DA 17-70/F4 SDM Full Specs (Official)

RiceHigh · 05-02-2008, 06:36 AM

It can be found at:

http://www.pentax.no/accounts/433774/File/Datablader/Objektiver/18720.xls

So, it's official as it is found at a Pentax website!

As for the most likely dropping of body motor AF support, I have some short remarks and comments at my latest blog entry:

RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Pentax Starts to Drop Support for Body Driven AF

k100d · 05-02-2008, 06:45 AM

unfortunately no mention of weathersealing ... not that i have a seald body

RiceHigh · 05-02-2008, 06:57 AM

Originally posted by k100d

unfortunately no mention of weathersealing ... not that i have a seald body

The DA 17-70 cannot be used on our K100D anyway, unless we accept to have a MF lens on our DSLRs..

thePiRaTE!! · 05-02-2008, 08:49 AM

Selfishly, as a K20 user I am glad to hear the slot drive is gone (at least from one offering) hopefully we can look forward to the same thing from the 60-250

I've not used a lens that had only an SDM motor and no slot drive to know if the MF feel is improved by doing away with the slot gear shaft, but I'm interested to learn it. It would also seem possible to add some extra throw range on the focus ring without having to consider the strain on the little slot shaft as well. If the latter two points are unaffected by its removal, then one can only hope it offsets the cost of the motor somewhat.

wlachan · 05-02-2008, 09:11 AM

The DA16-45/4 is not so dead afterall.

gokenin · 05-02-2008, 11:29 AM

well if thats true then it makes my decision easier off to the world of sigma I go and will get the 17-70 from them since I am not going to upgrade a perfectly good camera just to get a new lens .

Torphoto · 05-02-2008, 02:08 PM

As another selfish K20D owner, I just want to see this in B&H in 2 weeks so I can buy one.

calicojack · 05-03-2008, 07:04 AM

Originally posted by gokenin

well if thats true then it makes my decision easier off to the world of sigma I go and will get the 17-70 from them since I am not going to upgrade a perfectly good camera just to get a new lens .

I'm sure you'll be happy with the Sigma 17-70. It was my first choice as a kit to complete my K10D body only. I'm happy with it and not looking back in this range.

axl · 05-03-2008, 03:49 PM

Originally posted by wlachan

The DA16-45/4 is not so dead afterall.

It's just shame that Pentax have chosen to go this way, compatibility was always one of their key elements, but if you can't use this new standard zoom on anything older then k10D then it's bad. I know all of us want to have the new K20 or 200 but not everybody can afford them... anyway, I think it's wrong decision to loose screw driven AF. If they did it with this lens they will make it again and again, and then screw drive will be history only...

Torphoto · 05-03-2008, 08:14 PM

It seems obvious why Pentax wants to move away from screw drive, it's all about costs!

Miserere · 05-03-2008, 08:53 PM

Originally posted by axl

If they did it with this lens they will make it again and again, and then screw drive will be history only...

But screwdrive was History the moment SDM was invented. The only question was "when". I'm sure we all thought Pentax would keep it around longer than the other brands, but it was clear SDM was the future of lens focusing.

What I'm wondering now is how many generations of cameras it will take to lose the screw from the body, leaving millions of eBay lenses orphan.

Aegon · 05-03-2008, 08:59 PM

These lenses cost more than cameras built to support them. The argument that potential buyers are deterred by backward compatibility is offset by the argument that those shelling out $800 for a lens are not unwilling to spend a little for a more recent camera.

Suppose you have a K100D. This is a fine camera that will quickly sell on the marketplace. You can sell it and buy a K100D Super for a little more money. Maybe on the order of $50-$150, depending on if you get a used version or buy new. That $100 is a small price to pay for compatibility with an $800 lens.

Actually, I have no idea what the lens price will be. I'm just guessing. But the point is, with $500 K10D cameras floating about, the price of a body shouldn't be a concern to people buying the latest and greatest lenses.

Geekybiker · 05-05-2008, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by Aegon

These lenses cost more than cameras built to support them. The argument that potential buyers are deterred by backward compatibility is offset by the argument that those shelling out $800 for a lens are not unwilling to spend a little for a more recent camera.

Suppose you have a K100D. This is a fine camera that will quickly sell on the marketplace. You can sell it and buy a K100D Super for a little more money. Maybe on the order of $50-$150, depending on if you get a used version or buy new. That $100 is a small price to pay for compatibility with an $800 lens.

Especially when you consider that multiplied by several lenses. Bodies are transitory. Glass is forever.

axl · 05-05-2008, 02:46 PM

Originally posted by Aegon

...
Suppose you have a K100D. This is a fine camera that will quickly sell on the marketplace. You can sell it and buy a K100D Super for a little more money. Maybe on the order of $50-$150, depending on if you get a used version or buy new. That $100 is a small price to pay for compatibility with an $800 lens.
....

Try to sell it bit later on when no new lenses will be AF with it because of lack of SDM support. hm, what then.
And then you (and maybe guys in Pentax) should think about those of us who kind of can't afford splash money on new body just about every 18-24 months, but have to (maybe some want to) stick with the camera for half decade or decade... what then if you'd love to have new 17-70 with green ring but it won't work

AndrewG NY · 05-05-2008, 03:31 PM

So many tough decisions with so many attractive lenses available now and coming soon. I have to think this is a very important lens for Pentax, I really hope they get it (and the DA* 60-250) right. Minimum size is slightly larger than DA16-45, I wonder how it extends when zooming (does it extend drastically at wide angle like 16-45?)?

I guess we'll have to wait to find out how it is priced, whether its build quality is improved at all, etc. DA16-45 isn't shabby but doesn't seem quite as good as the less expensive DA50-200. My guess is that it will be at least $100 more than DA 16-45 at launch time.

Even though I have an older *ist DS2 that I still use frequently (along with SDM-capable K10D) I am somewhat willing to accept SDM-only lenses IF AF-performance/MF capability is improved by removing it from the design. If it's only cost savings, I'd rather pay $25 more to keep backwards compatibility. I imagine that Pentax has already done the math--by 2009 there will probably be a lot more SDM-capable bodies in regular service than the old screw-drive bodies--keep in mind that as a DA lens it never needed to offer film-body compatibility. The K100D owners that are seriously considering this pricier lens may be willing to upgrade from their increasingly dated body for other benefits as well.

I do think they should have included dual AF-drive support in the DA55-300 though.

05-02-2008, 06:36 AM	#1
RiceHigh Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 1,934	DA 17-70/F4 SDM Full Specs (Official) It can be found at: http://www.pentax.no/accounts/433774/File/Datablader/Objektiver/18720.xls So, it's official as it is found at a Pentax website! As for the most likely dropping of body motor AF support, I have some short remarks and comments at my latest blog entry: RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Pentax Starts to Drop Support for Body Driven AF

05-02-2008, 11:29 AM	#6
gokenin Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: lowell,ma Posts: 1,899	well it makes one decision easier well if thats true then it makes my decision easier off to the world of sigma I go and will get the 17-70 from them since I am not going to upgrade a perfectly good camera just to get a new lens .

05-03-2008, 03:49 PM	#9
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	Exactly Originally posted by wlachan The DA16-45/4 is not so dead afterall. It's just shame that Pentax have chosen to go this way, compatibility was always one of their key elements, but if you can't use this new standard zoom on anything older then k10D then it's bad. I know all of us want to have the new K20 or 200 but not everybody can afford them... anyway, I think it's wrong decision to loose screw driven AF. If they did it with this lens they will make it again and again, and then screw drive will be history only...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Official Pentax K-5 Specs !	Priyantha Bleeker	Pentax News and Rumors	365	09-20-2010 07:42 AM
Official specs now online!!	Marc Langille	Pentax News and Rumors	7	05-20-2009 07:51 AM
Pentax X70 - full specs and image!	MCR	Pentax News and Rumors	74	03-18-2009 08:03 AM
Unofficially official? ;~) : No Full Framer	solar1	Pentax News and Rumors	22	02-04-2009 08:41 AM
DA* 200f2.8 SDM specs	lol101	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	12-22-2007 11:44 AM

05-02-2008, 06:45 AM	#2
k100d Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Toronto Posts: 3,911	unfortunately no mention of weathersealing ... not that i have a seald body

05-02-2008, 06:57 AM	#3
RiceHigh Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Hong Kong Posts: 1,934 Original Poster	Originally posted by k100d unfortunately no mention of weathersealing ... not that i have a seald body The DA 17-70 cannot be used on our K100D anyway, unless we accept to have a MF lens on our DSLRs..

05-02-2008, 08:49 AM	#4
thePiRaTE!! Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Calgary, AB Photos: Gallery Posts: 942	Selfishly, as a K20 user I am glad to hear the slot drive is gone (at least from one offering) hopefully we can look forward to the same thing from the 60-250 I've not used a lens that had only an SDM motor and no slot drive to know if the MF feel is improved by doing away with the slot gear shaft, but I'm interested to learn it. It would also seem possible to add some extra throw range on the focus ring without having to consider the strain on the little slot shaft as well. If the latter two points are unaffected by its removal, then one can only hope it offsets the cost of the motor somewhat.

05-02-2008, 09:11 AM	#5
wlachan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 2,625	The DA16-45/4 is not so dead afterall.

05-02-2008, 02:08 PM	#7
Torphoto Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Trinidad W.I. Photos: Gallery Posts: 612	As another selfish K20D owner, I just want to see this in B&H in 2 weeks so I can buy one.

05-03-2008, 07:04 AM	#8
calicojack Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Long Island, N.Y. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,124	Originally posted by gokenin well if thats true then it makes my decision easier off to the world of sigma I go and will get the 17-70 from them since I am not going to upgrade a perfectly good camera just to get a new lens . I'm sure you'll be happy with the Sigma 17-70. It was my first choice as a kit to complete my K10D body only. I'm happy with it and not looking back in this range.

05-03-2008, 08:14 PM	#10
Torphoto Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Trinidad W.I. Photos: Gallery Posts: 612	It seems obvious why Pentax wants to move away from screw drive, it's all about costs!

05-03-2008, 08:53 PM	#11
Miserere Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Boston Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,993	Originally posted by axl If they did it with this lens they will make it again and again, and then screw drive will be history only... But screwdrive was History the moment SDM was invented. The only question was "when". I'm sure we all thought Pentax would keep it around longer than the other brands, but it was clear SDM was the future of lens focusing. What I'm wondering now is how many generations of cameras it will take to lose the screw from the body, leaving millions of eBay lenses orphan.

05-03-2008, 08:59 PM	#12
Aegon Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 1,416	These lenses cost more than cameras built to support them. The argument that potential buyers are deterred by backward compatibility is offset by the argument that those shelling out $800 for a lens are not unwilling to spend a little for a more recent camera. Suppose you have a K100D. This is a fine camera that will quickly sell on the marketplace. You can sell it and buy a K100D Super for a little more money. Maybe on the order of $50-$150, depending on if you get a used version or buy new. That $100 is a small price to pay for compatibility with an $800 lens. Actually, I have no idea what the lens price will be. I'm just guessing. But the point is, with $500 K10D cameras floating about, the price of a body shouldn't be a concern to people buying the latest and greatest lenses.

05-05-2008, 08:53 AM	#13
Geekybiker Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Chicagoland Posts: 337	Originally posted by Aegon These lenses cost more than cameras built to support them. The argument that potential buyers are deterred by backward compatibility is offset by the argument that those shelling out $800 for a lens are not unwilling to spend a little for a more recent camera. Suppose you have a K100D. This is a fine camera that will quickly sell on the marketplace. You can sell it and buy a K100D Super for a little more money. Maybe on the order of $50-$150, depending on if you get a used version or buy new. That $100 is a small price to pay for compatibility with an $800 lens. Especially when you consider that multiplied by several lenses. Bodies are transitory. Glass is forever.

05-05-2008, 02:46 PM	#14
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	Originally posted by Aegon ... Suppose you have a K100D. This is a fine camera that will quickly sell on the marketplace. You can sell it and buy a K100D Super for a little more money. Maybe on the order of $50-$150, depending on if you get a used version or buy new. That $100 is a small price to pay for compatibility with an $800 lens. .... Try to sell it bit later on when no new lenses will be AF with it because of lack of SDM support. hm, what then. And then you (and maybe guys in Pentax) should think about those of us who kind of can't afford splash money on new body just about every 18-24 months, but have to (maybe some want to) stick with the camera for half decade or decade... what then if you'd love to have new 17-70 with green ring but it won't work

05-05-2008, 03:31 PM	#15
AndrewG NY Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Chappaqua, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 688	So many tough decisions with so many attractive lenses available now and coming soon. I have to think this is a very important lens for Pentax, I really hope they get it (and the DA* 60-250) right. Minimum size is slightly larger than DA16-45, I wonder how it extends when zooming (does it extend drastically at wide angle like 16-45?)? I guess we'll have to wait to find out how it is priced, whether its build quality is improved at all, etc. DA16-45 isn't shabby but doesn't seem quite as good as the less expensive DA50-200. My guess is that it will be at least $100 more than DA 16-45 at launch time. Even though I have an older *ist DS2 that I still use frequently (along with SDM-capable K10D) I am somewhat willing to accept SDM-only lenses IF AF-performance/MF capability is improved by removing it from the design. If it's only cost savings, I'd rather pay $25 more to keep backwards compatibility. I imagine that Pentax has already done the math--by 2009 there will probably be a lot more SDM-capable bodies in regular service than the old screw-drive bodies--keep in mind that as a DA lens it never needed to offer film-body compatibility. The K100D owners that are seriously considering this pricier lens may be willing to upgrade from their increasingly dated body for other benefits as well. I do think they should have included dual AF-drive support in the DA55-300 though.