[monochrome]

I'd prefer to see the FA Limiteds left alone, or given modest updates at most. Better for Ricoh to add new lenses
to the line-up than to ruin three nearly perfect creations.

On careful and thoughtful examination, that is the most important opinion among current Pentax users. ANY attempt to modify the FA Limiteds will be viewed with skepticism.

Ergo, don't modify them at all - just bite the bullet and make entirely new lenses based upon the FA Limited optical formulas, but tweaked to reflect current optical preferences (sharpness corner-to-corner) and correct the known faults (CA, PF, etc.). Call them D-FA* lenses, if you must, with all the modern trimmings.

For the purists, to reduce the outrage, offer small runs of FA Limited Classics, hand-assembled in Japan, to even higher standards, make them actually LIMITED PRODUCTION lenses - and charge first-born-male-child prices for them.

---

Last edited by monochrome; 05-11-2015 at 08:44 AM.

[Stavri]

I suspect that Pentax will do the same to the FA Ltd's as they recently did to the DA Ltd's - update the coatings, tweak the aperture blades, give them a red ring , and call them DFA's.

Heck No!!! That would completely change its character, It would be the three amigos gone through plastic surgery, unrecognizable. Like the OP said Ricoh/Pentax perhaps decided to show the FF mockup with the 31 ltd to show that the brand has the pedigree that ranges from hand-crafted ltd gems to the big d-FA* zooms and the commitment towards maintaining such high standard of excellence. Pentax in terms of IQ has never made a flawed premium lens, excellent lenses + excellent bodies make for happy photographers.

[tvdtvdtvd]

I'd prefer to see the FA Limiteds left alone, or given modest updates at most. Better for Ricoh to add new lenses
to the line-up than to ruin three nearly perfect creations.

OK, having thought about this further, I have to admit that statement is folly.

Just because the FA Limiteds represent a high-water mark does not mean further development should be halted.
The K28/3.5 is often sighted as a high-water mark for that focal length, but that doesn't mean further development
of the 28mm should have stopped in 1976.

The FA Limiteds have a had a very good run and have been in production an impressively long time, but there is
no question that much development has occurred in the meantime. So, yes, it is time to give them an update.
Dress them up with all the latest trimmings. The resulting lenses will be current and introduce useful features
that are presently 'lacking' in the existing designs. No way to definitively tell whether they will be better or worse than
the existing designs, though they will unquestionably be different. Nonetheless, there is no way to achieve a new
high-water mark without trying.

[FantasticMrFox]

Nonetheless, there is no way to achieve a new high-water mark without trying.

Exactly, you snooze, you lose. Praising the FA Ltd. as some sort of pinnacle that won't be surpassed for decades to come and becoming afraid that any change will ruin them would be a big mistake to make. Pentax has demonstrated that they are able to produce outstanding prime lenses, why should they not be able to make them even better? They should have gathered enough experience with the Ltd.s by now to know what they could realistically improve and what they'd better not fiddle with.

[IchabodCrane]

What will be difficult for Ricoh is knowing whether an altered FA Ltd design is better, worse, or just different than the original. As opposed to measuring things like resolution, etc., effects of pixie dust are far harder to quantify. Also, different people measure pixie dust effects differently. I can see this as a reason for them to be quite cautious in messing with these three lenses.

[Stavri]

OK, having thought about this further, I have to admit that statement is folly.

Just because the FA Limiteds represent a high-water mark does not mean further development should be halted.
The K28/3.5 is often sighted as a high-water mark for that focal length, but that doesn't mean further development
of the 28mm should have stopped in 1976.

The FA Limiteds have a had a very good run and have been in production an impressively long time, but there is
no question that much development has occurred in the meantime. So, yes, it is time to give them an update.
Dress them up with all the latest trimmings. The resulting lenses will be current and introduce useful features
that are presently 'lacking' in the existing designs. No way to definitively tell whether they will be better or worse than
the existing designs, though they will unquestionably be different. Nonetheless, there is no way to achieve a new
high-water mark without trying.

I disagree with such as sentiment, the thought that the FA Ltds will "benefit" from modern updates is IMHO an oxymoron, because it will destroy the character that made them what they are in the first place. When I.M Pei was tasked with designing the addition to the Louvre, he knew he couldn't "compete" with the old building but instead decided to go underground and built the famous glass pyramid so that every visitor could rediscover the grandeur of the old palace through a new perspective. (If Frank Ghery was given the same task he'd probably built some twisted abomination clad in metal.) That shows reverence for the past and its exactly how Ricoh should feel about the Pentax lens legacy.

I'm saddened to see that the FA ltds are not longer in production, the series adds so much intrinsic value to the brand. IMO Ricoh/Pentax should leave the FA ltds alone and focus on NEW fast primes, 35 f1.4, 50/f1.4/ 85/f1.4, 135/f2-2.8 and so on.

Exactly, you snooze, you lose. Praising the FA Ltd. as some sort of pinnacle that won't be surpassed for decades to come and becoming afraid that any change will ruin them would be a big mistake to make. Pentax has demonstrated that they are able to produce outstanding prime lenses, why should they not be able to make them even better? They should have gathered enough experience with the Ltd.s by now to know what they could realistically improve and what they'd better not fiddle with.

Progress without perspective almost always results in catastrophe. Be careful what kind of "improvements" you wish for. When Pentax updated their DA lenses to include rounded aperture blades, people were upset because they couldn't get starburst bokeh with the new series. For someone who treasures that feature, the improvements ruined the character of their beloved lenses. Lens character is ephemeral, its an amalgam of things that no computational software can simulate, this is especially true when it comes to trio.

[monochrome]

It is entirely possible Ricoh can't get the same glass blanks, can't make the same coatings, no longer has access to a critical machine - there can be any number of non-business reasons that the FA Limiteds can't be produced, whether Ricoh wants to or not.

We sort of kind of know the existing stock of FA Limiteds is finite and there hasn't been a batch run in over two years. At some unknown future date they have to make a decision. We don't know and probably won't know all the inputs to the decision.

What we do know is, whatever the decision, it will be controversial.

---

Last edited by monochrome; 05-11-2015 at 08:52 AM.

[tvdtvdtvd]

I disagree with such as sentiment, the thought that the FA Ltds will "benefit" from modern updates is IMHO an oxymoron, because it will destroy the character that made them what they are in the first place.

I agree with you. The existing FA limiteds are optimal designs. Tweaking them is more likely to pull them out of balance than
improve them. However, they are aging designs. There will, (has?), come a point for the designs to be retired and new designs
to take their place. Nothing lasts forever, especially in a fast moving industry such as a present day photography.

In an ideal world, we might cherry pick high-water mark designs for perpetual production. In that case I vote the
A* 200 Macro and K30/2.8 be added to the list. Kickstarter, perhaps?

[yorik]

It is likely that Ricoh/Pentax is retiring the Amigos (just like the former greats were retired), and that they will introduce new lenses (that may incorporate elements of the ltd optical design, or not) to replace them. I would guess that they will begin with primes in the more traditional focal lengths - 28, 35, 50, 85, 135 - all with the newest bells and whistles to attract new users. The old guard may kvetch, but if the FF camera lives up to the hopes and dreams, people aren't going to jump ship.

[bdery]

Personally, I think it debatable whether the DA Limiteds were improved with rounded aperture blades.

I think they were not. Especially the 15 and 21. Maybe the 40 is slightly better.

Ergo, don't modify them at all - just bite the bullet and make entirely new lenses based upon the FA Limited optical formulas, but tweaked to reflect current optical preferences (sharpness corner-to-corner) and correct the known faults (CA, PF, etc.). Call them D-FA* lenses, if you must, with all the modern trimmings.

That makes a lot of sense, and is probably the safest course.

Heck No!!! That would completely change its character, It would be the three amigos gone through plastic surgery, unrecognizable.

The HD coatings have not damaged the colour rendition of the DA limiteds.

The FA limiteds are gorgeous lenses, but they are far from being without flaws. I am quite sure it is possible to preserve their perks while working on their flaws...

[dakight]

Well, as I understand the FA limiteds are out of production anyway. Some kind of replacement seems pretty much inevitable at this point.

[willeisner]

Limited lenses are fantastic as a * fa *
I hope Pentax best d-fa lenses than these three risk in new products F2 200, 100 F2 etc and recreate the magic that we like both these lenses of the past.

I think Pentax may shock the market and launch better lenses zeiss otus.

[FantasticMrFox]

I think Pentax may shock the market and launch better lenses zeiss otus.

That's just wishful thinking. Zeiss Otus lenses have no AF but stellar image quality and a price tag to prove it. Pentax wants to sell primes for its FF, they cannot ask for $4000 per piece without AF. They cannot trick physics either.

[Stavri]

Limited lenses are fantastic as a * fa *
I hope Pentax best d-fa lenses than these three risk in new products F2 200, 100 F2 etc and recreate the magic that we like both these lenses of the past.

I think Pentax may shock the market and launch better lenses zeiss otus.

Looking at the depiction on the Zeiss Otus line supposedly implementing "glass that's in weight is more expensive than gold" I highly doubt it. IMO pentax does already produces a variant of the Otus 55/f1.4 the DA* 55. (notice the similar rendering characteristics)

[willeisner]

I read in the comments dpreview between otus * and 55 mm,
Pentax can do something very close to price conditions
acceptable.

Zeiss makes no AF lenses in the ZE and ZF line, provalemente by contractual issues,
Sigma was processed by Nikon, it took a lot of money.

Zeiss Otus 55mm F1.4 APO lens test.: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
https://photographylife.com/zeiss-make-autofocus-dslr-lenses