[Asahiflex]

So let me rephrase, I would be embarrassed to be using a lens that didn't make full use of the resolving capabilities of the sensor. Age has nothing to do with it, except that all the Pentax FF lenses are old. Some like the DFA 100 WR have been updated for digital. Most have not.

That lenses are "updated for digital" is the biggest bullshit in photographic history. I happily use my oldest lenses on my newest cameras; resolution and sharpness are only important for people with VERY specific (maybe scientific) needs in mind, camera testers and pixel peepers.

To me, sharpness and resolution are probably last on my list when I want to shoot a pleasing photo. General photography is not about resolution and sharpness; far from it. The sooner you realize that, the happier you will be in your shooting

By the way, Canon's L glass is almost as good as my Takumars.

---

Last edited by Asahiflex; 02-05-2013 at 07:37 AM.

[Ed n Georgia]

So, will Pentax introduce and entire new line of Lens for their FF effort? Or, just bring many of the old Lens back to life?

Everything Pentax has introduced in the last, at least, 10 years has been geared towards the APS-C Sensor.

[gazonk]

To me, sharpness and resolution are probably last on my list when I want to shoot a pleasing photo. General photography is not about resolution and sharpness; far from it. The sooner you realize that, the happier you will be in your shooting

I kind of agree, but the fact that the images from my DA35 Ltd and DA70 Ltd are so sharp makes it much easier to use a fixed focal length - the freedom to crop is large! So say we get a 36mp Pentax FF ("KF-1"?) - does the FA31 have enough center sharpness to outresolve it? (From which aperture?) If it has, the "KF-1" and the FA31 will make a terrific walk-around combo. And make it no larger than the K10D, thank you!

[Asahiflex]

So, will Pentax introduce and entire new line of Lens for their FF effort? Or, just bring many of the old Lens back to life?

Due to RoHS regulations the electronics of old lenses cannot be made anymore. Optical glass is exempt from the RoHS regulations, but manufacturing processes have changed a lot since FA* times. So, these won't be brought back in their original form, not even the optics.

[Asahiflex]

I kind of agree, but the fact that the images from my DA35 Ltd and DA70 Ltd are so sharp makes it much easier to use a fixed focal length - the freedom to crop is large! So say we get a 36mp Pentax FF ("KF-1"?) - does the FA31 have enough center sharpness to outresolve it? (From which aperture?) If it has, the "KF-1" and the FA31 will make a terrific walk-around combo. And make it no larger than the K10D, thank you!

Well, let's just assume this is the main difference between primes and zooms. In my experience zooms are never as sharp as primes, so any prime will usually be sharper, even old Takumars (with enough exceptions of course, the old wide angle lenses are usually not up to par).

[monochrome]

SMC Pentax-F* 250-600mm F5.6 ED [IF] - SMC Pentax-FA* 28-70mm AL - SMC Pentax-FA* 80-200mm ED [IF] - SMC Pentax 28mm F2 - SMC Pentax-F 50mm F1.7 - SMC Pentax-F 50mm F2.8 macro - SMC Pentax-DA* 55mm f/1.4 - SMC Pentax-FA* 85mm F1.4 [IF] - Voigtländer 125mm F2.5 Macro Apo-Lanthar - SMC Pentax-F* 300mm F4.5 ED [IF] - SMC Pentax-FA 77mm F1.8 Ltd - SMC Pentax-FA 43mm F1.9 Ltd - SMC Pentax-FA 31mm F1.8 Ltd - Takumar 83mm f/1.9

By the way, Canon's L glass is almost as good as my Takumars

Your published lens list is the most in-your-face refutation of the Peter Zack Principle quoted in my sig I ever see here. But I like K's. They were inexpensive when I got them,, they feel wonderful in use and they're as good as I need on acetate or silicon substrates.

[Asahiflex]

Your published lens list is the most in-your-face refutation of the Peter Zack Principle quoted in my sig I ever see here. But I like K's. They were inexpensive when I got them,, they feel wonderful in use and they're as good as I need on acetate or silicon substrates.

To be very fair: I don't own the most of them anymore, but I was happy to get the chance to try and use them. Since a few years I've gotten used to the idea that "less is more" and concentrated on my old love - Takumars and the A series.

[monochrome]

To be very fair: I don't own the most of them anymore, but I was happy to get the chance to try and use them. Since a few years I've gotten used to the idea that "less is more" and concentrated on my old love - Takumars and the A series.

Heh. I've done much the same - with bodies, too - but your list still serves well for musing in front of a fireplace in the winter time..

[Kunzite]

Asahiflex: do you honestly believe Pentax can afford to launch an expensive camera, only to be beaten in every review, every test?

[miles]

That lenses are "updated for digital" is the biggest bullshit in photographic history. I happily use my oldest lenses on my newest cameras; resolution and sharpness are only important for people with VERY specific (maybe scientific) needs in mind, camera testers and pixel peepers.

To me, sharpness and resolution are probably last on my list when I want to shoot a pleasing photo. General photography is not about resolution and sharpness; far from it. The sooner you realize that, the happier you will be in your shooting

I almost agree.
"Updated for digital" usually means that the rear element is coated, and that any shiiny mechanics in the back of the lens are painted black.
I also use a few film era lens and love them. The only problem they have are "ghost reflections" of grossly overexposed areas (=light sources) symmetrically accross the center of the image. Think of a lamp-post at night... Some modern lens are affected by that too... so maybe "Updated for digital" is complete BS after all...

The takumars render beautifully, and so do many Pentax lens, which is why i like them so much.

I know sharpness is not everything (far from it) . Still, some of these oldies are razor sharp and very contrasty stopped down a couple stops.

By the way, Canon's L glass is almost as good as my Takumars.

Lol!

[Kenn100D]

The issue still remains... the current standard for guys like me is the Nikon D800 and the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8 AFS, Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8 AFS and Nikon 70-200mm VR II. I don't own it, but if I felt confident I needed to upgrade, that's where I'd go, with appropriate primes filling in where needed.

It's a package. I can't even begin contemplating moving to a Pentax FF body until I see a comparable set of lenses. Who knows, maybe the currently available lenses will stack up...but Pentax doesn't really have any Digital Glass versions of these lenses for FF. RIght now my upgrade path is dependant on deciding it would be worth my while to spend a lot more money, While I'd jump at the chance to use my existing lenses on more than one format...

My Studio instructor once said , "find the lens you like and buy the body that goes with it." Out of the gate, without covering the 14-200 zoom range with Digital Glass, I'm not sure a an FF is a starter around here. If they're thinking they're going to sell me a $3000 camera with a kit quality lens hoping for better to come along later.....

How embarrassing would it be to be carting around a Pentax FF with a 20 year old 35-80 on the front of it? They can sell me the FF glass before they come out with the camera. I'm not so sure it would work the other way around. I still listen to my Photography Studio teacher, 50 years later.

The only piece of Pentax Glass I'd buy specifically to make use of existing lenses would be the 31 ltd. and maybe the 77. And I'd want to rent and test before I bought. 31 is a long way from the 14 available in high quality glass on Nikon.

It makes me wonder, what glass does everyone have that you think would perform well on an FF camera?

That's where tokina kicks in. To supply Pentax a broad of lenses for FF for the transition and later develop FF Lenses based on the APS-C one's

[awo425]

I kind of agree, but the fact that the images from my DA35 Ltd and DA70 Ltd are so sharp makes it much easier to use a fixed focal length - the freedom to crop is large! So say we get a 36mp Pentax FF ("KF-1"?) - does the FA31 have enough center sharpness to outresolve it? (From which aperture?) If it has, the "KF-1" and the FA31 will make a terrific walk-around combo. And make it no larger than the K10D, thank you!

Is there a substantial difference in pixel density and resolution of 36mm FF sensor or 16+ MP APS-C sized sensor from you K5/K30/K01? I think not.
16+ MP APS-C is roughly 2 times smaller than FF. Is FA31 resolving fine on K5/K30/K01?

18-55 Kit is noticeably dull on this sensor, although it looks sharp on my old 6MP istD.

[normhead]

Well, let's just assume this is the main difference between primes and zooms. In my experience zooms are never as sharp as primes, so any prime will usually be sharper, even old Takumars (with enough exceptions of course, the old wide angle lenses are usually not up to par).

You might want to go to photozone and look at the numbers for the DA* 60-250 and the numbers for the DA* 200. They are functionally about the same @200. Zooms tend to have more CA, but if you look at the Sigma 8-16 and the DA 15 or any of the older FA primes, or even the DA 14, you might get your head turned there a bit too.

If you want to say cheap primes are better than cheap zooms I'm with you. Personally, the DA*60-250 meant to me I didn't need the DA* 300 F4 or the DA* 200. In which case, I'd say, a top quality zoom can eliminate the need for several primes. It all depends on what's available. And these truisms are only meaningful until they aren't. To the point where I wonder why people even inject them into conversations.

[ogl]

It's sad...But there are more equipment for sale at Russian Penta-club after CP+2013...

[ogl]

Is there a substantial difference in pixel density and resolution of 36mm FF sensor or 16+ MP APS-C sized sensor from you K5/K30/K01? I think not.
16+ MP APS-C is roughly 2 times smaller than FF. Is FA31 resolving fine on K5/K30/K01?

18-55 Kit is noticeably dull on this sensor, although it looks sharp on my old 6MP istD.

The resolution of 24 MP APS-C and 24 MP FF cameras are different.
For example, NEX-7 - 3400 LW/PH, D3X - 4000 LW/PH (max.)

The resolution difference between 36 MP FF camera and 16 MP APS-C camera is huge.