DA 35/2.8 Macro sharpness...

I've read a few online comments here and there that claim the DA 35/2.8 Macro is lacking a bit in the sharpness

department. Well, I can't say I've noticed anything too soft'n'fuzzy in the snaps I've taken with mine, so far.

 

But OK, perhaps my sharpness standards are lower than some people's...? And since this lens isn't the cheapest

one out there I thought I'd take a few more (lazy, handheld) test snaps so potential buyers can make up their own

minds.

 

First up, wide open at f/2.8:

 

http://koti.welho.com/pwilkins/near28.jpg

 

http://koti.welho.com/pwilkins/far28.jpg

 

And the same boring-but-that-doesn't-really-matter scenes at f/5.6:

 

http://koti.welho.com/pwilkins/near56.jpg

 

http://koti.welho.com/pwilkins/far56.jpg

 

I was focusing on the trees in the far distance for the outdoor shots, which are at IS0 200. I bumped up the ISO

to 800 for the indoor shoots, to keep the shutter speed up. Converted from RAW, with my usual "printing for

detail" clarity and sharpness settings applied. ("Clarity 50", "Sharpening Amount 50".)

 

So, how does these shots look to you, detail-wise...? Personally, at 100% view I can see the cables on the

distant telegraph poles in the outdoor shots... I'm referring to the poles behind the orange/white mast, just in

front of the trees on the horizon. I can also make out individual cars in the cityscape postcard in the top right

corner of the indoor shots. That doesn't seem bad at all, especially bearing in mind the K100D's lowly 6MPs...

 

What do you think? Perhaps there's a QC problem with early copies of this lens, but mine seems pretty damn sharp,

TBH.

There's hardly any vignetting at f2.8, if any at all. That's great news for those considering this lens.

Usually Macro lenses are capable of very high resolution, certainly far beyond 6 MP's

 

Evaluating sharpness at iso 800 hardly makes justice to the lens.

 

I have yet to hear anything bad about this lens, and it certainly looks the business.

 

Congratulations on your purchase. Post some more pictures when you get the chance. Preferably from the places

you seem to travel to :-)

 

Cheers

 

Fredrik

Well, I read a couple of not-so-enthusiastic comments from DA 35 owners here:

 

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/20706-da-35-macro-2.html

 

Those comments didn't put me off buying it, but I thought I may as well show what my copy is like... And yeah, ISO 800 isn't the best for showing ultimate sharpness, but I think it would still show up anything disturbing in the lens department. And OK, at least people can see what kind of detail they may get with that particular setting... :) Well, Phil Askey I ain't, and I'm proud of that... :)

 

Looking at those shots again, there does seem to be some vignetting at f/2.8 - it's a little more noticeable when comparing thumbnails side by side - but it doesn't bother me at all, TBH. Anyway, it seems decent enough for scenic shots and seems to work nicely at closer distances too, so no complaints from me, apart from the obvious dent in the beer fund...

 

So, "HIGHLY RECOMMENDED" it is... :)

BTW, the weather took a turn for the worse in that outdoor location, later in the evening. Check it out:

 

http://koti.welho.com/pwilkins/clouds.jpg

I used the lens for two weeks and if I could afford one I would have one. It's a great lens, sharp, light weight and quality construction.Add to that I got some pretty decent photos with it. If you want the 35mm focal length at f/2.8 I don't see how you can go wrong with Pentax's latest Limited lens.

Paul, I think the number of people who absolutely love this lens far outnumber those who hate it.

 

Those storm clouds are awesome.

 

I really wish I could stop myself from reading posts on this lens. I had finally resigned myself to never buy the great FA 35mm f/2, when the DA 35mm macro is introduced. Really, not fare.

It's exceptionally sharp at all distances...with K20D it seems to produce medium format detail at infinity. It's flat field and perfectly rectilinear. Autofocus is exquisitely good at all distances, but it wants to hunt excessively in extremely dim light (unlike my other DAs)...probably because it has to deal with its built in extension tubes.. happily the bright prism makes this DA easy to focus manually in dim light. If your main thing is low light grab shooting, the more conventional 35/2 might autofocus better.

Miserere, why on earth had "I had finally resigned myself to never buy" the great FA 35mm f2? It's an amazing bargain, sharp wide open and with the lovely delicate signature of a 7-element rigid or dual-range Summicron for only $300. A better fast normal for street shooting could scarcely be imagined. You should have no qualms at all about owning both 35s -they serve quite different purposes.

David (related to John?), I have a very limited budget for lenses (well, photography in general), so most of what I use is old, courtesy of eBay. As such, I have a new/gently-owned lens buying roadmap to follow, composed mainly of fast primes, roughly following the classic 2-stop separation between focal lengths: 24mm -- 50mm -- 85mm -- 135mm. With these focal lengths, a 35mm doesn't really fit in, at least not until I have a complete line-up.

 

Maybe one day, when I have the system I've planned, I'll buy a used FA 35mm f/2...for $500! Ha ha ha. Oh well...

Miserere, i think 3 lenses is about the maximum I can reasonably expect to learn, so have only DA 21, FA 35 and DA 70. this translates to 32, 52 and 105mm equivalents. If the projected DA 15 is light and compact, i'll substitute it fort he 21, if I can afford to. Only the FA 35 was bought new. In practice it is the lens that stays on the camera and gets used 90% of the time. I have no road map but have decided to try to follow HCB's precept that "A strict economy of means is necessary to achieve simplicity of expression." Maybe it'll work.

We think along the same lines, David. Your lens choices make sense; my walk-around is 24/28mm, and the only lens from my 4 primes I got new was the FA 50mm f/1.4. I now want to substitute the other 3 I have for newer, faster versions, with my next purchase being the Sigma 24mm f/1.8. I'd like to buy it used, but hardly anyone lets go of theirs, which I take as a good sign :-) I just recently got a Tamron 28-75mm (which also has a great reputation) for a good price (used), so maybe there's hope. The downside is that it's so good I can see it taking the place of 3 of my primes. However, when you need a fast prime, nothing else will do.

 

I agree with HCB wholeheartedly (does he post here?--kidding!) and I rarely find myself not getting the photo I want due to lack of physical means; it's the photographer (me) who fails most of the time.

I think I'd be happy to use almost any prime lens in the 24-50mm range for general snapping with the K100D. Sure,

I'd get slightly different shots depending on the focal length used, of course, but I wouldn't say any particular

focal length would be any better than any other, at least for my purposes. What's ideal for one shot may not be

quite so good for the next, so I just try to make the most of what happens to be stuck on the front of the camera

at any given time.

 

With that in mind, my main justification for coughing up the cash for the DA 35/2.8 was that if I'm gonna have a

reasonably compact/lightweight prime on my camera whilst wandering around somewhere in half-decent light, I may

as well have one which has the option to focus close, simply because it offers more shooting options than a

regular lens.

 

I have the (rather chunky) Sigma 30/1.4 and the (rather lovely) little M 50/1.7 for low-light stuff, with the

former being pretty well-suited to indoor shots - where it's usually no problem to rest it on a table/bar or

something, from time to time, if it literally becomes a pain in the neck - and the latter being sufficiently

small/light to pop in a bag/pocket and go everywhere my camera goes, just in case things get a bit dim...

 

Ideally, I suppose I'd like to have something along the lines of a 30mm, f/1.4, 1:1 macro pancake, weighing less

than 250g or so, but that's asking a lot from a single lens, methinks... Still, if Pentax are reading this, I

hope they take note and get the R&D bods working on it sharpish... :)

 

If I didn't already have the other primes, the FA 35 would seem to be the best single-lens compromise in terms of

weight, speed and price.

I found this lens sharp even at f/22...so I don't know what the issue is. When I get to the Nundagao ridge files I will post some shots at f/22 and about 1:1.5 macro. Suffice to say I am now a full month behind on trip reports and photos with no catchup in sight. I'm hoping to have memorial day done by the 7th of July!!! (I HOPE).

 

There are people in the world that will never be happy, then their are those that are happy just to have enough money and time to partake in fools pleasures like hiking and photography.

 

I'm in the later. All lenses have flaws if you search hard enough, so do all cameras, and everything else in life.

 

My guess is the people who find all these flaws are miserable and probably will die single as they will never find a mate who meets their perfection.

 

Ah, but at least they'll never be tricked into buying a less than perfect lens!!

Aye, I can imagine it must be a true living hell for some folk when they find that a 100% crop looks 0.00001% crap...