Just because they haven't released any new lenses that aren't DA lately doesn't mean that they've abandoned the nomenclature. After all they no longer sell any FF 35mm cameras. Why build lenses for them. When an ~24x36mm camera is released we'll probably see more D FA lenses, not before.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Perhaps, although they seem to have abandoned that nomenclature. In any case, > it's hard to believe that any lens designed for the smaller image circle will > perform optimally on the larger format. Unless, of course, Pentax has been > designing them with a future application in mind and "DA" is no more than a > marketing tool. On the other hand, we've seen that the DA 16-45, for example, > won't cover the full frame at focal lengths wider than about 20mm. > Paul > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > From: Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> I am asking my question mainly because if it indeed covered full frame >> and there were no image deterioration past the APC frame, Pentax >> probably would have given it FDA designation instead of DA. >> >> >> Boris >> >> William Robb wrote: >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "Boris Liberman" >>> Subject: Re: DA70 and 24x36 coverage >>> >>> >>> >>>> William, what about its sharpness towards the corners of the full frame >>>> image? >>>> >>> That would require me to put it onto a film camera and use it. In the >>> finder >>> it looked about the same in the corners as it did at the center, but this >>> is >>> in no way a scientific observation. >>> >>> William Robb >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow >> the directions. >> > > > -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
