Comparative performance of the new 35 - anyone have definitive evidence?

**Ed Hurst** · 01-13-2016, 03:34 PM

Hello all,

It's clear that increasing numbers of us have the new DFA version of the 35mm 645 lens. Comments suggesting that it performs better than the FA are common (though perhaps not radically so), and some people also say it's better than the A. What I am keen to know is whether anyone has a view on how its performance compares to the 28-45 @ 35mm. Would be great to know!

All the best,

Ed

LA_Photographer · 01-14-2016, 02:09 PM

Sadly, I have never used the A, FA, or the zoom (other than testing it in a shop when I bought my Z), but I will say that I am completely 100% happy with the new 35 (zero buyers remorse). I'll try and get some shots posted in the next few days with it so people can pick things apart a bit.

klaus123 · 01-15-2016, 05:54 AM

There are some comparison on a German page

itshimitis · 01-15-2016, 10:07 AM

As linked by the author himself:

Originally posted by Ristretto

I did some comparison between the FA35 and the new D-FA35 on my blog (www.fotoristretto.ch). Conclusion quick & dirty: The new one is sharper than the FA, especially at wide aperture, Bokeh is nicer, but CA and Flares are about the same... :-(

The A35 wasn't available for the review...

**Ed Hurst** · 01-15-2016, 01:25 PM

Thanks guys; some interesting stuff there. But none of it seems to provide a comparison between the new 35 and the 28-45 (@35). It all seems to be comparing the different 35 primes.

I have the zoom (and it is superb!) and the 35A (which, while brilliant, is not up to the zoom). So what I really need to know is whether buying the new 35 would give me anything quality-wise that the zoom does not. I am not worried about the bulk of the zoom, so it's purely a performance comparison I am interested in.

itshimitis · 01-15-2016, 06:48 PM

I would test, but my 28 - 45 is still away in France for repair

**Ed Hurst** · 01-15-2016, 11:14 PM

Thank you for that thought sir! That would have been brilliant (and still will be when the not-so-quick service process concludes!). What happened to your zoom! And, if you don't mind my asking, what prompted the purchase of the new 35 given that you own the zoom? The desire for a smaller option? Or the hope of its superiority?

Good luck with the repair,

Ed

rhern213 · 01-15-2016, 11:48 PM

I had both and stayed with the zoom. There was no difference between the 2 in my eyes in any way. The 35 was not any better if that's your main question. Unfortunately I deleted the test shots I took sorry.

TheDocAUS · 01-16-2016, 02:54 AM

Ed

Where do you live in Sydney? I have a new DFA35mm and live in Sydney at Revesby.

itshimitis · 01-16-2016, 03:59 AM

Originally posted by Ed Hurst

Thank you for that thought sir! That would have been brilliant (and still will be when the not-so-quick service process concludes!). What happened to your zoom! And, if you don't mind my asking, what prompted the purchase of the new 35 given that you own the zoom? The desire for a smaller option? Or the hope of its superiority?

Good luck with the repair,

Ed

I almost didn't go through with the purchase. I sent the zoom off with the same company that I got the DFA 35 from and thought that my zoom was back or a timeline was in place for its return, as the guy running the shop thought it would be a fairly simple repair. Turns out it was less so as the lens is weather sealed. It was on my camera when I failed t put up my tripod properly when about to load it in to my car, and the camera with the lens tumbled. I grabbed it, but not in time to save the impact of the lens. Nothing wrong with the glass I suspect (and this is confirmed by the thoughts o the camera store owner who thinks it is something to do with the screws that guide the glass...

I still don't have any timeline. But the DFA 35 is MUCH lighter and is (to my memory) as sharp as the 28 - 45 at least. It is more prone to flare than I would like though.

Kolor-Pikker · 01-16-2016, 06:34 AM

Originally posted by itshimitis

It is more prone to flare than I would like though.

Probably has to do with the fact that it's intended for a larger format, so the hood doesn't offer optimal shading.

**Ed Hurst** · 01-16-2016, 07:42 PM

Thanks everyone - appreciate the input. As suspected, it doesn't seem like the DFA 35mm improves on the performance of the zoom in any aspect except size...

TheDocAUS - I live in Beacon Hill (Northern Beaches) but work in the CBD - so meeting up to do some sort of test would be pretty easy if you're game. Not that I am any sort of testing person. I guess we could take the shots then make the RAWs available for others to scrutinise!

TheDocAUS · 01-17-2016, 03:04 PM

Perhaps we should meet at Circular Quay and your test shots can be the Opera House and Sydney Harbour Bridge.

**Ed Hurst** · 01-17-2016, 04:34 PM

Sending you a PM :-)

TheDocAUS · 01-18-2016, 11:19 PM

Ed, did you get my second PM?

01-13-2016, 03:34 PM	#1
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657	Comparative performance of the new 35 - anyone have definitive evidence? Hello all, It's clear that increasing numbers of us have the new DFA version of the 35mm 645 lens. Comments suggesting that it performs better than the FA are common (though perhaps not radically so), and some people also say it's better than the A. What I am keen to know is whether anyone has a view on how its performance compares to the 28-45 @ 35mm. Would be great to know! All the best, Ed

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
anyone have a good comparison of the Q line?	Mothballs	Pentax Q	30	12-28-2015 02:22 PM
Ruggard Triumph 35 Sling Bag: Anyone have one?	shaX 07	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	3	01-08-2015 05:26 PM
IR Performance on the 70 or 35 ltd?	Omestes	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	11-01-2014 06:07 PM
Machinery Evidence of Steam Travel	normhead	Post Your Photos!	5	07-09-2014 06:33 PM
very, very few people have been willing to let the evidence speak.	jeffkrol	General Talk	41	12-03-2012 10:46 AM

01-14-2016, 02:09 PM	#2
LA_Photographer Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 37	Sadly, I have never used the A, FA, or the zoom (other than testing it in a shop when I bought my Z), but I will say that I am completely 100% happy with the new 35 (zero buyers remorse). I'll try and get some shots posted in the next few days with it so people can pick things apart a bit.

01-15-2016, 05:54 AM	#3
klaus123 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Germany Posts: 238	There are some comparison on a German page

01-15-2016, 10:07 AM	#4
itshimitis Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: All over the place Posts: 3,535	As linked by the author himself: Originally posted by Ristretto I did some comparison between the FA35 and the new D-FA35 on my blog (www.fotoristretto.ch). Conclusion quick & dirty: The new one is sharper than the FA, especially at wide aperture, Bokeh is nicer, but CA and Flares are about the same... :-( The A35 wasn't available for the review...

01-15-2016, 01:25 PM	#5
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657 Original Poster	Thanks guys; some interesting stuff there. But none of it seems to provide a comparison between the new 35 and the 28-45 (@35). It all seems to be comparing the different 35 primes. I have the zoom (and it is superb!) and the 35A (which, while brilliant, is not up to the zoom). So what I really need to know is whether buying the new 35 would give me anything quality-wise that the zoom does not. I am not worried about the bulk of the zoom, so it's purely a performance comparison I am interested in.

01-15-2016, 06:48 PM	#6
itshimitis Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: All over the place Posts: 3,535	I would test, but my 28 - 45 is still away in France for repair

01-15-2016, 11:14 PM	#7
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657 Original Poster	Thank you for that thought sir! That would have been brilliant (and still will be when the not-so-quick service process concludes!). What happened to your zoom! And, if you don't mind my asking, what prompted the purchase of the new 35 given that you own the zoom? The desire for a smaller option? Or the hope of its superiority? Good luck with the repair, Ed

01-15-2016, 11:48 PM	#8
rhern213 New Member Join Date: Nov 2015 Posts: 9	I had both and stayed with the zoom. There was no difference between the 2 in my eyes in any way. The 35 was not any better if that's your main question. Unfortunately I deleted the test shots I took sorry.

01-16-2016, 02:54 AM	#9
TheDocAUS Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 126	Ed Where do you live in Sydney? I have a new DFA35mm and live in Sydney at Revesby.

01-16-2016, 03:59 AM	#10
itshimitis Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: All over the place Posts: 3,535	Originally posted by Ed Hurst Thank you for that thought sir! That would have been brilliant (and still will be when the not-so-quick service process concludes!). What happened to your zoom! And, if you don't mind my asking, what prompted the purchase of the new 35 given that you own the zoom? The desire for a smaller option? Or the hope of its superiority? Good luck with the repair, Ed I almost didn't go through with the purchase. I sent the zoom off with the same company that I got the DFA 35 from and thought that my zoom was back or a timeline was in place for its return, as the guy running the shop thought it would be a fairly simple repair. Turns out it was less so as the lens is weather sealed. It was on my camera when I failed t put up my tripod properly when about to load it in to my car, and the camera with the lens tumbled. I grabbed it, but not in time to save the impact of the lens. Nothing wrong with the glass I suspect (and this is confirmed by the thoughts o the camera store owner who thinks it is something to do with the screws that guide the glass... I still don't have any timeline. But the DFA 35 is MUCH lighter and is (to my memory) as sharp as the 28 - 45 at least. It is more prone to flare than I would like though.

01-16-2016, 06:34 AM	#11
Kolor-Pikker Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2014 Posts: 343	Originally posted by itshimitis It is more prone to flare than I would like though. Probably has to do with the fact that it's intended for a larger format, so the hood doesn't offer optimal shading.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-16-2016, 07:42 PM	#12
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657 Original Poster	Thanks everyone - appreciate the input. As suspected, it doesn't seem like the DFA 35mm improves on the performance of the zoom in any aspect except size... TheDocAUS - I live in Beacon Hill (Northern Beaches) but work in the CBD - so meeting up to do some sort of test would be pretty easy if you're game. Not that I am any sort of testing person. I guess we could take the shots then make the RAWs available for others to scrutinise!

01-17-2016, 03:04 PM	#13
TheDocAUS Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 126	Perhaps we should meet at Circular Quay and your test shots can be the Opera House and Sydney Harbour Bridge.

01-17-2016, 04:34 PM	#14
Ed Hurst Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sydney Posts: 1,657 Original Poster	Sending you a PM :-)

01-18-2016, 11:19 PM	#15
TheDocAUS Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 126	Ed, did you get my second PM?