[jsherman999]

.




In order to answer your question about why a 135 isn't on the roadmap...

Two questions - 1) Which of my 135mms took the following, and 2) what kind of sunglasses is the guy wearing? :

a) SMC-M 135 f/3.5
b) Super MC Takumar 135 f/3.5
c) Tokina 135 f/2.8
d) DA* 50-135 f/2.8



Cropped:



Cropped again:




.

[JJJPhoto]

.




In order to answer your question about why a 135 isn't on the roadmap...

Two questions - 1) Which of my 135mms took the following, and 2) what kind of sunglasses is the guy wearing? :

a) SMC-M 135 f/3.5
b) Super MC Takumar 135 f/3.5
c) Tokina 135 f/2.8
d) DA* 50-135 f/2.8

I get the point you are trying to make, but I think you're missing the bigger picture (no pun intended). If you take your argument to extremes, you could say that the DA 18-250 covers all the major focal lengths so all Pentax needs to make is the 18-250 and then a fisheye and an extreme telephoto to satisfy the people who need a wider or longer lens.

Likewise, you could say, now that the DA* 50-135 is here there's no need for prime lenses between 50mm and 135mm. Of course, if you try to make that argument you'll have a darn hard time explaining why Pentax has the DA* 55mm f/1.4 on the roadmap.

Pentax has a reputation for making incredible lenses ... particularly primes. So the fact that there's no 120mm or 135mm DA lens currently in production seems like an obvious hole.

Sure, there are other lenses in the current lineup that cover this focal range ... but that isn't the point for those of us who want a DA 135mm Limited.

I have a wonderful Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG but I also own a DA 40 Limited and a DA 70 Limited ... both of which are optically superior to the Sigma. However, I have use for all three lenses in my work.

It's also worth pointing out the first two lenses (and maybe the third) on your list are no longer in production.

[jsherman999]

I get the point you are trying to make, but I think you're missing the bigger picture (no pun intended). If you take your argument to extremes, you could say that the DA 18-250 covers all the major focal lengths so all Pentax needs to make is the 18-250 and then a fisheye and an extreme telephoto to satisfy the people who need a wider or longer lens.

That's almost my point - what I was trying to show was the quality of the 50-135 at 135mm - that focal length isn't just covered, it's covered by something extremely sharp.

The 18-250, while a very good lens, can't match a prime in IQ anywhere in it's focal range - the 50-135 can, IMO.

[ogl]

DA*50-135/2.8 is bigger and heavier than FA135, for example.
The bokeh of DA*50-135 is not good as fixed lens, sometimes, 50-135 can make no good bokeh at all. It's zoom and it has zoom's bokeh. Pentax was never the best zoom lenses manufacturer. He had several good zoom. And it's all.
DA*50-135 can't replace fixed lenses.

There is real HOLE from 77 till 200 mm. DFA100 macro is 100 macro.
Pentax has no new AF lenses from 77 till 200 mm.

[jsherman999]

DA*50-135/2.8 is bigger and heavier than FA135, for example.
The bokeh of DA*50-135 is not good as fixed lens, sometimes, 50-135 can make no good bokeh at all. It's zoom and it has zoom's bokeh. Pentax was never the best zoom lenses manufacturer. He had several good zoom. And it's all.
DA*50-135 can't replace fixed lenses.

There is real HOLE from 77 till 200 mm. DFA100 macro is 100 macro.
Pentax has no new AF lenses from 77 till 200 mm.

Yes, the bokeh is not nearly as good with the 50-135 as any of my 135 primes.

It would be super if a DA* 135 or DA 135 appeared on the horizon, don't get me wrong, but I suspect Pentax feels that the 50-135 @ 135mm fills that gap. I do know that I shoot with my 135 primes much less now that I have my 50-135, so they may be on to something.

Anyway, if we organize a march or something we may be able to get a new 135. That would make for some crazy footage on CNN.


.

[selar]

The DA* 50-135 is very sharp indeed at 135, and remains so wide open. At this point in time, I am a bit sick of changing lenses and i think it is a good thing that Pentax has come out with two high quality zooms.
There was a FA 135 on sale in the market place, why not get that one?

[lithos]

uh, no it's still 135mm. the smaller fov doesn't really affect it when you're shooting portraits.

How far do you normally backpedal from your subject? Are you some sort of nasal hair photographer? Dermatologist? Ear, nose and throat specialist?

[Torphoto]

OK lets not get the 135mm, as we really don't need it.

Lets get a 123mm macro limited instead ( Pentax's rip off of the Voigtlander SL 125mm Lanthar ).

Yes Pirate I'm stealing your idea :P

[JJJPhoto]

OK lets not get the 135mm, as we really don't need it.

Lets get a 123mm macro limited instead ( Pentax's rip off of the Voigtlander SL 125mm Lanthar ).

Yes Pirate I'm stealing your idea :P

If Pentax makes a good DA Limited prime somewhere between 120mm and 135mm with f/2.8 or better I'll buy it.

'nuff said.

[John Kovarik]

I have this lens and it is superb!


NaCl(it's manual focus and aperture but with IQ like this who cares?)H2O

I have the SMC 135/2.5 and the K version also. Both produce startlingly great images. I would
post but NaCl's shot is an excellent example. Yet I don't see that the 50/135 falls short in comparison and so feel a new 135AF would be redundant for PTX. Unless the affinity for the word 'prime' equates to a larger market than I would guess exists. Also the 50/135 pricing
is about where a 135 prime would be IMO, so why? Just wonderin'...............

[aegisphan]

I think they just need to recycle the A* 135/1.8 design. That would compete well against others.

And there is a lot of redundancies in the the current Pentax line, thought they all cater to different needs. The Prime DA* 135/1.8 would offer a fast prime, with SDM, and weather sealed. For someone who shoots regularly at 135, that extra one stop definitely helps. Razor thin DOF, of course, but we can all manage .

[JJJPhoto]

I think they just need to recycle the A* 135/1.8 design. That would compete well against others.

And there is a lot of redundancies in the the current Pentax line, thought they all cater to different needs. The Prime DA* 135/1.8 would offer a fast prime, with SDM, and weather sealed. For someone who shoots regularly at 135, that extra one stop definitely helps. Razor thin DOF, of course, but we can all manage .

As much as I think that lens would be amazing to own, I would prefer a f/2.4, f/2.5 or f/2.8 design simply because it would have to make less compromises in terms of edge-to-edge sharpness ... and it would actually be affordable.

Can you imagine how much a DA* 135mm f/1.8 SDM lens would cost. There's no way that type of lens would cost less than $1,499 ... and it would probably be closer to $2,000+.

Pentax could easily sell a DA 135mm f/2.4 Limited for less than $1,000

[jsherman999]

I Unless the affinity for the word 'prime' equates to a larger market than I would guess exists. Also the 50/135 pricing
is about where a 135 prime would be IMO, so why? Just wonderin'...............

smaller + bokeh = LBA!



There were some good points made about size and bokeh advantages of a fixed length, which I can see.


.

[JMS]

I would LOVE a modern 135mm f1.8. I do a bit of sports shooting (track mostly) and I find 135mm is just the right length, but add two stops and fast AF, and I'd ditch my M135 f3.5 in a second.

[John Kovarik]

I thought my LBA cured with the application of the DA* 200. However, thinking about size+bokeh and 135/1.8s is raising my temperature a bit..........it may be the fever lingers.