28mm F2.8 - F vs FA ?

[Adam-T]

They did it for £75 to the door - I hope it's as good as Viking's sample and not like my A lens was

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 

[Anastigmat]

I was very happy with my FA 28 f/2.8, but I sold it because I felt it
had limited use on my APS-C digital. Back in the old film days, the
older F actually had better reputation than the FA, not all was happy
with the change of optical design. Now in the digital era, the FA has
better reputation than F. Quite funny.

Look at the numbers, photodo gives the FA a 3.8 rating based on MTF tests, and it gives the F a 3.2 rating. Unless there was a mistake the FA is the better lens. The FA has the aspherical lens element and AL designation. It is an effective change in design because it works.

F has same optical design as A 28 f/2.8.
--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo

If and when the Full Frame Pentax and/or Samsung becomes available, the value of the FA will soar. Right now, it is not cheap either. However, you are correct that the 28mm has limited use, even on a full frame because it is just not all that wide. A 24mm is more useful, even on film cameras.

 

[Anastigmat]

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=27825137

My post in that thread

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=27824083
--
Thommo
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jthommo101/

 

[Anastigmat]

The Sigma AF 24mm f2.8 gets better ratings than either the FA or F 28mm and it is more useful on a DSLR. Many Pentax users are aware of the excellence of the Sigma. Recent eBay auctions of the Sigma has never ended in the lens being sold for less than $100 if it is a Pentax mount, but routinely sells for much less in other mounts. In Canon EF mount, this lens sells for very little, because all that this lens will do on a late model Canon is to give an Err 99 message.

The only 28mm F2.8 AF pentax I've used is the A model and quite
frankly I wasn't impressed at all wide open - I know that 28 F2.8s
aren't the most magnificent lenses out there (the C&N ones are pretty
mediocre too) but the Pentax FA seems to get better reports than
nost AF 28s... I was wondering if the F model was the same optically
(with the Aspherical elements) or was just the crappy A model with an
AF drive added ...
I ask because I've been offered a 28 F model for Ma as a compact fast
aperture rig on her K100D and it's not particularily cheap and she
doesn't like manually focussing lenses (she's 80), Heck I don't like
MFing 28mm lenses either !! .. is it the same as the FA or the
dissappointing A model ??

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 

[Anastigmat]

Practically all test sites test only a single sample. If lens to lens variations are so great (which means terrible quality control), then chances are that most copies are bad, and the chance of getting a bad copy far outweighs the chance of getting a good copy. If quality control is good, then sample to sample variations would be minimal, and the sample should be representative of the lens overall.

In either case, a single lens can be representative of what the ordinary buyer can expect when he/she buys one. Of course, an occasional bad copy may be encountered from any lens maker, so most test sites will request a second sample if the first one appears faulty. And if the second sample is bad, then the lens or its quality control is unquestionably bad.

PhotoDo's old reports vary on copies as like DPR they only ever
tested one, I never took them as Gospel but thanks for the link

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 

[Adam-T]

The Sigma AF 24mm f2.8 gets better ratings than either the FA or F
28mm and it is more useful on a DSLR.

I know, I've had the Infamous "Superwide-II" in Canon (Still have, though only works wideopen on the 1DS2), Nikon and Sigma mounts and it stands up to pixel peeping full frame on a 1DS which is more than can be said for the F1.8 EX version even at F5.6 let alone F2.8 ..

It's a moot point because I've never seen it in pentax AF fit ever - Real Pentax AF Primes are as rare as hell here let alone hidden-Gem Vintage Sigmas such as the Superwide-II, 300 F4 APO Macro and 400 F5.6 APO Telemacro..

There's a state of affairs here where a Manual Focus Pentax A 50mm F1.7 goes for the same money as an AF Minolta or Nikon and an F one goes for DOUBLE that (more than a new Nikon or Canon 50 AF) , an FA is almost as much as a new 1.4 !!! ..

The sad part is that Pentax AF cameras sold very poorly in the UK, everyone was using Canon, Nikon or manual Pentax 35mms and the result is a drought of Legacy AF glass here

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 

[viking79]

Hehe, I hope so too!

Some people don't like this focal length on digital, but it is just about the perfect normal, with equivalent focal length as the 43mm ltd.

That is a good price vs what they sell for on eBay if you just let bidding run free.

Here are the pics, only images 0429 and 0433 (the second of each duplicate) are at F8, everything else is f2.8. Full size images are as links right under each picture. Only click those if you really want to see the 100% crop, as they are about 5 to 6 MB each.



http://homepage.mac.com/atastad/.Pictures/Pentax/ShotsForDpReview/F28mm/IMGP0412-2.jpg
Focus point was center top of fence.



http://homepage.mac.com/atastad/.Pictures/Pentax/ShotsForDpReview/F28mm/IMGP0416-2.jpg



http://homepage.mac.com/atastad/.Pictures/Pentax/ShotsForDpReview/F28mm/IMGP0417-2.jpg



http://homepage.mac.com/atastad/.Pictures/Pentax/ShotsForDpReview/F28mm/IMGP0418-2.jpg



http://homepage.mac.com/atastad/.Pictures/Pentax/ShotsForDpReview/F28mm/IMGP0420-2.jpg



http://homepage.mac.com/atastad/.Pictures/Pentax/ShotsForDpReview/F28mm/IMGP0423-2.jpg
Focus point was center top of first 0.



http://homepage.mac.com/atastad/.Pictures/Pentax/ShotsForDpReview/F28mm/IMGP0424-2.jpg
Focus point was edge of black truck.



http://homepage.mac.com/atastad/.Pictures/Pentax/ShotsForDpReview/F28mm/IMGP0429-2.jpg
Above was at f8.



http://homepage.mac.com/atastad/.Pictures/Pentax/ShotsForDpReview/F28mm/IMGP0430-2.jpg
Focus point was center edge of of white garage.



http://homepage.mac.com/atastad/.Pictures/Pentax/ShotsForDpReview/F28mm/IMGP0432-2.jpg
Focus point was near top third in the center where branch intersection occurs.



http://homepage.mac.com/atastad/.Pictures/Pentax/ShotsForDpReview/F28mm/IMGP0433-2.jpg
Above was at f8.

 

[Adam-T]

Looks great to me I REALLY hope it's as good as that one !!! - I'll give it a full test on the K10 as she'll be getting a K200 when the price drops ..

I prefer 24mm on APS cams as it gives around 35mm and usually have a 35 F2 in my pocket when shooting work stuff on FF - but beggars can't be choosers when it comes to affordable AF primes in pentax fit, those LTDs are very expensive in the UK and in some cases like the DA Pancake, more "Bling" than practical regardless of how sharp they are - fast aperture speaks volumes in primes as does Value for money..

IMO what's needed is a re-introduction of the FA 50 F1.7, FA 28 F2.8, FA 20 F2.8, an AF 24mm FA (don't remember one) and the FA 85 F1.4 .. Canon and Nikon have all of these as well as a full run of FF legacy zooms and Pentax used to make them..

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 

[BrettRTurner]

... I'd prefer a Sigma 24mm F2.8 Superwide II if they did it in PK AF,
I have it in Canon, had it in Nikon and it's superb even wide open
(better FOV than a 28 on APS too)

They do make it. I got one a year ago off eBay all the way from Greece. Image quality is every bit as good as it was for you on C and N.

Mine likes to overexpose for some reason; I have to dial in EV -.7 pretty regularly. But the FOV is wonderful, the resolution is everything you could want, minimum focus distancei is very short---it's effectively a 24mm macro lens---and it's small enough to put in your pocket. A great lens.

--
Brett Turner
Pentax K100D
bturner.zenfolio.com

 

[Adam-T]

Mine likes to overexpose for some reason;

All old Sigmas do that in all mounts - they expose properly wideopen and overexpose when stopping down

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 

[.Sam.]

I didn't read all the above replies... ;-)

I used to have an F-28mm/2.8 and the image quality was not on par with my other primes. The FA has been reported to be much better.

--
.Sam.

Life: http://www.shadzee.com/ - Photos: http://www.shadzee.com/photoblog/

 

[Miguel J Princz]

I use a FA 28mm f/2,8 and find it very good, very sharp.

 

[Adam-T]

Seems to be as good as Vikings . tack sharp in the middle wideopen, only a touch softer at the extreme borders - I'd say it was a lot better than the Minolta version which was in turn quite a bit better than the Canon and Nikons ..

Of course sample variation comes into play but it's a winner and nicely compact too - as compact a lens as I'd want on the K10

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 

[Roland Mabo]

The general consensus among Pentax users in the late 90's was that the F was a better design than the FA. When I bought the FA 28 instead of the F 28, this choice was questioned by many. The recommendation was to get the F or A because the FA was an inferior design. Even if the FA is technically better, many users liked the F or A better. I remember I got some messages about the F and A having a more "organic" quality to the images than the FA.

Now, I have the M 28 f/2.8, version 2 and this is supposed to have the same optical design as the A and F. It is clearly warmer in it's output than the cooler FA, so yes the M creates images with more character. The FA being more neutral.
This is when compared on film, Agfa RSX.

But on digital, the difference in colour rendition and character seems less obvious or less important than on slide film.
--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo

 

[Adam-T]

Took it out in the field as I don't have a lot to do today (just a couple of Wedd Albums to assemble) and put the F28 though its paces.. it's very sure footed on the K10 and you don't have to focus on something deliberately mid-way or close range like the 18-55 Mk2 (which can get tricky to get centre AND edges sharp even at F8 on complex scenes) - pretty much a P&S lens in nice weather at F5.6 and even at F2.8 it's a lot more accurate than I thought the K10 capable of !!

As for the FA model, I've not used it but Aspherical Elements aren't always a good thing unless they're GROUND Asp optics and very very few lenses have Ground Aspherical glass in them, they're usually the Hybrid, Plastic / glass laminate which varies in quality -- as someone pointed out, Aspherical elements are usually there in modern lenses to reduce the number of elements so they can make a lens cheaper or smaller (and the FA series in general seemed to be a cheapening exercise when you compare the build of the non-* zooms to the better made F variants) ..

Anyway the chances of comparing top samples of both the F and FA are remote because BOTH lenses are like Hens teeth (in the UK at least) and the F is certainly more than up to the task.. I have to say that it's the best 28mm Prime I've used beating the Canon 28 F1.8 USM by quite a margin and all the F2.8 ones from Canon, Nikon, Minolta and of course that dreadful A model I had (Which in retrospect MUST have been a dud copy) ..

F28 at F5.6



--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 

[Roland Mabo]

I have the Sigma AF 24 f/2.8 II - it is a nice lens, but with a cooler colour temperature than the FA 28 f/2.8 (which is already cooler than my M 28 f/2.8). In use, the Sigma shows more flare than my Pentax lenses.
--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo

 

[Adam-T]

I have the Sigma AF 24 f/2.8 II - it is a nice lens

I currently have it in Canon, have had it in SA and N too - Agreed about the performance, I rank it higher than the C&N OEM F2.8 24s, yes it can flare and also has that irritating old-Sigma issue of overexposing when stopped down

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 

[viking79]

Beautiful shot, and I am glad you got a good sample! I was afraid you might come looking for me if you got another dud

It really is a nice compact lens. Not quite DA Limited compact, but not big either.

Eric

 

[Adam-T]

Beautiful shot, and I am glad you got a good sample! I was afraid
you might come looking for me if you got another dud

LOL - No - your shots were Proof that good ones exist, you made no guarantees that they made more than ONE good one ;-)

It really is a nice compact lens. Not quite DA Limited compact, but
not big either.

Close enough for Jazz , a lot Cheaper and FF ready . Thanks Erik for your help, I'd have written the "F" off on the grounds that it was A optics without your shots - It's superbly sharp on the K10 so will be even more "P&S Like" for Ma on the little K100

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

 

[Adam-T]

Pics I took of the lens itself in case anyone is interested ..



--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist