Lens Comparison - Advice needed

Dan, thank you so much for this.

John, I know they are huge files, but because there is a lot of money on the plate, I really appreciate your advise with a thorough analysis, which can (unfortunately) only be done with the full res. files.

What I am trying to establish here, is if there is such a difference in the rendition, sharpness, bokeh, etc. of these two lenses, to justify owning both, or if the difference is so minimal at this focal lenght (across the aperture range) that I will have to consider the other characteristics of the 2 lenses, and if its still worth keeping them.

#1 for me, it has better colour rendition and is more contrasty, but the difference is so minimal, I'd sell the one that is likely to make the most money by selling it, or keep the one that is likely to make most money from selling the photo's it produces.

Not much to choose between them IQ wise.

Hope that helps.

it surely does. thank you very much!

A few more comments and i'll spice it up, telling what lenses we are talking about!

I'll be having a look later....

Ok, because its too complicated to download the very large files, I am now re-attaching the jpgs from photobucket. Hope it will be easier to judge with these size photographs.

Lens 1 f2.8
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/Lens1f28.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 2 f2.8
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/Lens2f28.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 1 f5.6
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/Lens1f56.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 2 f5.6
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/Lens2f56.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 1 f8
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/Lens1f8.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 2 f8
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/Lens2f8.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 1 f22
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/Lens1f22.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 2 f22
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/Lens2f22.jpg[/IMG]

My initial reaction to these is that Lens 1 seems very slightly better, but it really depends on how they both perform generally. CA aside, maybe for more usual subjects one would be clearly better than the other.

For example, a front lit bit of architecture, or a portrait. I'd really want to use the lenses and see how they fared with a variety of subjecta.

This test shows up some properties, but doesn't show us resolution, contrast with normal subjects, even sharpness as the subject is substantially through glass.

If it's very close, other considerations will be common filter sizes with other lenses owned, close focusing ability, compactness, or even matching ergonomically with the rest of your lenses.

Hope those initial thoughts help a little.

THey certainly do.

I am about to do another test shot, and will post it soon.

FWIW

number 1 looks very slighly under exposed compared to number 2

number 1 looks slightly sharper

For all practical purposes by F5.6 little to no difference between them.


Hope this helps - Steve

Thank you steve,

I am not too bothered about the exposure, because it is all shot in AV.

Here is another scene, very different from the first.
All shots are focused on the centre AF point - on the left side of the nose of the bear!

Lens 1 f2.8
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/_IGP5811.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 2 f2.8
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/_IGP5816.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 1 f4
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/_IGP5812.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 2 f4
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/_IGP5817.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 1 f8
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/_IGP5813.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 2 f8
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/_IGP5818.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 1 f16
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/_IGP5814.jpg[/IMG]

Lens 2 f16
[IMG]http://i517.photobucket.com/albums/u332/nathanever82/_IGP5819.jpg[/IMG]


THank you again for your help here!

Still going with Lens 1, but not much in it. Your target is unfortunately focused on the nose of the bear, which is the most difficult part to judge by. Perhaps it it were focused on a flat subject with lots of detail (newspaper page?) then we could see how crisp it was?

Well number 1 still does it for me. It seems a tad sharper and at 2.8 the "bokeh" on the 7 of diamonds looks better. ( shallower depth of field?)
But I wouldn't feel handicapped using either one!
Ok,
spill the beans........

not yet...

Based on these limited tests, I'd probably go with Lens #1.
However, as I've found there's more to a lens than sharpness and bokeh (in these circumstances).

I once did a casual test between the FA 31 Ltd, and the FA24-90 and was pleasantly surprised by the 24-90. Certainly saved me a lot of angst over trying to save up However, the test I did was essentially a sharpness test - shot at f/8 IIRC. The 24-90 stood up extremely well, and gave me a new insight into its abilities.

That said, there are situations where there the differences may show up. For example:
* Bright specular bokeh. For instance, distant lights, or highlights on leaves.
* Difference in bokeh between near and far out of focus items (the DA*50-135 is superb for far out of focus, but can produce "busy" bokeh for near items).
* Difference in front and rear bokeh.

Then there is the overall handling, the filter sizes, the dimensions of the lens itself (e.g. the DA55-300 vs FA80-320), etc.

Tough one to choose Nathan!

As it happens, I have a little collection of Pentax lenses that are probably going to have to be sold to fund other things... it's a real pain deciding what's to go as they all have their individual merits

Matt

Ok I'm guessing 31 and 35 ltd's .....

It is a very difficult one indeed. ANd Matt, as you say, the conditions to assess the quality produced by a lens are so varied, that it is very very hard to make a fair decision.

So the story goes like this;

Lens number 2 is the DA*16-50 @ 31mm. I have bought this lens for work, without even thinking about it. I was immediately shocked at the quality across the focal lenghts, and since i've had it, I very often use it for work, and leisure shooting. Its a versatile lens, it does the job, and I love it!

The other lens (Number 1 in all test shots) is the 31mm ltd. I have lusted after it for a long long time, and saved for years to buy it. And I find myself not using it enough. I enjoy shooting with it, and I really enjoy the rendtion of the photographs it produces. But I am not in love with it.

POint is that I don't feel like i'm using it enough, and when I do need that focal lenght (photo-shoots or live-music) I always prefer the versatility of the DA*. The results are only marginally different, and whilst the 31 is IMO better at f2.8 and f.4, it is not sharp enough at f1.8, f2. If I take the lens out for a walk I will struggle to find difference wide open...

All this makes it a very expensive luxury to have...