There are some sample images here:
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/pentax/smc_da_40_28_limited
and
http://www.pbase.com/cameras/pentax/smc_pfa_43_19_limited

There may be better examples around though
Matt

PygmyTwittle,
If you run the PEF file through Adobe's free stand-alone DNG converter it'll shrink them significantly.
Send them one at a time to my Hotmail address just in case things go wrong
I'll let you know what I find!
Matt

Welcome to the board

Just a thought - all results from a CCD are a little soft, even with a super sharp lens. If you shoot RAW, then you can give a little "oomph" with my Sharpen-O-Matic action for Photoshop. Works a treat

From your image, it looks like you have got some very nice results indeed!

The DA40 and FA43 are not the same, AFAIK. The Limited series lenses have 9 aperture blades and ghostless coatings. But, having said that the DA series (like the DA16-45 you mentioned that I have) can be excellent indeed!

There's a whole set of requirements for sharpness - not just the lens itself. Make sure you're stopped down (preferably to the lens sweet spot, or MTF setting, usually f5.6 to f. Use a tripod for best stability etc etc.

If you want a second opinion, feel free to email me a full size JPG (or Adobe DNG RAW) and I'll tell you what I reckon the problem is
Matt

Mike,
The 1.7xAF disengages the lens' focus, and it focuses internally.
In many ways that's a benefit because there's only a small amount of glass to move. But you have to just watch that the lens itself doesn't creep, or get accidentally moved. Adjusting the lens focus manually changes the range that the 1.7xAF can focus within.
It's great in practice but hard to explain!
Hope that helps!
Matt

Just posted a shot taken with the Pentax 1.7x AF convertor on the SMC-FA 80-320mm
http://www.ephotozine.com/gallery/showlargepic.cfm?photoid=447534&start=0&am...

The contrast was reduced quite a bit by the convertor, but Capture One and Photoshop rescued the image. I was mighty pleased with the sharpness, given the riddiculous focal length! (On a Manfrotto MN444 tripod)

Matt

Certainly no issues with the Pentax 1.7xAF adapter. The DA lenses have regular couplings - they just don't have the recessed "finger" that moves with the aperture ring telling the body where the ring is. In all other respects the mount is the same.
Matt

John.
The short answer is yes

There are several teleconvertors available for Pentax K-mount. Look for an autofocus K mount and you can't go far wrong. (I have the Pentax 1.7xAF convertor which also allows autofocus when using older manual focus lenses. The quality is pretty good indeed.) There are third party models from Kenko, Sigma and the like.

Extension tubes are also available. The third party ones are probably best (since the original Pentax ones didn't couple the electrical contacts). I picked up a set of three second hand from Jessops for about £20.

Again, close up filters are available - they just fit on the front of the lens so you'll need to know the filter thread size. Extension tubes tend to give better results, but close up filters are often more convenient and allow autofocus.

Hope that helps!
Matt

Oh wow! That's a great shot! Love the DoF too and the rich colours!
Matt

Fast lenses -

Advantages
* Work in darker surroundings
* Able to use faster shutter speeds
* Lower f-stops can isolate the subject more effectively

Disadvantages
* Heavier
* Expensive
* Can be soft (ie not as sharp)
* Focus becomes more critical at lower f-stops

It depends what you want to do. Fast lenses are not always better. I've had fast (non-Pentax) lenses that had problems with flare and sharpness. I now have a couple of fast Pentax lenses (eg 50mm/f1.4) that are just amazing.

Regarding constant aperture zooms - if you use automatic exposure modes, and/or TTL flash then there's not really a problem at all. Constant aperture zooms are perhaps more difficult to make, and are therefore often more expensive.

If you need fast glass - then there's no alternative.
If you're hoping to get good glass, then fast is not necessarily the answer. You have to consider the whole characteristics: bokeh, flare, colour, contrast, resolution - and not just speed.

Hope that helps
Matt

PS: I moved the topic as it suited the section "Pentax Lenses" more

I'm sure the 50-200 is better.

It depends what you're looking for. If you want a brighter lens, then Sigma do a 70-200 f2.8 - but you might choke when you see the price. Pentax do an 80-200 f2.8 - but you'll die when you see the price, should you ever be lucky enough to find one for sale!
The Pentax has the legendary SMC coating - and this shouldn't be underestimated. Having tried several other makes, I've settled on 100% Pentax lenses. However, I know many are satisfied with third party lenses.
But for compactness, optical clarity, and cost - I think the Pentax is pretty hard to beat!

(I personally have the Pentax SMC-FA 80-320 which I got very reasonably second hand, and fits in with the other lenses I already have, but the 50-200 is still very tempting).

Hope that helps,
Matt