Interesting. I have the FA and didn't notice any PF. My 16-45 shows PF in all high contrast regions. The photozone test and samples of the DA version amazed me.
I would like to see samples of the same lens on a K10D vs K20D. If PF is caused by CCD bleeding the K20D samples should be much better. On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 10:16 PM, AlunFoto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I know I promised some test results last week, but I haven't got > around to process what I did in the week-end yet. :-( > > So here's some text describing my results. Pics will follow if there's > any interest in the issue. > > What I have found is this: > > Sharpness and contrast: > I can't tell them apart. Both are pretty darn good. > > AF speed: > The two lenses are about equal in focus speed on my K10D. On the > *istD, however, the old FA* is twice as fast as the DA*. I assume this > would apply to all non-SDM cameras. > > >From a classical twig-shot at f/2.8 and f/4: > There is indeed a bit more PF in the DA* than in the FA*. However, the > FA* also exhibit some cyan fringing. There is no cyan fringing in the > DA*. > I also found that there must be some serious overexposure for the > fringing to become noticeable in both lenses. Exposure for the > highlights and then application of "auto levels" in Photoshop gave a > much better balanced result than dialling in "+2" exposure > compensation in the camera. > Why anyone in a legal state of mind wants to shoot scenes with loads > of twigs against a bright background at f/2.8 beats me, tho... There > must be better ways to employ either of these lenses. > > >From strongly backlit portraits at f/2.8 and f/4: > Same thing as for twigs, except it seems like a good idea to employ > the lenses for this purpose. Note also that even the little built-in > flash in K10D can save the day both with regards to skin tones and to > balance the foreground face against the light background. > > So my conclusion is that unless you defiantly maintain that all your > Pentax glass must be full frame, the DA* is just as good as the FA*. I > have not been able to imagine any shooting situation where one would > fail and the other save the day. Price, availability, weatherproofing > and AF noise are all in favour of the DA*. And if you get a shot that > you really, really need to save despite colour fringing, the output > from a DA* with be easier to post-process because it fringes in only > one colour where the FA* fringe in two. > > > Best, > Jostein > > > -- > http://www.alunfoto.no/galleri/ > http://alunfoto.blogspot.com > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- Toine http://www.repiuk.nl -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
