[Rondec]

Very nice. A general castigation of Pentax lenses is meaningless to me. Every company makes good lenses and consumer lenses. The good lenses tend to pricey, the consumer lenses are cheap. It is hard for me to judge prices of lenses like the FA limiteds. The FA 77 is priced between Nikon's 85mm f1.8 and their 85mm f1.4 lenses, the FA 31 limited is priced between Nikon's 35mm f1.8 (which is APS-C only) and their 35mm f1.4 lenses. Does this make these lenses over priced or under priced? You got me. I just know that the results are nice, whether it is on a K5 II or a K3.

FA 31 limited on a K5 II.



DA 15 limited on a K3.

[DSims]

I do think the new * ~70-200 lens on the roadmap will be the real test for Ricoh. So far we don't really know if they can produce lenses with the high IQ of top Pentax lenses of yore. The DA20-40 does little to dispel the doubt. We know without a doubt that prices are going up, but we don't yet see that we're getting any IQ improvement for it.


Perhaps the 08 Q lens is the most impressive lens they've developed so far - I'm not sure when the newer 645 lenses began development. But neither mount is for the mainstream market, and design requirements are different for those sensor sizes anyway. So doubt is in order, until they can prove otherwise. They'll undoubtedly charge a high price for the *70-200, so they'll be rightly expected to meet the IQ standards of Canon/Nikon/Sony with it. I sure hope they do!



So the OP brings up a good point (along with some inflammatory rubbish).

[boriscleto]

Since all those posters were and are valued, long term members who have a right to their opinions I won't accuse this OP of anything.

PentaxIsDoomed™

This OP was boriscleto'd™ on his first post to the forums. A record shared by just one other poster...

[DeadJohn]

The 2 photos a few posts above are good. Oh, wait, they were taken with Pentax lenses? Those photos suck now.

[SashasMom]

Am I the only person that Pentax lenses are become inferior?

Let me talk about THOSE lenses.


1. Pentax renewed Limited lenses when K-3 released. But they Renewed only lens coating which is HD. And then, they raised much higher price. That's really ridiculous. Base on the lens test from Dxo, the image quality is same as previous version. This is so stupid.

2. Most of lenses did not change from the beginning. Why dont they make better version of those lenses? None of them cant support K-3's image quality at all. Just use them? That's fine. but you must know that even Fuji and other companies made better lenses and more.

3. We can not expect Pentax for lenses from their plan. They are falling. They dont follow the trend at all. From this moment, expecting FF camera is really stupid thing. Pentax camera bodies are the best but lenses dont.


They better figure out for their dark future. I heard many bad news from Japan...

Must be the person behind the camera that's the problem, not the equipment.

[Parallax]

I usually don't write this but, is this really a serious thread?

I was wondering the same thing.

Geeze, this guy has used them all.

That is particularly remarkable considering, according to his profile, his photo equipment consist of:
pentax istDL
Tamron 28-300mm macro
Pentax 50mm macro
I wonder why he got rid of all of the others?

[DSims]

I used them all.

Could you please update your profile, so you can at least have a fighting chance of credibility?

'Cause a Tamron 28-300 and an unspecified model of 50mm macro on an *ist DL ain't gonna cut it!



EDIT: Looks like Parallax and I wondered the same thing at the same time!

[monochrome]

Perhaps the 08 Q lens is the most impressive lens they've developed so far

Wow! Is it that good, or just that good within the context of the mount format? I'm not being snarky - I'm impressed by what the Q series can do in the hands of accomplished users (I can dream but I can't yet deliver) and I know Ricoh considers Q-mount to be a growth driver.

[DSims]

Wow! Is it that good, or just that good within the context of the mount format? I'm not being snarky - I'm impressed by what the Q series can do in the hands of accomplished users (I can dream but I can't yet deliver).

I think a lens has to be judged within the context of its mount, as well as by the absolute IQ of the resulting images (regardless of format).


It wasn't an attempt at a backhanded compliment, or anything like that. The 08 is the only new lens design they've produced (I think it was a Ricoh design - although I haven't thoroughly researched it) that I've actually wanted. And I'd be willing to buy into the system to get (if I determine I actually need it).


Every K-mount lens I can think of so far (except the DA20-40) is just a re-release or re-package of an existing design - leading one to wonder if they even can produce a top-tier new design with their current staff. It could be that what they're working on now is a set of new lenses that turn out to be very impressive. But we don't know this yet. And I haven't heard that they still have the engineers to pull it off (but I hope they do).

[RobA_Oz]

I hesitate to get involved in this rather odd little thread, but I will say that I wondered about the update of the DA Limiteds, until I bought my latest lens (see my signature) and that changed my thinking. Now, I'm contemplating selling my DA*16-50 in favour of a DA20-40 Limited, in spite of the fact that the K-3 seems the perfect body for the 16-50, having now used it on an *istD, K20D and K-5 as well. Maybe I'll keep both – they each exhibit different strengths, and maybe that's something the OP should consider, rather than condemning Pentax lenses across the board.

It does, however, raise the question about where the Pentax lens range is going. Putting aside the matter of the cheaper kit lenses that serve their role very well, perhaps they should be developing the DA* line further into even faster lenses while the Limiteds remain as smaller, light weight lenses specifically aimed at the discerning traveller. Nonetheless, on the question of whether or not the present range "sucks", the answer is a clear "no". Can they be developed further? Definitely.

[jatrax]

I wonder why he got rid of all of the others? :confused2:

That's obvious, because they suck. Come on didn't you even read his post?? /sarc

[Parallax]

Quite a difference between your position in this thread, and the position you held on November 11, 2013:

Well you didn't think about DA limited lens itself..............

........................Well you know that limited lens have premium price. Look at the other brands. Do they make these kinds of lens? NO. Only pentax does. also we don't need to care about the spec cause we just take pics. The purpose is to take pics. Why do we have to discuss about the specs?

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/242178-da-20-40mm-l...ml#post2574754

[Driline]

I are suck now

[normhead]

I are suck now

me tooo.... it seems to be the in thing....

[DSims]

I hesitate to get involved in this rather odd little thread, but I will say that I wondered about the update of the DA Limiteds, until I bought my latest lens (see my signature) and that changed my thinking. Now, I'm contemplating selling my DA*16-50 in favour of a DA20-40 Limited, in spite of the fact that the K-3 seems the perfect body for the 16-50, having now used it on an *istD, K20D and K-5 as well. Maybe I'll keep both – they each exhibit different strengths, and maybe that's something the OP should consider, rather than condemning Pentax lenses across the board.

It does, however, raise the question about where the Pentax lens range is going. Putting aside the matter of the cheaper kit lenses that serve their role very well, perhaps they should be developing the DA* line further into even faster lenses while the Limiteds remain as smaller, light weight lenses specifically aimed at the discerning traveller.

I do think the DA20-40 could be considered a traveler lens. I don't think the IQ matches most other Limited lenses (perhaps the DA40, which I've always considered the weakest anyway).



The DA*16-50 is far from a perfect lens (no lens of its class is), but I have no intention of trading it in for (or supplementing it with) a DA20-40 which seems to have been completely bypassed by the "pixie dust fairy."

But if you do get one, let us know what you think - I just haven't seen it in the photos, and I've been looking. I see IQ I'd expect from a Pentax zoom that would cost about half that price, at the most. Which is why some people still like it, I'm sure. The IQ is "good enough" for their standards, and it's small and well built, so they just live with the price. But if this is Ricoh's vision of the future, I'm worried.