[Ayoh]

Having had the chance to use the 20-40mm Limited Silver lens for a few days, the general impression has been a disappointment. First of all the build quality and size seems not up to the Limited standard. Compared the FA and DA limited's - The lens is very large and somehow feels like it is made from plastic that is painted with Silver paint. This is because It is not as cold to the touch as the other limited and is very light for its comparatively large size.

The different feel seems to be because the HD limited silver lenses are actually painted silver rather than left with a natural machined aluminium finish like the FA limited's (see photo). The silver colour is also a different shade than the FA series. The housing wall sections also seem slightly thinner than on the FA limited lenses. The lens hood is also painted plastic. Somehow the general impression is not as good as the other limited lenses. Additionally in the copy I used, the extending portion of the barrel was not quite concentric with the focus ring - there is a noticeably larger gap on one side than on the other.

I know this may sound trivial to some, but if you are paying $1000 for a lens mainly due to its unique build quality and construction and expecting the same experience as with the other limited lenses, then you are left wanting. It seems like the build quality was "cheapend" to reduce costs. It is disappointing to see Pentax making these compromises.

Aside from the tactile impressions. The AF seemed unsure - it is quiet and reasonably fast, however the copy I used would often miss focus on the k3.

All in all a pretty disappointing experience, and frustrating to see cost cutting measures implemented in such an expensive lens.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[luftfluss]

This seems unacceptable in a thousand dollar lens.

[Kozlok]

A few people seem to really like this lens, but most seem pretty disappointed in it.

[stevebrot]

The chipped paint is truly a shock to me. I would have expected an anodized surface for the silver and high quality enamel or lacquer for the black version.


Steve

[Ayoh]

Yes it is disappointing, and pointless since the underlying material is already machined aluminium. I guess painting it must be ever so slightly cheaper/easier than anodizing. Every cent matters!

The chipped paint is truly a shock to me. I would have expected an anodized surface for the silver and high quality enamel or lacquer for the black version.


Steve

[DennisH]

EDIT: Never mind; I figured it out.

Carry on.

[Ayoh]

The chipped photo is actually of a 70mm HD Silver limited taken by someone else, but the 20-40mm has the same Silver paint finish.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

That's surprising and very disappointing. Silver paint on a lens always seems like a bad idea. That's why almost all the old silver Pentax star lenses I ever see, like the 85mm 1.4, look like crap. You'd think Pentax would have learned their lesson. Especially when somebody is paying $1000 for a 20-40mm f2.8-4 lens.

So are you able to return it?

[Time Traveller]

"The lens hood is also painted plastic."

The lens hood on my copy is made of metal.

[Na Horuk]

Wait, so there is a difference in the material between SMC limited and HD limited, with the HD being worse? Because in photos they seem pretty good (but I haven't handled many HD limiteds, only the 21mm for a couple minutes)

[zapp]

Pentax wants to make money with sepcial edition lenses. Good for them. Never buy special edition stuff.
The whole engineering of the lens and all fittings is optimized for the regular design. Just can not just exchange materials and get something better. Typically you get something worse.

[Jonathan Mac]

I will stick to black, prime limiteds.