Hi everybody,

I would like to open up a thread dedicated to one topic:

DA lens on Full Frame: a sticky test shots thread.

This thread shall be dedicated to test shots of a DA lens mounted to a full frame body (e.g., a film camera body). By test shot, I mean shots dedicated to evaluate the performance. Shots of ordinary subjects aren't suitable to this task, normally, and should not be posted. So, these are the rules:

• K mount lens dedicated to the APS-C form factor is used.
• Image is taken full frame 36mm x 24mm.
• Lens hood was removed.
• And ideally, no filter is mounted.
• The aperture used is specified (note that film cameras don't record EXIF...).
• Sample image shows the entire field of view.
• Sample image(s) show(s) corner, border and center performance at 10MP-100% (multiple crops, or single not-resized image).
• The subject is such that resolution and vignetting at the borders can be compared to the center.

The idea behind this thread is obvious: To compile enough data to assess the spectrum of available lenses for a forthcoming full frame DSLR in K mount.

#################################################

Table of results as obtained in this thread (updated regularly):

SMC Pentax-DA primes...

• DA 14mm F2.8: - (clawhammer)
• DA 15mm F4.0: - (Zav)
• DA 21mm F3.2 Limited: - (Boris Liberman)
• DA 35mm F2.4 AL: +++ (aurele ;like FA35/2.0 and no vignetting) (frank)
• DA 35mm F2.8 Limited Macro: 0 (ryno), + (@ 1.15 crop)
• DA 40mm F2.8 Limited: +
• DA* 55mm F1.4 SDM: +++ (aurele)
• DA 70mm F2.4 Limited: +
• D FA Macro 100mm F2.8 WR: +++ (officially specified FF by Pentax)
• DA* 200mm F2.8 ED [IF] SDM: +++? (common belief, but is it true?)
• DA* 300mm F4 ED [IF] SDM: ++ (officially rated "designed for FF" by Pentax patent US7715116)

SMC Pentax-DA zooms...

• DA 10-17mm F3.5-4.5 Fish-Eye ED [IF]: FE, see #59, #61, #94. 10mm: heavy vignette / 14mm: almost no vignette / 17mm ++ (Reps, froeschle, Gooshin)
• DA 12-24mm F4 ED AL [IF]: - (below 16mm, xitek.com), o (at 18mm, architorture), + (at 20mm, architorture), ++ (at 24mm, architorture)
• DA 16-45mm F4: - (below 21mm, Nesster)
• DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM: - (xitek.com)
• DA 17-70mm F4 AL [IF] SDM: - (KjetilH)
• DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL: - (at 18mm, Spongefingers; below 23mm, xitek.com)
• DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL II: missing
• DA 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 ED AL [IF]: - (xitek.com)
• DA 50-200mm ED: -
• DA* 50-135mm F2.8 ED [IF] SDM: - (elho_cid)
• DA* 60-250mm F4 ED [IF] SDM: ++ (officially rated "designed for FF" by Pentax patent US7489452) probably good on full frame but evaluation still missing; the rating is +++ with a baffle modification, + without)
• DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED: 0 (+, ++ at tele end, viking79)

Sigma K mount DC...

• Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC: -
• Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 DC: - (below 14mm, Gooshin)
• ...

Tamron K mount Di-II...

• ...

Overall rating scale:
+++: no significant difference between APS-C and FF corners
++: difference but usable at full aperture with a small loss in corner IQ only
+: usable staring at f/4~f/5.6, with no or a small loss in corner IQ only
o: usable at f/11 or with big loss in corner IQ only
-: not usable

[UncleVanya]

Here is DA 21ltd on K-1 at f3.2; the first picture is with the original lens hood, and the second's with the metal hood for SuperTak 35mm.

Both pictures were taken with the same settings, from exact same spot, and focusing at the same point.

Did you do any without a hood?

[micromacro]

Did you do any without a hood?

Nope. I can if you'd like to check.
Here. Looks pretty much the same as with Takumar hood

[UncleVanya]

Nope. I can if you'd like to check.

Mostly just curious, but please.

[micromacro]

Done, see above

[UncleVanya]

Nope. I can if you'd like to check.
Here. Looks pretty much the same as with Takumar hood

Thank you. I see slight improvements over the Takumar one - but it's hard to see them side by side. It is subtle at best. Thanks again.

[micromacro]

Thank you. I see slight improvements over the Takumar one - but it's hard to see them side by side. It is subtle at best. Thanks again.

Not much, plus with that subtle difference hood still may help at day light. I guess.

[coastjunkie]

Hi everyone,
I am a long time Pentax user, and a great fan (and long time lurker) of this forum... This is my first post, so apologies if I am not following site posting etiquette:

I have recently acquired my Pentax K1 and I have been trying out my various DA lenses.

Tonight I tested my DA 35mm f2.4 AL, and I am certainly finding some vignetting between 2.4 and 4.5. Vignette at 2.8 is very pronounced, and quickly recedes after 4.5.

After 4.5, the vignetting was more or less automatically dealt with by Lightroom lens profile correction.

Attached (I hope) are 4 photos I took tonight. RAW from camera and spit out via lightroom.

F2.8, F4.5, F9, F11 respectively.

Cheers

Attached Images

       

[UncleVanya]

Hi everyone,
I am a long time Pentax user, and a great fan (and long time lurker) of this forum... This is my first post, so apologies if I am not following site posting etiquette:

I have recently acquired my Pentax K1 and I have been trying out my various DA lenses.

Tonight I tested my DA 35mm f2.4 AL, and I am certainly finding some vignetting between 2.4 and 4.5. Vignette at 2.8 is very pronounced, and quickly recedes after 4.5.

After 4.5, the vignetting was more or less automatically dealt with by Lightroom lens profile correction.

Attached (I hope) are 4 photos I took tonight. RAW from camera and spit out via lightroom.

F2.8, F4.5, F9, F11 respectively.

Cheers

What would be interesting is to pit this result against an FA 35 f/2 to see if there is a significant improvement in vignetting.

[aurele]

according to photozone, the FA show 0.7 EV of vignetting at f2 and 0.3 EV at f2.8, so it's close overall

http://www.photozone.de/pentax/123-pentax-smc-fa-35mm-f2-al-photozone-review...report?start=1

[falconeye]

After 4.5, the vignetting was more or less automatically dealt with by Lightroom lens profile correction.

Thanks for the test. How about corner sharpness?

I find it interesting that LR applies their profiles despite the fact that the image circle is different. Obviously, Adobe does not keep track of image circles in the profile and the body.

Which is kind of sad as it renders DA profiles useless on full frame bodies and makes full frame profiles for DA lenses impossible. However, hand-made profiles and their manual selection could help here.

[kh1234567890]

I find it interesting that LR applies their profiles despite the fact that the image circle is different. Obviously, Adobe does not keep track of image circles in the profile and the body.

Which is kind of sad as it renders DA profiles useless on full frame bodies and makes full frame profiles for DA lenses impossible. However, hand-made profiles and their manual selection could help here.

Adobe programs should pick up and use the SensorFormatFactor parameter. This is 1.5 in their stock profile for that lens. Adobe profiles of Pentax FF 'approved' lenses, such as the DFA 100mm macro, now have SensorFormatFactor value of 1 and presumably polynomial correction coefficients needed for FF coverage.

[AtitG]

has anyone tried the sigma 30mm f/1.4 art yet? I've read some reviews that it vignettes only slightly on canon FF.

[Michi Joel]

has anyone tried the sigma 30mm f/1.4 art yet? I've read some reviews that it vignettes only slightly on canon FF.

I'm interested too

[mee]

Hi everyone,
I am a long time Pentax user, and a great fan (and long time lurker) of this forum... This is my first post, so apologies if I am not following site posting etiquette:

I have recently acquired my Pentax K1 and I have been trying out my various DA lenses.

Tonight I tested my DA 35mm f2.4 AL, and I am certainly finding some vignetting between 2.4 and 4.5. Vignette at 2.8 is very pronounced, and quickly recedes after 4.5.

After 4.5, the vignetting was more or less automatically dealt with by Lightroom lens profile correction.

Attached (I hope) are 4 photos I took tonight. RAW from camera and spit out via lightroom.

F2.8, F4.5, F9, F11 respectively.

Cheers

Thank you for taking the time to test this DA. I'm curious about the performance though -- is it quick to focus on the K-1? Is it loud?

[coastjunkie]

Thank you for taking the time to test this DA. I'm curious about the performance though -- is it quick to focus on the K-1? Is it loud?

I found the performance of the lens (focus, noise, sharpness) to be reasonable, particularly given the price point, which was just under $200 CDN new.

---------- Post added 06-20-16 at 05:51 PM ----------

Thanks for the test. How about corner sharpness?

I find it interesting that LR applies their profiles despite the fact that the image circle is different. Obviously, Adobe does not keep track of image circles in the profile and the body.

Which is kind of sad as it renders DA profiles useless on full frame bodies and makes full frame profiles for DA lenses impossible. However, hand-made profiles and their manual selection could help here.

I actually returned the lens, so I had to look through the test shots I took to discern corner sharpness. Based on the shots I have on file, I don't see much in discernible sharpness loss on the corners in FF, particularly at the lower apertures.