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

[zzeitg]

so what about DA* 60-250mm and its performance on FF sensor?

[UncleVanya]

so what about DA* 60-250mm and its performance on FF sensor?

I'd like to know this also. In lieu of the ff sensor, a few shots on film would be nice.

[Barry Pearson]

so what about DA* 60-250mm and its performance on FF sensor?

In 2013 I tested my DA* 60-250mm on a Pentax film camera, had the film scanned, then uploaded it. (I did the same with several other Pentax lenses, accessible from the link below). See:

DA* 60-250mm f/4 on Z-1p

Conclusion for the 60-250mm:

"This isn't an unqualified FF lens. But neither is it unusable on a 35mm camera. At 60mm on 35mm the corners are soft. At 250mm the corners are darker, but still usable. These improve on stopping down. In other words, similar to (although perhaps worse than) a typical kit lens used on an APS-C sensor. Perhaps that is a way to think about it - an expensive kit lens (unless you already own it, as I do) for an FF camera!

"It appears that this is likely to be a useful lens on an FF camera when used with a 1.4 teleconverter. I am already looking forward to using it on an APS-C sensor as an 84-350mm f/5.6 lens if/when Pentax supply a 1.4x teleconverter. And I think it might be good as an FF lens in that combination."

---------- Post added 8th Feb 2015 at 04:21 PM ----------

I'd like to know this also. In lieu of the ff sensor, a few shots on film would be nice.

Here are some tests of DA and DA* lenses on film that I did in 2013. Their time has come! Spread the word.

Pentax Full Frame tests

[UncleVanya]

Thanks

[Weevil]

In 2013 I tested my DA* 60-250mm on a Pentax film camera, had the film scanned, then uploaded it. (I did the same with several other Pentax lenses, accessible from the link below). See:

DA* 60-250mm f/4 on Z-1p

Conclusion for the 60-250mm:

"This isn't an unqualified FF lens. But neither is it unusable on a 35mm camera. At 60mm on 35mm the corners are soft. At 250mm the corners are darker, but still usable. These improve on stopping down. In other words, similar to (although perhaps worse than) a typical kit lens used on an APS-C sensor. Perhaps that is a way to think about it - an expensive kit lens (unless you already own it, as I do) for an FF camera!

"It appears that this is likely to be a useful lens on an FF camera when used with a 1.4 teleconverter. I am already looking forward to using it on an APS-C sensor as an 84-350mm f/5.6 lens if/when Pentax supply a 1.4x teleconverter. And I think it might be good as an FF lens in that combination."

---------- Post added 8th Feb 2015 at 04:21 PM ----------



Here are some tests of DA and DA* lenses on film that I did in 2013. Their time has come! Spread the word.

Pentax Full Frame tests

Interesting !

[zzeitg]

Here are some tests of DA and DA* lenses on film that I did in 2013. Their time has come! Spread the word.

OK, thanks! Let's see how much money we'll have to pay for a new glass

[KyleWhorten]

Anybody tried the tamron 70-200 f2.8 ?

[Jean Poitiers]

Anybody tried the tamron 70-200 f2.8 ?

Good question to be confirmed. This lens is on my short list and it should be FF since it is a "Di" lens.

The website of my local B&M shop lists the lens as compatible for "24x36" and APS-C.

[yucatanPentax]

Although I doubt it is a FF lens, the DA 18-135mm WR is missing from the list in the OP.

[falconeye]

Although I doubt it is a FF lens, the DA 18-135mm WR is missing from the list in the OP.

Yeah. The 18-135mm is a newer lens (this thread was started ages ago ) and even as the OP, I cannot modify my OP anymore

[pinholecam]

Anybody tried the tamron 70-200 f2.8 ?

Lots of Canikon guys have

[yucatanPentax]

Yeah. The 18-135mm is a newer lens (this thread was started ages ago ) and even as the OP, I cannot modify my OP anymore

Well, that's a shame. Maybe a note to the Admins and they could insert whatever text you requested into the original post? Just an idea. I honestly had no idea that our "edit" capabilities on our own posts expired, but I've never tried it either. Learn something new every day!

[geomez]

Yeah. The 18-135mm is a newer lens (this thread was started ages ago ) and even as the OP, I cannot modify my OP anymore

I was wondering why the list was so outdated. It's a real shame you can no longer edit the post. This is important info for all Pentax users I hope the mods can give you the power back, or take the reins and list the info somewhere outside of a thread.

[Gerbermiester]

Anybody tried the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 ?

Yep, the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 designed for fullframe. Works like a charm on my PZ-1 and Z1-P film bodies.

[K David]

For kicks, I mounted the new 18-50 collapsing kit lens that comes with the K-S2 on my MG. Obviously, the lens can't be focused without ca camera power source. Nor can it be stopped down. So it's useless except at infinity and wide open with most Pentax bodies. That said, on FF, it vignettes with a clear image circles and corner cut-off in the viewfinder from 18mm to 24mm on the MG. Given that the MG has a smaller viewfinder, it could be assumed that it would vignette up to 28mm. One interesting thing is that the entire image is sharp. I had a vertical slat fence on the side of the viewfinder and there was significantly less distortion at 18mm in the out-of-APS-C-image-circle area than expected. In fact, the out-of-circle area was nearly as sharp as the in-circle area.