[johnmb]

I had assumed that my three limited lenses would only be really useful in crop-mode on the K-1. But from looking at the samples of the DA 35mm macro 2.8 and the DA 70mm 2.4, they look surprisingly good, even wide open. Since the small limited lenses are so convenient for carrying, and give such wonderful results, this is a huge plus.
Regards, johnmb

[WPRESTO]

I suspect that if the K1 has sufficient sales they will eventually design new "limited" lenses specifically for it, perhaps a 20mm f4 as tiny as the 15mm f4.

[Mikesul]

I had assumed that my three limited lenses would only be really useful in crop-mode on the K-1. But from looking at the samples of the DA 35mm macro 2.8 and the DA 70mm 2.4, they look surprisingly good, even wide open. Since the small limited lenses are so convenient for carrying, and give such wonderful results, this is a huge plus.
Regards, johnmb

The 70 and 40 should work just fine on the K-1. They are excellent on the Sony A7RII.

[Sandy Hancock]

The 35 limited is not a full frame lens. It's OK at macro distances, but it vignettes heavily at longer range.

[pathdoc]

At the very least, you can shoot them in crop mode and get results not that different (in megapixel terms) from what you'd achieve with a K-5. I've shot my DA40 on film and noticed no particular problems, but those were just happy-snaps of the kids. I don't yet have a film body that will let me control aperture*, either directly or indirectly, but as soon as one arrives I will be trying the DA70 out at all apertures and seeing what comes out of it.



* To clarify, I meant this in context to refer to controlling apertures on FA-J, DA or DFA lenses without aperture rings.

[volosong]

I don't yet have a film body that will let me control aperture, either directly or indirectly, but as soon as one arrives I will be trying the DA70 out at all apertures and seeing what comes out of it.

I don't quite understand what you said. I have a MX and used to have a K1000 and a Spotmatic. All I need to do to change the aperture is turn the aperture ring. Did you mean to say, "I don't yet have a digital body that will let me control aperture..."?

(bold type font in your quote added by me.)

[Sandy Hancock]

I don't quite understand what you said. I have a MX and used to have a K1000 and a Spotmatic. All I need to do to change the aperture is turn the aperture ring.

DA lenses do not have aperture rings, so for full control with a film body you need something like the PZ-1.

[pathdoc]

I don't quite understand what you said. I have a MX and used to have a K1000 and a Spotmatic. All I need to do to change the aperture is turn the aperture ring. Did you mean to say, "I don't yet have a digital body that will let me control aperture..."?

(bold type font in your quote added by me.)

Sorry; I meant this in the context of DA lenses, which don't have aperture rings. I've added a footnote for clarity.

[RobA_Oz]

The 35 limited is not a full frame lens. It's OK at macro distances, but it vignettes heavily at longer range.

Vignetting wasn't apparent to me at all in the LX viewfinder (95%), so it rather depends on what you call "heavily", but it obviously does. This is why variable crop markings in the K-1 viewfinder would have been nice to have, not to mention in-camera file cropping. Maybe with the K-1ii…

[Sandy Hancock]

Heavy as in black in the corners, not just a stop or two darker, indicating an abrupt cut-off of the image circle. The amount of vignetting is not great; it might be OK on APS-H for instance.

Unsurprisingly, what you see in a <100% viewfinder is not the "full frame"

Forgive the poor quality shot; it was only ever meant to be a test, but it demonstrates the small, but heavy vignette. And yes, the hood was fully retracted

[Wild Mark]

I wonder if the discussion here re: vignetting is actually more about the size of the circle projection. I would have thought these two concepts, while related, are separate issues. I can confirm the 35mm 2.8 macro does not offer any picture detail in the corners of a FF camera - not a vignetting issue.

[RobA_Oz]

Heavy as in black in the corners, not just a stop or two darker, indicating an abrupt cut-off of the image circle. The amount of vignetting is not great; it might be OK on APS-H for instance.

Unsurprisingly, what you see in a <100% viewfinder is not the "full frame"

Forgive the poor quality shot; it was only ever meant to be a test, but it demonstrates the small, but heavy vignette. And yes, the hood was fully retracted

There's a fair amount of asymmetry in vignetting within that image.

My point was that if 95% of the shot doesn't suffer from significant vignetting (and that's the horizontal viewfinder cropping in the LX) then it's still more than you'd get from APS-C (or APS-H). So, obviously, it's not the full 35mm frame, but much more than the usable area of many other DA lenses on the K-1, and hence my vote for a variable crop delineation in future developments. I don't think we're actually in disagreement, here.

[Sandy Hancock]

I don't think we're actually in disagreement, here.

Quite right

I'm just labouring the point to avoid people buying this lens thinking it will work well on full frame. It is marginal at best - despite the solid cut-off in the extreme corners, there is quite marked loss of light and detail well into the frame. The amount of cropping required to eliminate it completely would get you back to APS-H at least.

But don't get me wrong - it's a fantastic lens on the K-3. There's no way I'll be getting rid of mine as long as I have a crop body.

[K-amps]

Its an easy fix in post with healing brush and smudge depending if you want to spend the time.

[Sandy Hancock]

Its an easy fix in post with healing brush and smudge depending if you want to spend the time.

Rubbish. You can't put detail back where it wasn't in the first place.