Ricoh Imaging Japan reads as follows:

The HD PENTAX-FA 31mmF1.8 Limited and HD PENTAX-FA 43mmF1.9 Limited provide a round-shaped diaphragm from open aperture to F3.5, while the HD PENTAX-FA 77mmF1.8 Limited provides this from open aperture to F4

http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/limited_lens/fa_limited/

FWIW...FA 77/1.8 Limited, nine old-school curved blades at f/2.8




Steve

[repaap]

All three of my old FA Limiteds give classic spiky starbursts, so if the blades are rounded, it's not by much.

It will be very interesting to see if the rounded blades of the new lenses improve the bokeh, compared to lenses which are already highly regarded for that.

This is true! Darn...some quirks can be smoothed out from 31 and 77 to make them very much more appealing ... will be looking close this as 31 is one of my absolute favorites.

[biz-engineer]

Honest opinion on the refresh of the FA limited trio. While I recognize the emotional value of these lenses (small, rather good optically, and beautifully built from end of film era), I don't think the K1 is the good match for those lenses. My experience with K1 and FA 35 2 is that the camera body is too big of a chunk to benefit from small size primes. Ricoh would need to cast the K1 core into a retro style body (like Nikon Df) to make those limited lenses a true pleasure to carry around everywhere. IMO, Pentax K1 matches the D-FA lens line-up also chunky, but doesn't match well with the limited lens concept. The FA limited lenses were designed to match slimmer and lighter film bodies.

[someasiancameraguy]

Honest opinion on the refresh of the FA limited trio. While I recognize the emotional value of these lenses (small, rather good optically, and beautifully built from end of film era), I don't think the K1 is the good match for those lenses. My experience with K1 and FA 35 2 is that the camera body is too big of a chunk to benefit from small size primes. Ricoh would need to cast the K1 core into a retro style body (like Nikon Df) to make those limited lenses a true pleasure to carry around everywhere. IMO, Pentax K1 matches the D-FA lens line-up also chunky, but doesn't match well with the limited lens concept.

I'm all for a KP style FF body with the new high brightness + magnification OVF glass.

[robbiec]

Time to kick off and have a rant. Coming up to 1yrs lockdown will do that to you.
Sandy will give out so I'm not going to embellish by swearing but what on earth is that prism overhang design for? The red might work in some sort of fetish club run by dark trooper star wars fans, it looks to be automotive concurs type paint. Dunno about the shiny bit for your bottom fingers, thought the grip was for gripping not slipping. The AOC logo is discrete and works. The new dimpling on the rubber works too. Twitter is saying its for the 1% of the 1%

Right - when are Pentax or Ricoh going to seriously start building the mystique around the Limited's? Sell them set of 3, set off in a polished Cherry wood box (for example) with silk lined real leather bags and a dedicated Pentax K-1ii Limited model with matching paintwork and straps matching the bags. Have a booklet done up for each lens describing the philosophy behind the design and get some of their tame photographers give examples. Throw in a set of Lens plugins for Lightroom or whatever the other big offering is. Seriously tune the program line variables for each lens for maximum pop ie the 43 is best at 8 to 18 feet @f/2.4, 77 for faces is f/2.2-2.8 and about 6 feet. 31? Just set it at f/5.6 and lock it at infinity and burn everybody with resolution 🙂

The FA Limited's are a specific genre of photography, you've stepped off the rat race, you know the difference between a std Whiskey and a Single malt, Swiss watches by in large bore you, too gaudy, too flash, you prefer something like a Nomos. You are not interested in charts and numbers and sharp bokeh, you want images that capture the moment without the sterile computer driven / AI adjusted perfection of the competition, you want warmth, feeling, a sense of I remember this, I took this, had to be on my game because these lenses punish you if you're not. It was satisfying. It's a great shot. Wrap that up, bottle it, sell it.

[Paul the Sunman]

Can anyone explain the relative pricing of these lenses? Many years after the development costs of the SMC versions were recouped, and with presumably minimal extra costs for the HD versions, why is the 31 $1049 whilst the 43 is $599 and the 77 $799? They have respectively 9 elements in 7 groups for the 31 and 7 elements in 6 groups for the others. Where is the price differential coming from?

[Serkevan]

Can anyone explain the relative pricing of these lenses? Many years after the development costs of the SMC versions were recouped, and with presumably minimal extra costs for the HD versions, why is the 31 $1049 whilst the 43 is $599 and the 77 $799? They have respectively 9 elements in 7 groups for the 31 and 7 elements in 6 groups for the others. Where is the price differential coming from?

At least back then the 31's aspherical element was very expensive to manufacture. Maybe they don't really have the means to retool for a more efficient manufacturing process for these specific lenses.

But I'd wager that the main reason is "because people will pay for them".

[biz-engineer]

Right - when are Pentax or Ricoh going to seriously start building the mystique around the Limited's?

100% agreed. These lenses are "spiritual" lenses. Beside my large "technical" system (K1+big D-FA glass), there is space for gear lust for a stylish leather/metal compact kit. I see the style in the limited, but no so much in the camera / accessories offer. The K1 J limited is the total opposite of the classy limited lens trio.

[Sandy Hancock]

Where is the price differential coming from?

I suspect it's all about the glass, Paul.

The 31 has an aspherical element, and other exotic glass in its formula.
The 77 has lots of glass, but nothing particularly exotic.
The 43 has less glass altogether - fewer and smaller elements.

[Serkevan]

I suspect it's all about the glass, Paul.

The 31 has an aspherical element, and other exotic glass in its formula.
The 77 has lots of glass, but nothing particularly exotic.
The 43 has less glass altogether - fewer and smaller elements.

The machined aluminium body also plays a part. It's more expensive than casting the parts (and obviously more expensive than plastic casings).


Loving the turquoise pip on the 43, by the way. The one on the 77 has drawn eyes more than once!

[Reed]

I'm pretty sure that new 43HD will come to my camera bag sooner than later, and I'm very curious of it's performance with my K-1II. I had one before(definitely a bad sample) and had to part ways with it.

[Sandy Hancock]

...and as for Robbie's post:

I agree the K-1 Mark II J Limited is an ugly travesty with few redeeming features. But our opinion doesn't matter, as Japan is the intended market.
I would fully support such a mystique-based marketing strategy.

And thanks for keeping it clean

[sundown]

Gosh, so tempting that 43HD with the new blades and if the coating does indeed promise a nuance of sharpness.

[gazonk]

Honest opinion on the refresh of the FA limited trio. While I recognize the emotional value of these lenses (small, rather good optically, and beautifully built from end of film era), I don't think the K1 is the good match for those lenses. My experience with K1 and FA 35 2 is that the camera body is too big of a chunk to benefit from small size primes. Ricoh would need to cast the K1 core into a retro style body (like Nikon Df) to make those limited lenses a true pleasure to carry around everywhere. IMO, Pentax K1 matches the D-FA lens line-up also chunky, but doesn't match well with the limited lens concept. The FA limited lenses were designed to match slimmer and lighter film bodies.

YMMV on this. I really enjoy using my K-1 with the tiny DA70 mounted.