Ther DA15 Limited is a superb lens in all departments, IMO. Small, beautifully built to limited standards, superb IQ in all aspects with a 3D look in many instances. See my DA15 gallery for some examples:

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/da15

Congratulations, Richard!

I don't think that I would opt for a rectalinear lens that was wider than 12mm anyway due to the stretched look of objects close to the edges as you pointed out with the boxes, so I applaud your selection.

Beautiful shot, Mike:

It's a tough ask to work out which lens always gives the best bokeh. I have many photos which I consider to be nice bokeh, but they don't always come from the same lens, it just depends on the circumstances, ie camera to subject distance, subject to background distance, type of background, aperture used and lighting etc. Here are a few samples:

FA*300 f4.5




I do find that the DFA100mm f2.8 macro has nice bokeh.







FA50 f1.4

Trust me, the DA*55 f1.4 is a better lens than the FA50 f1.4. I have both. It is sharper, has better contrast, has better bokeh and has that 3D look.

When I open up the images from the DA*55 in post process, I immediately get the wow factor, something I didn't really get with the FA50.

Yes, the DA*55 is expensive and there is the law of diminishing returns at work. The FA50 is possibly the best value for money lens out there, but if you can afford the extra, the DA*55 won't disappoint.

DA*55 gallery:

http://www.pbase.com/lance_b/da55

I wonder why we put so much faith in what a "professional" photographer tells us without question. I have a mechanic that I trust with many things, but I also question a few of the things he tells me and does. I don't always believe what my doctor tells me, in fact, there was a survey done recently asking doctors questions about general nutrition, exercise and other life skills and they found that they scored very poorly when compared to the general public!! So much for advising us on how to eat and exercise for a good quality long life!!

I guess I get a little suspicious when someone touts something as true just because a "pro" told him so.

I would suggest that whenever any "professional" tells you something, you take what they say on board but make up your own mind, get other opinions and trial their suggestions yourself.

I find this quite extraordinary.

I have the FA*28-70 f2.8 and the FA*80-200 f2.8 and find the IQ of these two lenses amazing. What I did find is that with the FA*80-200 f2.8 on my K10D that it back focused and I wonder if this is the reason for your dissatisfaction with it and maybe a few of your other lenses. I would seriously advise trying out a K20D or K-7 with focus adjustment feature and give these lenses a second chance. In fact, I would almost guarantee the fact that you have BF/FF issues with some of your lenses which can easily be remedied by the K20D or K-7. I would suggest that you try the K-7 as it's build quality, performance and feel is superb.

I think you will find that the FA*80-200 f2.8 is easily a march for the Canon 70-200 f2.8. If you go to Photozone and compare the resolution of the Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS USM to the Pentax FA*80-200 f2.8, you will see that there is barely anything seperating them as far as resolution is concerned. In fact the Pentax outresolves the Canon, but this may have a little to do with the fact that the Canon was tested on an 8Mp camera and the Pentax on a 10Mp camera. Full test here for Pentax and Canon lenses:
Pentax:
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/139-pentax-smc-fa-80-200mm-f28-if-ed-review--lab-...
Canon:
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/199-canon-ef-70-200mm-f28-usm-l-is-test-report...
Pentax:



Canon:



CA is much better on the Pentax, but vignetting is slightly better on the Canon.

It was a mistake and they have altered the discontinued lens list.

I have the FA*80-200 f2.8 and the FA*28-70 f2.8 and I can assure you, they are exemplary lenses for IQ. There is something about the look of the images that come from those lenses that is different to every other lens. Hard to put my finger on, but all I can say is that the IQ is fantastic.

One aspect of these two lenses that I also like is the power zoom feature. Rather than having to twist the zoom ring through a large range for most other manual zooms, all that is required with these two lenses is a small twist of the zoom ring and the lens zooms. There are 3 speeds to the zoom that can be selected, slow, medium and fast just depending on how far you turn the zoom ring. It really works very well when you are zooming and trying to keep your subject in the frame, all very descrete and smooth. With a manual zoom, you can/may lose your subject simply because you may need to twist your hand around the lens barrel when zooming.

Anyway, if Pentax ever reintroduced the FA*80-200 f2.8, I am sure it would be a big hit. The FA*28-70 f2.8 is a bit of an odd-bod range for APS C, but it would be fine on a FF Pentax.

I think there was talk that the reason they are not re-introduced is because they use lead in their elements and this is a no-no in this modern era. Why, I have no idea as I hardly think lead mixed in glass would be harmful to anyone. Don't they still put lead in crystal glassware that we drink out of.

The only issue that I had with my K10D was that I had lenses which were slightly off as far as BF and/or FF was concerned. All other aspects of the K10D, including the IQ, were excellent. When the K20D came along and graced us with the AF adjustment feature, I was in heaven. So, if you feel as though you are not getting the crisp shots that you think you should, it could very well be that fact that your lens may suffer from a small amount BF or FF. It is amazing what a correctly adjusted lens can do for your photos.