DFA100 WR good or not?

Some photos with the DFA100WR link

I can still not say if the bokeh is better or not, what do you think?

Has anyone handled the lens, the build quality of the DFA100 isn't super you see so some feedback on that would be great.

As far as I know, the DFA100 f2.8 WR is exactly the same lens formula as the previous DFA100 f2.8 macro which has superb sharpness and excellent bokeh. I would say that the bokeh should be the same.

I thought the WR lens had a rounder diaphragm. This would affect the rendering of the out of focus areas.

Would really like to know if anyone on here has one, and what their experiences are with it, as I want one!

Having had a quick play with one at SRS and comparing it to my FA 100 Macro, the fact that it seemed half the size, felt great, has weather sealing and works better with the macro flash really has me sold!

The only thing I am uncertain of is the image quality. Will I be getting a performance gain or hit, and if so will I even be able to notice it? It will be bought soon, but would like to hear some first hand experiences first if possible.

Thank you guys

Yeah that's true but the effect is minimum form all the pictures I gathered, only when you can see a clear bokeh blob, disc of confusion is a better word then you see it are rounded blades for the rest you can't tell them apart.
The light distribution in the disk so bokeh is still the same because it uses the same lens formula.
And when you use the lens wide open it doesn't use the aperture blades at all and both lenses are round so precisely the same photos.
I had my hopes it would a bit more of an effect but by the looks of it it's only the build quality that makes me want it the most over the DFA100 I've now, the rounded blades are a plus but not something I would buy this lens for.

So how is the build quality?

I have seen side by side comparisons on another forum and there is a visible difference in bokeh between them, especially with small diameter bright objects in the OOF area.

Why does it work better with the macro flash?

I'd imagine that in order to be WR, the front element must not extend during focusing. Just speculating though as I own the non-WR version of this lens (and don't own a ringflash).

With the FA lens, you screw a ring on to the front element where a filter would go, so that the ring flash has something to attach to, so when you are focussing the ring flash moves in and out at the same time. It feels like a strain on autofocus!

With the DFA you attach what looks more like a lens hood onto the actual body of the lens, then the ring flash attaches to that. When focussing, the lens moves freely, whilst the flash stays in a fixed position.

Hope I've explained that well enough!

edit: just seen the above post, and yes, the front element does extend whilst focussing on the WR lens.

The DFA WR and non WR are both just as suited for the pentax ring flash, it use the hood bayonet with those lenses I believe.

Oggy that not true, you only see it with the bright dics, here see for yourself.
The bright discs only look more round nothing more nothing less, when you can't make out a clear disc the bokeh is the same.

We have the FA and D-FA 100mm macro lenses, and in terms of quality there's nothing to choose between them. The limiting factor is our technique.

Indeed John but it's never a sin to have something you like.
I'm sure you could appreciate the build quality of the WR lens.

I'm sure I could and if I were to be buying new at this moment then that's the one I would go for.

I just find 100mm too short, I wish they had bought out a 150/200mm version.

It could just be my eyes but in terms of the comparisons above, whilst the out of focus areas appear to be the same, the in focus areas appear to have a bit more of a 3C quality about them in the non-WR pictures.

It's probably my eyes though.