Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-23-2015, 04:04 PM   #31
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,229
They need a 135/1.8 again, then probably a 400.

QuoteOriginally posted by virusn3t Quote
15mm, 85mm and 200mm macro for me, all DFA*
These are all good ideas too.



They must bring back the FA*24 or a replacement, and it would be better to bring back the FA*85 (my favorite lens) rather than just relying on the FA77.

04-23-2015, 05:32 PM   #32
Des
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Des's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Sth Gippsland Victoria Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,733
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
bring back the 35/2 and the 28 2.8 (31 is not a substitute because of cost).
QuoteOriginally posted by Outis Quote
You know what the perfect focal length would be? A 28.
+1. I would settle for a 28 f2.4 in polycarbonate construction like the plastic fantastics, say for about $US250. If FF compatible, it would serve as a cheap wide for FF users who have blown the budget on the new camera and zoom lenses, as well as an affordable alternative to the FA 31 for APS-C users.

QuoteOriginally posted by aiki76 Quote
A 400 f/5.6 for me...
400mm f5.6 primes seem to have gone out of fashion. AFAIK only Canon still makes one. That's a pity. Why have to put a TC on a DA*300 to get the equivalent of 420mm f5.6 for birding if you can get a lens that already does it?

I am delighted with my Sigma 400 f5.6 tele macro. For me, it's the Goldilocks combination: long enough for significantly more reach than a 300, fast enough to be useful and lightweight enough (1.3kg) to be easily carried and easy to use handheld. Sure faster (f4) or longer (500mm) would be great, but it would be so much bigger, heavier and more expensive that it wouldn't interest me - e.g. Canon 400 f4 is 2kg and about $7k; Pentax DA 560 f5.6 is 3kg and $7k; Sigma 500 f4.5 is 3.1kg and about $5k.

Last edited by Des; 04-23-2015 at 06:40 PM.
04-23-2015, 08:38 PM   #33
Veteran Member
Outis's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 935
QuoteOriginally posted by Des Quote
+1. I would settle for a 28 f2.4 in polycarbonate construction like the plastic fantastics, say for about $US250. If FF compatible, it would serve as a cheap wide for FF users who have blown the budget on the new camera and zoom lenses, as well as an affordable alternative to the FA 31 for APS-C users.
Oh, I was actually making a math joke-- a perfect number is one which is the sum of all of its factors. So, 28 is a perfect number because 28 = 1 + 2 + 4 + 7 + 14.

But 28 is a little wider than 31, which is a very useful focal length, so I imagine that you're right, a 28mm f/2.4 would actually be pretty great.
04-23-2015, 09:31 PM   #34
Des
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Des's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Sth Gippsland Victoria Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,733
QuoteOriginally posted by Outis Quote
Oh, I was actually making a math joke
Nice line - sorry it was wasted on me.

At least I got @savoche's joke about primes.

It must drive you mathematicians nuts that the FA 77 isn't a 79, to go with 31 and 43.

---------- Post added 04-24-15 at 02:40 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by kenny47 Quote
But I reckon 42 would be the answer for everything.
Deep Thought got it wrong. The answer to the meaning of life, the universe and everything is 31, 43 and 77.


Last edited by Des; 04-23-2015 at 09:41 PM.
04-23-2015, 10:50 PM   #35
Veteran Member
bassek's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 644
QuoteOriginally posted by Des Quote
Deep Thought got it wrong. The answer to the meaning of life, the universe and everything is 31, 43 and 77.
This thread is getting better and better. I have to check it every morning.

Seb
04-23-2015, 11:51 PM   #36
Pentaxian
hoopsontoast's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 846
A compact D-FA 85mm f1.8 (inspired by the K85).
04-24-2015, 06:05 AM   #37
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,014
QuoteOriginally posted by Outis Quote
Oh, I was actually making a math joke-- a perfect number is one which is the sum of all of its factors. So, 28 is a perfect number because 28 = 1 + 2 + 4 + 7 + 14.
But a 24 would be practical:

Practical number - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
04-24-2015, 06:34 AM   #38
Veteran Member
redcat's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Paris
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,892
QuoteOriginally posted by hoopsontoast Quote
A compact D-FA 85mm f1.8 (inspired by the K85).
yeah, make a cheap&reliable 85mm 1.8 as Canikon would be very very useful !

04-24-2015, 07:03 AM   #39
Junior Member




Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Bratislava
Photos: Albums
Posts: 44
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
But a 24 would be practical
Well, 28 is both practical and perfect.

QuoteOriginally posted by Des Quote
Deep Thought got it wrong. The answer to the meaning of life, the universe and everything is 31, 43 and 77.
Maybe Pentax got it wrong (I know, no way that could happen) and 43 was meant to be 42?
04-24-2015, 12:48 PM   #40
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
TER-OR's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dundee, IL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,451
With the FF camera on the horizon, a 150mm to 200mm range macro would make a lot of sense. I use the 100mm on a K5 for field macro and a FF would get benefit from a WR long macro. I know there were 180mm macros in the past, just modernize that range - maybe fast motorized focus if the algorithm is fairly predictive.
04-24-2015, 01:54 PM   #41
Pentaxian
yorik's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Scotts Valley, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 910
QuoteOriginally posted by Des Quote

It must drive you mathematicians nuts that the FA 77 isn't a 79, to go with 31 and 43...
Humor aside (for a moment), I read somewhere that 7 is considered very lucky in Japan and having a 77mm FL was in part due to this... The digits of the 43 add up to 7 and 31 is (3+1)*7 + 3*1.

There you go.
04-24-2015, 01:58 PM   #42
Pentaxian
emalvick's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Davis, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,615
QuoteOriginally posted by kenny47 Quote
Well, 28 is both practical and perfect.



Maybe Pentax got it wrong (I know, no way that could happen) and 43 was meant to be 42?
Of course they got it wrong. They didn't want to wait for the program to complete... we all know how that ended up for Earth.
04-24-2015, 06:36 PM   #43
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
MadMathMind's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Houston, TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,717
QuoteOriginally posted by Des Quote
Nice line - sorry it was wasted on me.

At least I got @savoche's joke about primes.

It must drive you mathematicians nuts that the FA 77 isn't a 79, to go with 31 and 43.
If the lens weren't so awesome, I would boycott it on this principle.
04-25-2015, 02:13 AM   #44
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 5
Some fast primes with silent motors...
04-25-2015, 03:40 AM   #45
Junior Member




Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Bratislava
Photos: Albums
Posts: 44
QuoteOriginally posted by emalvick Quote
Of course they got it wrong. They didn't want to wait for the program to complete... we all know how that ended up for Earth.
Or..Pentax is planning new 17mm FA limited..in which case the average focal length of the four amigos would be 42. Anyway, from now on, I vote for 17:-)
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
answer, holes in pentax, joke, k-mount, lenses, pentax, pentax lens, pentax prime line, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Holes in the DA lineup devorama Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 52 09-11-2014 03:11 PM
Pentax Camera Line-up davetv13 Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 06-13-2013 07:14 PM
Having established that I'm missing a wide angle in my line up... gilsouthwood Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 20 05-07-2012 06:30 PM
My Pentax prime lens line-up. pcarfan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 63 01-25-2012 06:31 AM
1977 Pentax line up (Camera directory) Nesster Pentax Film SLR Discussion 9 07-05-2009 10:59 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:09 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top