06-10-2011, 04:39 AM
[quote name='Klaus' timestamp='1307603275' post='9083']
Pretty nice lens ...
[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/pentax/643-pentax300f4"]http://www.opticallimits.com/pentax/643-pentax300f4[/url]
[/quote]
Yes, and as usual, a very nice review. But as is all too usual for me, I'm confused. I have a copy of the F*300 f4.5, which I believe is optically identical to the FA*300 f4.5, which you've reviewed. When I look at the MTF graphs for the FA and DA lenses, looking only at the 'categories' of resolution, it seems they are similar, with the FA perhaps slightly better. But when I look at the LW/PH numbers, they are quite different, with those of the DA being substantially higher. Is this because of the higher resolution of the K5's sensor vs that of the K10D? Is there some way I could accurately compare their respective LW/PH numbers?
Pretty nice lens ...
[url="http://www.opticallimits.com/pentax/643-pentax300f4"]http://www.opticallimits.com/pentax/643-pentax300f4[/url]
[/quote]
Yes, and as usual, a very nice review. But as is all too usual for me, I'm confused. I have a copy of the F*300 f4.5, which I believe is optically identical to the FA*300 f4.5, which you've reviewed. When I look at the MTF graphs for the FA and DA lenses, looking only at the 'categories' of resolution, it seems they are similar, with the FA perhaps slightly better. But when I look at the LW/PH numbers, they are quite different, with those of the DA being substantially higher. Is this because of the higher resolution of the K5's sensor vs that of the K10D? Is there some way I could accurately compare their respective LW/PH numbers?