DFA100 WR good or not?

Thanks John, that'll do for me!

Will be putting the FA in the market place very soon!

Danny I've no idea what you read in Johns comment though that make you want to trade.

Macro always fetch good money second hand and the prices have gone up, I think I could sell mine without any or little loss.

I do not take well to being called a liar Stefan.

I have asked the person who took the pictures for permission to post them here. If he agrees I will do so.

Sorry Oggy didn't mean to offend you, I'm not so graceful with my words as you guys are. No harm at all intended but would love to see some prove, I hope you can post them because from the comparison that I've seen there is not much between them but would love to have another reason to buy this lens.

John, yes you are correct, I forgot about the round diaphragm of the new lens.

I trust his judgement, as I have great respect for him when it comes to Pentax lenses.

Since when do we need a good reason to buy a lens?

I find the D-FA 100mm quite flimsy which is why I rarely use it, I wonder if the new W version is better made .. that would be enough for me.

Actually just the fact its a macro lens would probably swing it anyway.

At F2.8 there is nothing in it. At F5.6 you can see a more rounded Bokeh with the WR model, but only just.
I suppose it depends on what you are going to use the 100mm for. If you are going to be out and about in all weathers then the WR model is going to be more suitable. Otherwise it might be better to go for the "standard" lens and save money.
In the meantime, I am going to stick with my Sigma 105mm EX Macro.

yes me too, John knows a lot about lenses but he said there are the same in quality so that's where my understanding ends.
If it was the DFA WR then of course the build quality is something to upgrade for.

Same here and I've read it's very nice to use the manual focus as well and that also get me tempted, if only the quality of the optics improved a little bit now I find it hard to justify the expense...

Let's hope Oggy has some good comparison photos

But the WR version has no aperture ring...

I do hope Oggy does not mind, I am the one with a few comparison shots between both WR and non WR version of the DFA100.


K-7, f/2.8, 6s, 100iso

DFA 100/2.8 (click on the photo to see it in full res)



DFA 100/2.8 WR




I wanted to see the difference due to the rounded aperture blades of the new WR lens. I set the camera to MF, pointed the camera to a few red LEDs and set the focusing ring to about 1m, in order to have the LEDs well out of focus:

K-7, DFA 100/2.8, f/4.5



K-7, DFA 100/2.8 WR, f/4.5





Here is an assembled photo showing both lenses side by side. From the build quality and feeling, the DFA 100/2.8 WR is much closer to the DA35/2.8 limited than to the older DFA100/2.8




Hope it helps...