Bruce Dayton asked me to report on the optical quality of this lens. I used it to complete a roll of Provia 100F, and I then took selected slides and scanned them on a Nikon LS 2000 at 2720 dpi with digital ICE on. The digital ICE dulls sharpness a bit. I did no manipulations, just printed them full-frame on an Epson 870 on 8-1/2 x 11 inch paper (about the same as A4).
I scanned transparencies of the following apertures: f1.8 f4.5 (the mtf value my PZ1p indicates) f16 At f1.8 the print was entirely acceptable to my eyes. There was some light fall-off noticeable in the sky. The f4.5 print was noticeably sharper. The f16 print was less sharp than the f4.5, but sharper than the f1.8. I would have been completely satisfied with the f1.8 and 16 prints. The real question is, how does this compare to other lenses? I own the following other lenses, and have made scans from them in the same manner: Zenitar 16 mm. f2.8 fisheye FA 17-28 FA 20-35 FA Power Zoom 28-105 FA 50 f1.7 F 80-200 f4.7-5.6 SMC F 70-210 f4-5.6 Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO Macro Tokina ATX-AF 400 The f4.5 print from the FA 31 Limited is definitely the sharpest print from any of these lenses, scanned and printed as I've described. How much better? I can't quantify, but I bought it to have a wide, fast prime, and it will fill the bill. Sorry, I don't have a web site where I could post things. Joe - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
