[Clavius]

I wish Pentax Ricoh would post on here and comment on this poll.

I only whish they would read along here at Pentaxforums. The suggestions done here are often brilliant. Food for their developement team.

[baker5]

So hard to choose.... so many good ideas here.

The SDM II, 1.4 Converter, new DA versions of the 400mm and 600mm lenses... all really cool (I want them now damn it)

Many coin tosses later I have picked the 135-400mm WR.... (though I would modify it to a F2.8 or F4 instead of F4-5.6).. that lenses would be useful.

[RonHendriks1966]

I wish Pentax Ricoh would post on here and comment on this poll.

I only whish they would read along here at Pentaxforums. The suggestions done here are often brilliant. Food for their developement team.

To serve you:
Pentax representative Yazid Belmadi (Pentax France) thanks PentaxForums.com on Salon de la Photo in Paris on their feedback on lensdevelopment.

You Tube

You Tube

So your input won't be wasted.

More info in this threat: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/161644-salon-de-la-photo.html

[mickey]

I didn't read this thread before the report was presented to Pentax at Salon de la Photo.
Good job, Ron.

Should any Pentax officials be checking, a zoom over 300 would be of interest.
Like the "DA 135-400mm/f4-5.6 WR" from the poll list.
Even a zoom up to 500mm would be great, like the Sigma 170-500/150-500. WR preferable, but not essential.
I'm more a zoom man, rather than primes...for budget and flexibility.

[cmohr]

To serve you:
Pentax representative Yazid Belmadi (Pentax France) thanks PentaxForums.com on Salon de la Photo in Paris on their feedback on lensdevelopment.

Nice Work Ron !!!!!!!

[RonHendriks1966]

Nice Work Ron !!!!!!!

Thanks.

[interested_observer]

Its wonderful that you were able to get Pentax's attention. Excellent work!!

I have often wondered why Pentax did not follow up with Tokina on their 11-16mm f2.8 lens. I have had my 12-24/4 for 3 years now, and prior to buying it, I was waiting for Pentax to announce their version of the 11-16. In some ways I like the 12-24 range better, but I do have to admit that f2.8 would come in handy - especially in that I read that the 11-16 is as sharp or sharper than the 12-24, with possibly less distortion.

The other approach I find it very curious that Pentax does not exploit, the updating of their immense lens library of the old classic lens designs - the K, A, M, F, FA to the new DA.

And, since we are on the topic of lenses, I have actually sought out some of the older Contax Carl Zeiss lenses and swapped mounts, no auto aperture, no auto focus, no focus clutch - all of which I would have liked, but especially NO SDM. In theory, I have no problem with SDM, other than the SDM failures that are posted here. So, to Pentax I would say - fix the ?*&% $%^&@* SDM once and for all. I would rather have a manual optical lens that works - first time, all the time, and not fail, than a fancy wiz bang lens that has a premium price attached to it that fails - even after being repaired. Also, it would be nice to have a screw drive backup on the body - so that when it (SDM) fails, you can at least use the lens in a degraded mode.

[Clavius]

Oh my God! Thanks Ron!

I think Pentax noticing the brilliant ideas on this thread is of great value. They're probably looking elsewhere on this forum too. There's lots of very good ideas to be found all over this place.

[adpo]

looking over this, the top 3 most popular lenses: the 24WR, DA*85 and DA*135 are exactly what i've been looking for. I have an old kiron 24mm, samyang 85mm and M135 in my bag and i was hoping to find AF equivalents i could upgrade to in the long term, as i have for my M50.
The 24mm WR or DA* is what i'd most like to see, partly because 24mm is my favorite focal length on my K-5 and partly cause it's near-impossible to find a FA*24. The sealing would just be the icing on the cake.
I'm happy with my 85mm and currently am planning on upgrading to an FA77 Limited, but a DA*85 would definitely cause a change in my lens-buying plan. I find my 55 to be a highly capable portrait lens and would love to see a DA* 85 to compliment it. While it'd be nice to see SDM II on such a lens, i probably won't find it all that necessary since i find the DA*55's AF to be, while quite slow, adequate for its use as a portrait lens. And once again, sealing is icing on the cake.
The 135mm is something I'd really like to get if and only if it has fast and capable AF, which means SDM definitely needs revision if this lens were to be released. The way I see the 135mm focal length is that it is a very "active" lens, in that a lot of indoor sporting and staged events would probably be the most likely use for this lens (i already do so with my M135, thank god for the K-5's high iso performance). The old 135 f/1.8 sells for stupidly high sums, in part because of its rarity, I can see pentax selling a new 135mm f2 for just as high of a price, which may drive some buyers off. However, those who want to dedicate the amount of money into a high performance optic as such will most likely be the first one's in line for such a lens. Plus, it'd be nice to have a readily available lens for when i can afford to upgrade rather than waiting for weeks on end for something that's several decades old to pop up on ebay.
If SDM II is introduced, i sure hope pentax are willing to take in current SDM lenses and replace the motor, i've already had the SDM motor fail on my first DA*55 and find that it really is quite slow, although not too bad since I'm primarily a portrait and still life guy.

[pz1fan]

looking over this, the top 3 most popular lenses: the 24WR, DA*85 and DA*135 are exactly what i've been looking for. I have an old kiron 24mm, samyang 85mm and M135 in my bag and i was hoping to find AF equivalents i could upgrade to in the long term, as i have for my M50.

I voted earlier, but never commented. I'd prefer a DFA*85 and DFA*135 over a DA*85 and DA*135.

This may sound odd, but bring back power zoom. Or improved "Power Zoom II". Put it in a DFA*250-600f5.6.

[baker5]

I am amazed at the number of people wanting a 1.4X converter... indicates that we all want better 'Pentax made' long lenses.. zoom or prime.

I must admit that have that extending my old 300mm to 420mm when required would have been useful... but so would a bigger zoom lens anyway.

Thanks to Ron and Pentax for visiting this page.

[rvannatta]

I am amazed at the number of people wanting a 1.4X converter... indicates that we all want better 'Pentax made' long lenses.. zoom or prime.

I must admit that have that extending my old 300mm to 420mm when required would have been useful... but so would a bigger zoom lens anyway.

Thanks to Ron and Pentax for visiting this page.

Although I am oneof those who voted for the 1.4x converter the more I look at it the more I become convinced that converters
are almost a zero sum game. To the extent that the lens, and not the sensor is the limiting factor of photographic detail,
We are just substituting an optical crop for a digital crop. The more I look at the lens line up, it seems to me that in
the medium focal lengths there is chaos. We have FA's, DAs Ltd's, We have all kinds of zooms and maybe that is what the market wants. Maybe it's because its a lens lineup that has only been partially optimized for digital.

Maybe they have been keeping the options open with respect to the possiblity of a FF bodywhile attempting to avoid creating false hopes.

Despite the choatic assortment --- wide and fast don't seem to have much attention. Popular focal lengths between 15 and 50
could see an array of primes of F2 or better. The value of a prime that underperforms a zoom that covers the range is hard
to appreciate at least for me.

Finally, there needs to be coverage for the > 300 mm range. exotic glass is expensive and I don't see spending a lot of R & D
on it, but the 250-600 and the 600 prime would allowPentax to claim a full range of glass. and since the ones last produced
were pretty good they don't need a lot of reinventing.

[Clavius]

Teleconverters are funny gadgets IMO. They are either priced reasonably and degrade the IQ. Or, their quality is extremely high and degrade the IQ only very little. But in that last case, they'll also be so expensive that you could just as well spend a little more and buy the lens in the wanted focal range.

I almost bought a cheap teleconverter once. I figured those few times I needed a longer range, I don't need a expensive lense. Turned out that a old second hand 2x auto teleconverter, that would get my 300mm to 600mm, was more expensive then getting a 800mm MF mirror lens. There is a slight size difference though.

[RonHendriks1966]

The 135mm is something I'd really like to get if and only if it has fast and capable AF, which means SDM definitely needs revision if this lens were to be released. The way I see the 135mm focal length is that it is a very "active" lens, in that a lot of indoor sporting and staged events would probably be the most likely use for this lens.

Well that would be my purpose too for this lens, so a fast focussing motor would be great. Mentioned sports for it when starting this.

I voted earlier, but never commented. I'd prefer a DFA*85 and DFA*135 over a DA*85 and DA*135.

This may sound odd, but bring back power zoom. Or improved "Power Zoom II". Put it in a DFA*250-600f5.6.

Well from a startpoint of saving money on development it probably will be from old design, so FF compatable.

You are the first to request powerzoom! That is an interesting concept, but also one of the things that break down on older lenses. The sysytem does work very well.

Did you gave my idea DA*135-270mm/f2.8 a thought? This is combined with a 2x converter your replacement for the big 250-600.

I am amazed at the number of people wanting a 1.4X converter... indicates that we all want better 'Pentax made' long lenses.. zoom or prime.

I think that is the message too.

The more I look at the lens line up, it seems to me that in the medium focal lengths there is chaos. We have FA's, DAs Ltd's, We have all kinds of zooms and maybe that is what the market wants. Maybe it's because its a lens lineup that has only been partially optimized for digital.

Despite the chaotic assortment --- wide and fast don't seem to have much attention. Popular focal lengths between 15 and 50 could see an array of primes of F2 or better. The value of a prime that underperforms a zoom that covers the range is hard to appreciate at least for me.

Finally, there needs to be coverage for the > 300 mm range. Exotic glass is expensive and I don't see spending a lot of R & D on it, but the 250-600 and the 600 prime would allow Pentax to claim a full range of glass. and since the ones last produced were pretty good they don't need a lot of reinventing.

For the choices to make in this survey I also looked into the different lenslines and offered choices to all these different lenslines to somewhat compleet them (for FA Ltd. a wide-angle and a short-telelens and for DA Ltd. a longer lens and one in between where the gap is the biggest). I do think they have some nice futures to offer on their own and thus make the Pentax brand more attractive.

Putting more primes in the range under 50mm could be done, but the lensline does need more other important gaps to fill. I think that in time, when demand is bigger these things can be done. Which ones would you like to see first?

I do see the need for a long telelens, but I don't see a market at the time for those two big lenses. I do hope that there will be a 400mm next year ot maybe a good 500mm in near future. One also has to build on this lensline while taking back marketshare.

I almost bought a cheap teleconverter once. I figured those few times I needed a longer range, I don't need a expensive lense. Turned out that a old second hand 2x auto teleconverter, that would get my 300mm to 600mm, was more expensive then getting a 800mm MF mirror lens. There is a slight size difference though.

On the other hand you don't have to carry two big lenses along when on a trip. I think there is a market for a good (and expensive) TC of hi quality when there are good lenses in the lensline to combine them with.

DA*300mm/f4 with a 1,4 TC is a good lens (wildlife or outdoor sports). D-FA*500mm/f5.6 with a 1,4x TC is good for birding. DA*135-270mm/f2.8 (or DA*300mm/f2.8) with a 1,4x TC is good for sports (some even indoors).

[rvannatta]

DA*300mm/f4 with a 1,4 TC is a good lens (wildlife or outdoor sports). D-FA*500mm/f5.6 with a 1,4x TC is good for birding. DA*135-270mm/f2.8 (or DA*300mm/f2.8) with a 1,4x TC is good for sports (some even indoors).

I guess I respectfully disagree with your bottom line in some respects:

a) I see a 135-270 f/2.8 costing as much as a 300 f/2.8 prime, and less desireable with the 60-250 f/.4 already in the lineup.
b) I don't see an f/5.6 anything good with a TC because absent strong sunlight it doesn't work.