RE: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
All my F and FA's work fine on the DL. No problems at all. Regards Jens Bladt http://www.jensbladt.dk +45 56 63 77 11 +45 23 43 85 77 Skype: jensbladt248 -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] vegne af Brendan MacRae Sendt: 27. august 2006 03:40 Til: pdml@pdml.net Emne: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues? Someone bought my FA 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 on eBay and is having issues with AF. Supposedly (according to some posts on DP review) this is common? Focusing past 60mm and the AF goes all wonky. Is there a fix for this other than focusing manually or using DA lenses only? -Brendan __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.6/428 - Release Date: 08/25/2006 -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.7/433 - Release Date: 08/30/2006 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
Brendan, I used to have the FA28-105/3.2-4.5 AL IF. Never had any issues with focusing. Several people told me that they had problems with that lens, but mine worked flawlessly. Godfrey On Aug 26, 2006, at 6:51 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote: --- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't own this lens, but I have a number of FA lenses, and they all autofocus very well on both of my *ist D cameras. You can read a lot of things on dpreview that aren't necessarily true. A lot of wonky users over there. Paul My thoughts exactly. Anyway, I just wanted to check here to make the guy feel a little better. AF should work fine according to everything I've seen (including the *ist DL manual). -Brendan __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
The same kind of fault happened to me with my D and three different samples of genuine smc Pentax-F 70-210 zoom lenses. From 70 to about 135, everything works fine. Past 135 up to 210 you cannot make AF work properly, irrespectively of environment light, subject contrast, etc. It doesn't hunt, it just focuses much nearer than the subject is, while the AF confirmation LED lies telling everything's OK. Of course, those F 70-210 autofocus well on my MZ-S and MZ-5 at any focal length. Of course, my D autofocuses well with any other lens I've tried since. AFAIK, the F 70-210 is the only lens having AF problems with my D (or my D only has AF problems with the F 70-210, if you prefer) so I just stopped fiddling with such a useless combo. Since for most of my work (night shots, concerts and the like) I truly don't need a slow maximum speed of F5.6, I ended up buying a Sigma 70-200 F2.8 instead: wonderful lens and perfect AF at any f-stop and any focal length :-) Dario - Original Message - From: Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 4:30 AM Subject: Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues? On 27/08/06, Brendan MacRae [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My thoughts exactly. Anyway, I just wanted to check here to make the guy feel a little better. AF should work fine according to everything I've seen (including the *ist DL manual). I know a user who has had to send his *ist D (and lenses) back for service as it refused to correctly focus with particular genuine Pentax lenses (some LTD), so it definitely can happen. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
Thanks, Godfrey. -Brendan --- Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brendan, I used to have the FA28-105/3.2-4.5 AL IF. Never had any issues with focusing. Several people told me that they had problems with that lens, but mine worked flawlessly. Godfrey On Aug 26, 2006, at 6:51 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote: --- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't own this lens, but I have a number of FA lenses, and they all autofocus very well on both of my *ist D cameras. You can read a lot of things on dpreview that aren't necessarily true. A lot of wonky users over there. Paul My thoughts exactly. Anyway, I just wanted to check here to make the guy feel a little better. AF should work fine according to everything I've seen (including the *ist DL manual). -Brendan __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
--- Dario Bonazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The same kind of fault happened to me with my D and three different samples of genuine smc Pentax-F 70-210 zoom lenses. From 70 to about 135, everything works fine. Past 135 up to 210 you cannot make AF work properly, irrespectively of environment light, subject contrast, etc. It doesn't hunt, it just focuses much nearer than the subject is, while the AF confirmation LED lies telling everything's OK. Of course, those F 70-210 autofocus well on my MZ-S and MZ-5 at any focal length. Of course, my D autofocuses well with any other lens I've tried since. AFAIK, the F 70-210 is the only lens having AF problems with my D (or my D only has AF problems with the F 70-210, if you prefer) so I just stopped fiddling with such a useless combo. Since for most of my work (night shots, concerts and the like) I truly don't need a slow maximum speed of F5.6, I ended up buying a Sigma 70-200 F2.8 instead: wonderful lens and perfect AF at any f-stop and any focal length :-) Dario Thanks, Dario. It seems to be an issue with the digitals and certain F and FA lenses. It's the first I'd heard of it but makes me warry of the new camera (K10D). Hopefully the K series digitals won't have these compadibilty issues since no one's mentioned the issue on the K cameras yet. But, they're brand new, so it's too early to tell. -Brendan __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
I would bet that it's an issue particular to specific lenses used with the *ist D series bodies. The DSLR bodies, at least until the K series came out, seem to have somewhat more sensitive/finicky servo drive motors and AF sensing algorithms. Lenses vary, unit by unit, in the friction of their drive system and the quality of their connections, etc. Some particular lenses seem to be just out of the sweet spec range that operate without issues. From all reports I've heard so far, the K100D's AF servo is much more positive and higher powered in operation, which should mean that variances in the lenses will no longer be so much of an issue. I wouldn't worry too much about the K10D ... if it proves to have *at least* the K100D's improved AF performance, it will be no problems. Godfrey On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:09 AM, Brendan MacRae wrote: Thanks, Dario. It seems to be an issue with the digitals and certain F and FA lenses. It's the first I'd heard of it but makes me warry of the new camera (K10D). Hopefully the K series digitals won't have these compadibilty issues since no one's mentioned the issue on the K cameras yet. But, they're brand new, so it's too early to tell. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
From all reports I've heard so far, the K100D's AF servo is much more positive and higher powered in operation, which should mean that variances in the lenses will no longer be so much of an issue. I wouldn't worry too much about the K10D ... if it proves to have *at least* the K100D's improved AF performance, it will be no problems. Godfrey That's good to know. You would figure that touting the K series' backwards compatibility Pentax would have these issues straightened out. -Brendan On Aug 27, 2006, at 9:09 AM, Brendan MacRae wrote: Thanks, Dario. It seems to be an issue with the digitals and certain F and FA lenses. It's the first I'd heard of it but makes me warry of the new camera (K10D). Hopefully the K series digitals won't have these compadibilty issues since no one's mentioned the issue on the K cameras yet. But, they're brand new, so it's too early to tell. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
On Aug 27, 2006, at 12:46 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote: ... You would figure that touting the K series' backwards compatibility Pentax would have these issues straightened out. If the issue is variances in individual lens' characteristics, it's hard to build in surety that *all* examples work perfectly even if compatibility for all series is supported. None of the lenses I've used with the *ist DS have had any problems, and they have been K, M, A, F, FA, and DA series Pentax lenses (as well as the Zenitar-K 16/2.8 FE). Haven't gotten anything yet that was too far out of spec for my two bodies, I guess. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
None of the lenses I've used with the *ist DS have had any problems, and they have been K, M, A, F, FA, and DA series Pentax lenses (as well as the Zenitar-K 16/2.8 FE). Haven't gotten anything yet that was too far out of spec for my two bodies, I guess. Godfrey In light of that, it would seem to be a fairly rare event to suffer these focus issues. -Brendan __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
I don't own this lens, but I have a number of FA lenses, and they all autofocus very well on both of my *ist D cameras. You can read a lot of things on dpreview that aren't necessarily true. A lot of wonky users over there. Paul On Aug 26, 2006, at 9:40 PM, Brendan MacRae wrote: Someone bought my FA 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 on eBay and is having issues with AF. Supposedly (according to some posts on DP review) this is common? Focusing past 60mm and the AF goes all wonky. Is there a fix for this other than focusing manually or using DA lenses only? -Brendan __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
--- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't own this lens, but I have a number of FA lenses, and they all autofocus very well on both of my *ist D cameras. You can read a lot of things on dpreview that aren't necessarily true. A lot of wonky users over there. Paul My thoughts exactly. Anyway, I just wanted to check here to make the guy feel a little better. AF should work fine according to everything I've seen (including the *ist DL manual). -Brendan __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
I'm sure almost anything can happen with any camera. But it's not a common fault. No one on the list has experienced it. Paul On Aug 26, 2006, at 10:30 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: On 27/08/06, Brendan MacRae [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My thoughts exactly. Anyway, I just wanted to check here to make the guy feel a little better. AF should work fine according to everything I've seen (including the *ist DL manual). I know a user who has had to send his *ist D (and lenses) back for service as it refused to correctly focus with particular genuine Pentax lenses (some LTD), so it definitely can happen. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
On 27/08/06, Brendan MacRae [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My thoughts exactly. Anyway, I just wanted to check here to make the guy feel a little better. AF should work fine according to everything I've seen (including the *ist DL manual). I know a user who has had to send his *ist D (and lenses) back for service as it refused to correctly focus with particular genuine Pentax lenses (some LTD), so it definitely can happen. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
On 27/08/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sure almost anything can happen with any camera. But it's not a common fault. No one on the list has experienced it. I didn't say it was but I do seem to also recall some problems mentioned early on, particularly with third party lenses. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
This is reportedly a case of Pentax lenses not focusing. Paul On Aug 26, 2006, at 10:38 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: On 27/08/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sure almost anything can happen with any camera. But it's not a common fault. No one on the list has experienced it. I didn't say it was but I do seem to also recall some problems mentioned early on, particularly with third party lenses. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
I'm assuming he's got an issue with his camera. It's not the lens as it worked perfectly for me. -Brendan --- Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is reportedly a case of Pentax lenses not focusing. Paul On Aug 26, 2006, at 10:38 PM, Digital Image Studio wrote: On 27/08/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm sure almost anything can happen with any camera. But it's not a common fault. No one on the list has experienced it. I didn't say it was but I do seem to also recall some problems mentioned early on, particularly with third party lenses. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
- Original Message - From: Brendan MacRae Subject: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues? Someone bought my FA 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 on eBay and is having issues with AF. Supposedly (according to some posts on DP review) this is common? Focusing past 60mm and the AF goes all wonky. Is there a fix for this other than focusing manually or using DA lenses only? If the AF is going wonky past a certain focal length, lets look at what else happens as we change the aperture on a variable aperture zoom lens. Just a wild guess, but I bet that in the light levels your buyer is shooting in, the AF doesn't work so well at apertures smaller than f/4 or so. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues?
--- William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: Brendan MacRae Subject: FA lenses on *istDL...focus issues? Someone bought my FA 28-105mm 3.5-4.5 on eBay and is having issues with AF. Supposedly (according to some posts on DP review) this is common? Focusing past 60mm and the AF goes all wonky. Is there a fix for this other than focusing manually or using DA lenses only? If the AF is going wonky past a certain focal length, lets look at what else happens as we change the aperture on a variable aperture zoom lens. Just a wild guess, but I bet that in the light levels your buyer is shooting in, the AF doesn't work so well at apertures smaller than f/4 or so. William Robb Could be, but he says it was going to be a walk around lens so I'm assuming he is going to be mostly shooting outside during the day so he could be in the f11-16 range when testing it (depending on ISO setting). To complicate matters, he comparing its operation to his DA lenses which I've told him is really apples to oranges. Not to mention the fact that the focus system in the MZ-S is nothing like that in the *ist DL. In any event, it's unfortunate for him but not really my problem. I have my own equipment woes to focus on. -Brendan __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: FA* Lenses
Herb Chong a écrit: it's the focus ring. Sigma lenses mostly have the same clutch. No, the Sigma lenses haven only a semi clutch The fosus ring is disengaged, but not the body af switch. Michel
Re: FA* Lenses
Marnie, The FA * lenses have a wider focusing ring than regular FA lenses. This focusing ring can be pushed or pulled (it snaps into place) to switch the lens from AF to MF or MF to AF. So the basic motion is to let the lens focus using AF and then if you want to touch it up a bit, just pull the focus ring toward the camera body (quite natural motion) and manually focus a bit. Want AF back, just push the ring (snaps back) and you are doing AF again. Much nicer system than standard FA lenses where you have to reach to the lower side of the camera and push the switch. Bruce Wednesday, September 17, 2003, 12:18:57 PM, you wrote: Bruce Eac Where is this clutch located? Eac Just curious. I mean on the lens. Is it readily visible and findable? Eac Marnie aka Doe More ignorance to dispel.
Re: FA* Lenses
The * is the thing. Originally (the M300/4.0) the * meant that the lens contained exotic glass (or non-glass) elements. Now it just seems to mean it is the top of the line, as many of the special things it meant, like aspheric elements, are now even in cheap lens. On the other hand, some of the things folks get excited about now-a-days, like internal focusing, make the new lens less sharp than the old lens. Internal focusing however does take a lot of the load off the focusing motor for faster focusing. Alan Chan wrote: o) They are faster than non-FA* lenses. Not aware of. FA*85/1.4 is no faster than A*85/1.4. FA*300/4.5 is the same as F*300/4.5, and slower than any M/A 300/4. o) They are sharp (at least, the ones I own are). FA*24/2 is not particular sharp, and my 2 samples perform the same. FA*85/1.4 is great at close distance (1-3m), but sucks at near infinity or with extension tubes. o) Their build quality is generally very solid. Basically yes, except the silly window frame which is actually worse than regular FA lenses. My best 35mm hand-held shots have been with my FA* 85mm F1.4 lens. It is a _wonderful_ indoor portrait/action lens. Images shot wide-open are very smooth and have a certain glow to them that I really like. That said, I haven't had a chance to compare this lens to, say, the 85mm F1.8 lens. Ironically, I have never been able to obtain very sharp result when handholding the FA*85/1.4. I guess it has to do with the balance. No such problem with the FA77/1.8. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com
Re: FA* Lenses
Mark, Some may not realize, but with the focus clutch design, you can manually focus the FA * lenses by simply pulling the clutch and focusing - you don't have to disengage the body af switch. Can be very handy for touch up focusing - much more like the Canon USM lenses. Bruce Tuesday, September 16, 2003, 8:37:42 AM, you wrote: ME Keith, ME The FA* lenses have the following properties: ME o) They are faster than non-FA* lenses. ME o) They are sharp (at least, the ones I own are). ME o) Their build quality is generally very solid. ME My best 35mm hand-held shots have been with my FA* 85mm F1.4 ME lens. It is a _wonderful_ indoor portrait/action lens. ME Images shot wide-open are very smooth and have a certain ME glow to them that I really like. That said, I haven't had ME a chance to compare this lens to, say, the 85mm F1.8 ME lens. ME --Mark ME keith wrote: Still, a question arises, do the 'Star' lenses in general offer the average shooter any particular advantage over a non-star lens? I mean, aside from the advertising hype, what's the truth... would you or I see a difference in our images? This is purely an academic question for me, as with all the Pentax bodies and lenses I own, I don't use an automatic Pentax body, but I'm still curious. keith
Re: FA* lenses
Keith wrote: Mark Erickson wrote: Keith, The FA* lenses have the following properties: o) They are faster than non-FA* lenses. Speed of focusing? Pentax autofocus works via a motor in the camera body. Since there aren't equivalent (i.e., same focal length and aperture) non-FA* lenses, this question isn't really answerable. As Bruce Dayton mentioned, the FA* lenses have a clutch system that disengages the manual-focus ring when you use autofocus. o) They are sharp (at least, the ones I own are). High resolution and good contrast? Sure. Better than other similar lenses? I don't know. I haven't done a horse-race between, say, an FA* 80-200 F2.8 and any of the non FA* zooms. --Mark
Re: FA* lenses
Mark Erickson wrote: Keith wrote: Mark Erickson wrote: Keith, The FA* lenses have the following properties: o) They are faster than non-FA* lenses. Speed of focusing? Pentax autofocus works via a motor in the camera body. Since there aren't equivalent (i.e., same focal length and aperture) non-FA* lenses, this question isn't really answerable. As Bruce Dayton mentioned, the FA* lenses have a clutch system that disengages the manual-focus ring when you use autofocus. Then why the statement They are faster than non-FA* lenses? keith
Re: FA* lenses
On Tuesday, September 16, 2003, at 05:19 PM, Keith Whaley wrote: Then why the statement They are faster than non-FA* lenses? I think the original poster meant faster in the sense of larger max aperture
Re: FA* Lenses
o) They are faster than non-FA* lenses. Not aware of. FA*85/1.4 is no faster than A*85/1.4. FA*300/4.5 is the same as F*300/4.5, and slower than any M/A 300/4. o) They are sharp (at least, the ones I own are). FA*24/2 is not particular sharp, and my 2 samples perform the same. FA*85/1.4 is great at close distance (1-3m), but sucks at near infinity or with extension tubes. o) Their build quality is generally very solid. Basically yes, except the silly window frame which is actually worse than regular FA lenses. My best 35mm hand-held shots have been with my FA* 85mm F1.4 lens. It is a _wonderful_ indoor portrait/action lens. Images shot wide-open are very smooth and have a certain glow to them that I really like. That said, I haven't had a chance to compare this lens to, say, the 85mm F1.8 lens. Ironically, I have never been able to obtain very sharp result when handholding the FA*85/1.4. I guess it has to do with the balance. No such problem with the FA77/1.8. Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
Re: FA* lenses
Mark misunderstood your question. the FA* lenses are all faster in terms of larger aperture. the FA* 80-200 is f2.8. compare that with the FA 80-200 f4-5.6. they are, if anything, slower in focusing speed since the moving elements are heavier, but Pentax presumably designed the AF motors to be strong enough to achieve adequate times on lenses with lots of moving elements. i was surprised how fast the AF worked on my Sigma 50-500. doesn't feel any different in speed from my FA 24-90. Herb - Original Message - From: Keith Whaley [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2003 5:19 PM Subject: Re: FA* lenses Then why the statement They are faster than non-FA* lenses? keith
Re: FA* Lenses
Some may not realize, but with the focus clutch design, you can manually focus the FA * lenses by simply pulling the clutch and focusing - you don't have to disengage the body af switch. Can be very handy for touch up focusing - much more like the Canon USM lenses. This also tends to make FA* lenses much nicer to focus manually on ~manual~ focus bodies (which don't possess a manual/autofocus switch), as well. None of that silly whirring . . . Fred
Re: FA* Lenses
WHAT!!!??? There are about 150 PDMLer's who would disagree with you there, I won't be surprised. This is not the 1st time, and won't be the last either. :-) Mr. Chan. It has been voted the most popular Pentax lens ever on several polls, and it is my personal favorite lens. It is very sharp, and contrasty, and at f8 it is sharp from 1.2 feet to The Sigma 24/2.8 has higher contrast if it matters. Don't get me wrong, I don't think the FA*24 sucks, just not as great as many claimed. infinity. And I have a bunch of 16x20's to prove it, the quality of which approaches medium format. It is even sharp mounted backwards as a 4:1 macro if you can control the focus with a geared head or macro rail set. Your comments on the FA* 85 are somewhat exaggerated, also. It is optimized for close distances, as it is a specialized portrait lens, and it is softer at or near infinity than in its optimal range, but it definitely does not 'suck' at any distance. And at portrait distances it is superb. I think it sucks at near infinity, and I found that out when I was doing landscape with it. The FA77 is better performer overall. If it was optimized for near distance only, at least Pentax should say so. At least nobody would expect a $8xx lens would perform well at near distance only. We are all entitled to our opinions, but geez! Just trying to keep the list alive... :-) Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
Re: FA* Lenses
I have to second Cameron here. Having owned both of those lenses, I concur with his conclusions. Alan, you have been known to have more than average trouble with Pentax equipment (who knows why?). It would seem that your experience is not the norm. At least these 2 lenses I owned (don't hv the 85 anymore) are/were trouble free. Sample variation if you insist. :-) Alan Chan http://www.pbase.com/wlachan _ Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Re: FA* lenses build quality details
I do not know about the inside, but the plastic aperture rings of the FA* lenses that I own (24/2, 200/2.8, 300/f4.5) with numbers merely printed on them has always been a nuisance to me. The focusing rings probably are made of plastic, too. The distance scale windows are plastic, of course, and what is beneath them it is just some paper with numbers printed on it, isn't it? However, the weakest point is the silver barrel colour that is scratched rather easily, as we have discussed her before. I believe the focus ring of the 24 is plastic, but the 85 200 are metal. Never own the FA*300 so don't know (mine is F*). From what I have read so far, the white finish on the Canon L lenses isn't very scratch resistance either, so to my F*300/4.5. But it is true that the silver finish of the FA* lenses is so attractive that it makes you nervious. AFAIK, inner mechanisms of FA* lenses were made of metal. 2 thing I don't like about FA* lenses are the stupid silver metal focus scale window frame, and the dust sucking feature (why can't they be better sealed from dust? FA*24/2 is quite dust resistance however). The limited lenses have none of these weeknesses. Their only problem is that the bigger resistance that they offer for good manual focusing makes them slow in AF mode (simimlar to the F series lenses). I used to believe the silver Limited lenses were scratch resistance, until I have discovered my 43/1.9 has a long scratch on it, or what appear to be a long crack on the finish. I have no idea why it was there. I always babe my gears. Basically the design of Limited lenses is like the M-series lenses with A setting and autofocus. My 43/1.9 has a little play on the focus ring and it's enough to affect the aperture blades position a little. However, it doesn't seem to cause any practical difference. The 43/1.9 is quite well sealed and inside still free from dust after 3 years. The 77/1.8 has the firm but loose focus feel. I cannot spot any flaw with it, except it sucks lots of dust. The very first time I used it few years ago, the inner elements became quite dusty already (I swear it was perfectly cleaned when I bought it in Japan). It is now very dusty, in fact, my most dusty lens ever (FA*85/1.4 come 2nd). regards, Alan Chan _ Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband. http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
Re: FA lenses aperture reporting
Alan Chan wrote: But then it's just a displayed value, and doesn't affect the accuracy of the metering at all. I assume the body will use this info to set the shutter speed when in A mode, I assume it is stepless. The amount by which the mount moves is miniscule so I doubt it will really affect the shutter speed. Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ (out of date) - 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 .
Re: FA lenses aperture reporting
I've taken to setting the aperture manually rather than using Hyper Program mode. My glasses get in the way of my right thumb when using the grip strap, and I'm having suspicions about the accuracy of the body setting the aperture. When the lens was set to 'A', the actual aperture controlled by the Z-1p could be off by up to 1/2 stop. I did some visual tests and found this out. For this reason, I usually use the aperture rings to set the aperture. Anyway, when using manual focus lenses I find that the aperture readout on the body rarely matches the setting. Its usually 1/2-stop out, so f/4.5 will read as f/5.6. Today I noticed that the Z-1p consistentlly reports the correct aperture setting with FA lenses. So does the lens actually communicate this information to the body electronically? When the lens was set to 'A', the lens communicates with the camera electrinocally. However, the position of the aperture resistor coupling below the camera mount would affect the displayed aperture of the Z-1p when the lens was set to non-'A' position. But this does not affect the chosen shutter speed accuracy. regards, Alan Chan _ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx - 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 .
Re: FA lenses aperture reporting
Alan Chan wrote: I do not know if I understand correctly. As I can observed, the aperture read out has no effect on the actual exposure accuracy. It is just a value guessed by the camera and displayed in the viewfinder LCD. The chosen shutter speed is determined solely by the EV level and position of the contact on the variable aperture resistor. Due to the mechanical manufacturing tolerance differences, some cameras or lenses may be off a little bit. That was what I was thinking. Yes. But when the F/FA lenses were set other than 'A', I believe the position of the aperture resistor coupling makes the difference too. For instance, if you set the lens at f5.6, grip the lens and try to rotate, the read out may become f4.5 or f6.7 (vary from lens to lens and camera to camera). You appear to be correct here. I just tried it with the Z-1p and the 400mm. Twisting the body/lens changes the reading by half a stop in one direction. F/8 will read correctly if twisted one way but will read f/9.5 when twisted the other. So I was incorrect yesterday. The camera/lens junction is barely moving BTW - it is definitely not loose so the actual exposure error is likely to be minimal. I hope. I didn't check to see if the shutter speed changed or not. I'm becoming a bit too tempted to look at the MZ-S... Cheers, - Dave http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ (out of date) - 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 .
Re: FA lenses aperture reporting
I'm becoming a bit too tempted to look at the MZ-S... I don't think this particular problem is Z-1p related, but the problem of the K mount design. Just that in the good old days, for instance, Super A/Program, when the lens was set manually (other than 'A'), the camera didn't display the chosen f-stop so we thought they were alright. The same characteristic could be there too, just that we had no way to know (or care). But then it's just a displayed value, and doesn't affect the accuracy of the metering at all. regards, Alan Chan _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com - 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 .
Re: FA lenses aperture reporting
On 10 Jul 2002 at 0:07, Alan Chan wrote: When the lens was set to 'A', the lens communicates with the camera electrinocally. However, the position of the aperture resistor coupling below the camera mount would affect the displayed aperture of the Z-1p when the lens was set to non-'A' position. But this does not affect the chosen shutter speed accuracy. Just to shed a little more light on the aperture position sensor, it's not a continuously variable resistor in the normal sense of the word. It is in fact a resistor ladder with taps along the series string terminating in gold printed contacts, it appears to provide 1/6 stop increments (MX aperture position sensor). Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html - 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 .
Re: FA lenses aperture reporting
David, this sounds like bad news. The mechanical aperture coupling on your PZ-1p appears to have shifted. Exposure should be affected with all manual lenses. However, it should expose correctly with F/FA lenses, as these transmit indeed the aperture value as part of the digital protocol. Servus, Alin DAM Anyway, when using manual focus lenses I find that the aperture readout DAM on the body rarely matches the setting. Its usually 1/2-stop out, so DAM f/4.5 will read as f/5.6. DAM Today I noticed that the Z-1p consistentlly reports the correct aperture DAM setting with FA lenses. So does the lens actually communicate this DAM information to the body electronically? - 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 .
Re: FA lenses aperture reporting
David, this sounds like bad news. The mechanical aperture coupling on your PZ-1p appears to have shifted. Exposure should be affected with all manual lenses. However, it should expose correctly with F/FA lenses, as these transmit indeed the aperture value as part of the digital protocol. I do not know if I understand correctly. As I can observed, the aperture read out has no effect on the actual exposure accuracy. It is just a value guessed by the camera and displayed in the viewfinder LCD. The chosen shutter speed is determined solely by the EV level and position of the contact on the variable aperture resistor. Due to the mechanical manufacturing tolerance differences, some cameras or lenses may be off a little bit. DAM So does the lens actually communicate this DAM information to the body electronically? Yes. But when the F/FA lenses were set other than 'A', I believe the position of the aperture resistor coupling makes the difference too. For instance, if you set the lens at f5.6, grip the lens and try to rotate, the read out may become f4.5 or f6.7 (vary from lens to lens and camera to camera). regards, Alan Chan _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com - 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 .
Re: FA* Lenses: Do you think we will see any more...
I'm not too sure that powerzoom would work well with an FA*50mm f/1.2, but I'd be happy to have one even without powerzoom. ;-) Len --- The limiteds are lovely but limited. I for one hope the FA* series continues, especially WITH powerzoom. Cameron - - 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 .
Re: FA* 28-70/2.8 (WAS-Re: FA* Lenses)
Nicholas Wright wrote: (snip) I have the f4 and am not dissapointed with it (I love how small it is), I'd just like the extra speed when I need it, but I also have a big penchant for Pentax glass(snip) Right, then you're just the person to answer my question: does the 28~70/4 vignette with the RTF? I know the 28~70/2.8 does. Thanks, RK - 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 .
Re: FA* 28-70/2.8 (WAS-Re: FA* Lenses)
Mine doesnt, its a pretty short lense, so i cant see why it would. I use it with a MZ5n. - Original Message - From: RK [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, August 05, 2001 6:29 PM Subject: Re: FA* 28-70/2.8 (WAS-Re: FA* Lenses) Nicholas Wright wrote: (snip) I have the f4 and am not dissapointed with it (I love how small it is), I'd just like the extra speed when I need it, but I also have a big penchant for Pentax glass(snip) Right, then you're just the person to answer my question: does the 28~70/4 vignette with the RTF? I know the 28~70/2.8 does. Thanks, RK - 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 . - 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 .
Re: FA* Lenses
Okay, call me a total moron but I thought the FA* lenses had plastic barrels. A camera store I stopped by today had the FA* 300/4.5, all metal. Are all the FA* (ie- 24/2; 28-70/2.8; etc) lenses metal? Thanks for answering, sorry it's a stupid question... :) It's true for 24/2. and 85/1.4. Not sure about others. The 28-70/2.8 has a metal outer barrel. This lens is not an IF design, so it has an inner barrel which holds the front lens elements. The inner barrel, which extends and rotates as the lens zooms and focuses, is plastic (including plastic threads). The 80-200/2.8 is metal. This lens is an IF design. I haven't actually handled any of the big glass FA* lenses, but they must be made of metal as well --Mark - 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 .
Re: FA* 28-70/2.8 (WAS-Re: FA* Lenses)
Nicholas wrote: I know you've said bad things about this lens before, which surprises me since you are such an outspoken Pentax person. :) Does the plastic barrel really make that big a difference with this lens? Its really more complicated than that. The lens is a fusion of great built quality with some pretty obvious compromises done in order for the power zoom and AF to be able to do its job. On many samples the power zoom is unable to zoom past the 35mm setting without the help of gravity; that is pointing the lens downwards. This lens really should have had inner focusing design like the FA* 80-200/2.8. I've seen someone actually remark that the 28-70/4 is better built than the 2.8. Is this true? That depends on how you define built quality. I would say that the FA* is more delicate due to its much more complicated design and extra size/weight. However, the metal parts on the FA* lens is really thick and solid but then no chain is stronger than the weakest link and herein lies the problem with the FA*. Anyway, I know I just saw the answer to my next question very recently so I'm sorry to ask it again; but, what brands do you recommend for a 28-70/2.8? Thanks! I can't reccomend anything cause I don't really know. The Tokina has a good reputation though, but I have no experience with it. Pål - 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 .
Re: FA* 28-70/2.8 (WAS-Re: FA* Lenses)
--- Pål_Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nicholas wrote: I know you've said bad things about this lens before, which surprises me since you are such an outspoken Pentax person. :) Does the plastic barrel really make that big a difference with this lens? Its really more complicated than that. The lens is a fusion of great built quality with some pretty obvious compromises done in order for the power zoom and AF to be able to do its job. On many samples the power zoom is unable to zoom past the 35mm setting without the help of gravity; that is pointing the lens downwards. This lens really should have had inner focusing design like the FA* 80-200/2.8. Hi Pål, are you sure that this lens (28-70/2.8) is still being made like this? I think it is about 10 years ago when it was introduced. From your description it seems that this lens has such a big design flaw that it is virtually unusable. Such kind of things could have been been fixed in later models? Alexander __ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ - 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 .
Re: FA* 28-70/2.8 (WAS-Re: FA* Lenses)
Its really more complicated than that. The lens is a fusion of great built quality with some pretty obvious compromises done in order for the power zoom and AF to be able to do its job. On many samples the power zoom is unable to zoom past the 35mm setting without the help of gravity; that is pointing the lens downwards. This lens really should have had inner focusing design like the FA* 80-200/2.8. Pentax should have replaced this lens with an non-power-zoom design long ago, and make the lens simple, lighter, more reliable and cheaper. But then now is too late, I have already had an array or prime lenses which I like more. regards, Alan Chan _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp - 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 .
Re: FA* Lenses
Nicholas Wright asks: Okay, call me a total moron but I thought the FA* lenses had plastic barrels. A camera store I stopped by today had the FA* 300/4.5, all metal. Are all the FA* (ie- 24/2; 28-70/2.8; etc) lenses metal? Thanks for answering, sorry it's a stupid question... :) The FA* 24/2 is all-metal. Its hood is made of plastic and is the only part I've managed to break so far (Araldite is wonderful stuff). Cheers, - Dave David A. Mann, B.E. (Elec) http://www.digistar.com/~dmann/ Why is it that if an adult behaves like a child they lock him up, while children are allowed to run free on the streets? -- Garfield - 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 .
