[mythguy9]

Given that quite a few DA lenses have full frame coverage (see https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/31629-da-le...ts-thread.html), my question is:

Should Ricoh Pentax rename/rebrand these DA lenses as D FA to sell better?

Alternatively, the company can release an official list of FF-compatible DA lenses.

[Adam]

A list would be nice. It would also be nice if the degree of in-camera cropping could vary by lens.

[bassek]

At least when/if they add HD-coating they could upgrade the lenses.
However I would not include lenses that are not decent on all apertures for the lenses with the "D FA" -label.

Seb

[Na Horuk]

A lot of DA designs already come from FA designs, so it would make more sense to reintroduce the FA version. For example, DA 35mm f2.4 should not be renamed to DFA 35mm f2.4, but rather, the FA 35mm f2.0and DA 35mm f2.4 should be discontinued and a DFA 35mm f2.0 released. The design of the FA, with HD coatings, bonus points for WR, QS.
The camera should also allow to capture full frame, or crop down to APSC, both in jpeg and raw mode. That way, you can use APSC to save time and memory space, or shoot FF and crop in post.

[Rondec]

I wonder if some of the DA lenses would need to be re-released with different hoods to be truly full frame compatible. Not sure.

Obviously the DA 35 f2.4 and DA 50mm f1.8 are both full frame compatible and don't come with hoods.

[ramseybuckeye]

Given that quite a few DA lenses have full frame coverage (see https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/31629-da-le...ts-thread.html), my question is:

Should Ricoh Pentax rename/rebrand these DA lenses as D FA to sell better?

Alternatively, the company can release an official list of FF-compatible DA lenses.

I would guess they already plan to do this, but there would probably be other changes, maybe new HD coating, rounded blades, or WR/AW if not already there, something to enhance it. Or with the way they are churning out new products, there may be some new optical formulas in the works.

A list would be nice. It would also be nice if the degree of in-camera cropping could vary by lens.

Definitely, or the ability to shoot them in FF and crop yourself.

I wonder if some of the DA lenses would need to be re-released with different hoods to be truly full frame compatible. Not sure.

Obviously the DA 35 f2.4 and DA 50mm f1.8 are both full frame compatible and don't come with hoods.

Very good point. I have a Tamron 10-24 that will work as full frame on a film camera with the hood off, and you would never want to use that lens without a hood.

[lytrytyr]

Given that quite a few DA lenses have full frame coverage . . . , my question is:
Should Ricoh Pentax rename/rebrand these DA lenses as D FA to sell better?
Alternatively, the company can release an official list of FF-compatible DA lenses.

"FF-compatibility" is a relative thing,
dependent on your requirements/expectations for edge IQ.
An area that is lit up by the lens
might not be an area where it delivers much
in the way of resolution and contrast.

Rather than have an FF-sensor camera
automatically crop a DA lens image,
I'd like to be able to decide for myself
where I'd like to crop the frame.

[6BQ5]

@Na Horuk brings up a good idea above. Ricoh may consolidate their line up and rename a few of the lenses. The DA and FA 35mm designs are a great example. Ricoh could examine these two lenses (one legacy and one current) and combine some design cues to make a D-FA 35mm f/2.0 or f/2.4. This makes a lot of sense.

Something like the DA 15 and DA 21 would say as they are.

A lot of people are asking about a potential update to the FA Limiteds. New coatings? WR? Quick shift? Who knows... but maybe they would be included in the product naming update. Would you be OK with a D-FA 43mm f/1.9 Limited? I think I would be. The markings would address the reality that APS users shoot with FF lenses.

[Adam]

Definitely, or the ability to shoot them in FF and crop yourself.

The FF would be flawed if it didn't have an option to disable cropping entirely. I'm sure users will be able to.

[ChristianRock]

Discontinue the 35 2.4 in favor of a more expensive 35 f2? I hope not. The Plastic Fantastic is a cheap, high quality, normal lens for APS-C (that does cover the full frame circle, but it's made to a price point that meets APS-C users). I don't think Pentax is just going to abandon APS-C users now.

[6BQ5]

Discontinue the 35 2.4 in favor of a more expensive 35 f2? I hope not. The Plastic Fantastic is a cheap, high quality, normal lens for APS-C (that does cover the full frame circle, but it's made to a price point that meets APS-C users). I don't think Pentax is just going to abandon APS-C users now.

APS won't be abandoned. They'll be combined with FF users. We'll have a new Plastic Fantastic. It's the perfect excuse for Ricoh to apply the new HD coatings to it. D-FA 35mm f/2.4 HD. Can't you just see it now?

[ChristianRock]

APS won't be abandoned. They'll be combined with FF users. We'll have a new Plastic Fantastic. It's the perfect excuse for Ricoh to apply the new HD coatings to it. D-FA 35mm f/2.4 HD. Can't you just see it now?

I don't see how they would make the FF lens all plastic, and it wouldn't cost at lest 399, probably even 499. Canon's 35 f2 full frame lens is 599.

Please Ricoh, keep the 35 2.4 for APS-C and cheapo FF users, and re-do the 35 f2 with HD coatings and the works, for FF users who demand only the best