Originally posted by Adam DA lenses are not full-frame lenses, barring the 40mm, which is an exception ...
Adam, this entire thread is about a single topic: To go beyond this kind of oversimplifying statements.
In my original post (which I am keeping up to date), I classify new lenses (lenses released after the DA 16-45) according to their usefulness on FF bodies, using a classification scheme of -, o, +, ++, +++. +++ would mean that the performance is identical to a lens designed and optimized for full frame. E.g., the DA40 is classified as '+'.
The thread contains all discussion with respect to deriving the classification. It is based on test shots and numerical evaluation of test charts (or brick walls
). Questions and mere opinions or hearsay should not be posted. Knowing that a lens isn't black in the corners is not sufficient.
As soon as I find the time, I will add a rating for FA* 300/4.5 and DA* 60-250/4. (and fix the broken image links in my earlier posts -- the provider deleted my images said to stay forever -- he said the traffic was too high ...)
Again, I invite anybody to photograph a test chart on film, using a lens which doesn't have a rating yet, like the DA*55/1.4. And post the result here.
Please refrain from pure discussion without adding any new facts. Thanks everybody.
@vespats:
The DA* 60-250/4 has no visible vignetting (no black corners and no darkening) over the entire focal range (fully open). The same holds true for perceived viewfinder sharpness. Even with the hood at 60mm, the corners don't black out, a sign that Pentax may plan to reclassify this lens as 35mm. But this information is not sufficient to rate this lens. It may be anything between + and +++. I ask Adam the favour to delete his misleading guess (the previous post).
@architorture:
I have added your results to the opening post. Thank you very much for your effort. As soon as you have better scans, we can verify if my corner sharpness assessments were ok.