Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-04-2015, 10:29 AM   #16
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,297
The 50mm DA and some of the kit zooms are substantially less than your $500 right now, and they are current production. Why should someone with an older camera be cut off from the next generation of such lenses?

08-04-2015, 10:40 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: North Syracuse, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,271
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Why should someone with an older camera be cut off from the next generation of such lenses?
Because Ricoh isn't in the business of supporting obsolete cameras. Just be thankful they haven't obsoleted the lenses.
08-04-2015, 10:46 AM   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,026
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
You forgot about the Sigma 35mm F1.4...it's more of a wide normal but probably be best lens in its class that money can buy right now. I'd recommend it especially if you're looking for something that's FF ready.
Sorry i forgot. Sigma 35 art are excellent optics, but long, heavy, pricey and a bit wide for a normal on FF. Still not bulls eye.

QuoteOriginally posted by stillshot2 Quote
Were these sharpness shortcomings found looking through reviews, or have you tried all these lenses?
I still haven't bought the Pentax FF or the normal prime. I'm looking for one and cant make up my mind because of too many compromises. I have been reading Pentax lens reviews for years and of course bought a small collection of them. I think i have a good overview of whats available.

QuoteOriginally posted by ivanvernon Quote
If Pentax ever comes up with a better optical design than the FA 43 limited, I will be the first one in line to buy it!
You could probably be a good friend of the Sigma Art series if it wasn't for the brand name. Compare those to reviews of the 43mm at Lenstip, Photozone, Slrgear, ephotozine and so on. The 43 is just so-so at max aperture.

QuoteOriginally posted by IchabodCrane Quote
There's a rumor out there that new FF prime lenses are coming next year.
Sounds great! Hope i'm not to late for Ricoh/Pentax to listen. at least on the hood, mount and wr part.
08-04-2015, 10:59 AM   #19
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Upstate New York, US
Photos: Albums
Posts: 225
Let's see -- you want fast, sharp, light, cheap, durable, and weather resistant with autofocus, good resistance to vignetting and color aberrations, and just the right focal length. Don't we all?

If you leave cheap out, then I can see that perhaps none of the lenses are exactly the right combination of high end features and focal length (mostly WR and focal length), but some of the criticism of some really good glass seems a bit nitpicky to me.

08-04-2015, 11:02 AM   #20
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 33,045
QuoteOriginally posted by CFWhitman Quote
but some of the criticism of some really good glass seems a bit nitpicky to me.
Exactly, what do you recommend to a guy who has already trashed some of the best on any mount?
08-04-2015, 11:03 AM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,728
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
The 50mm DA and some of the kit zooms are substantially less than your $500 right now, and they are current production. Why should someone with an older camera be cut off from the next generation of such lenses?
Your post leads me and I imagine others to think your position is Ricoh/Pentax should forever produce lenses that work with nine year old cameras. Most of us would consider that not to be reasonable, especially if they continue selling current screw-drive lenses when the next generation comes out. What are we missing here?
08-04-2015, 11:19 AM   #22
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,297
QuoteOriginally posted by IchabodCrane Quote
Your post leads me and I imagine others to think your position is Ricoh/Pentax should forever produce lenses that work with nine year old cameras.
It used to be that the "current generation" of lenses worked with cameras that were far, far older than nine years. Pentax took the belt-and-braces approach for the combined SDM/screw-drive lenses, and it's just as well they did. Why make us pay for an autofocus motor with every lens we buy? At least they still have the shake reduction in the body - they haven't been so unutterably stupid as to think about changing that yet. (Or have they?)
08-04-2015, 11:28 AM   #23
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,199
My understanding - not born from direct testing - is that the F/FA 50 1.4 is not quite as sharp as the F/FA 50 1.7 or the DA 50 1.8 at the same f stop until around f/5.6 - I could be wrong. The F/FA f/1.7 version is cheap and available and I think sharp enough at f/1.7 to be very useful.

The plastic hood mentioned for the 35 f/2.4 is not standard equipment. The same hood fits the 50mm 1.4 1.7 lenses.

The petal lens hoods are very large at 50mm. Look to the 50-135 for an example. That hood is designed for a 50mm - the length and bulk are pretty clearly a compromise vs. a round or rectangular hood. Diameter has a little to do with it - a smaller version could exist for the fixed primes but doesn't. The 55mm hood is a good choice. I remember shooting when no one had a petal hood - round was the norm for almost all lenses; rectangles were the next option.

Based on your criteria:
1st choice: Get the 55 - it offers better wide open performance than most, has silent focus, and a nice dedicated hood.
2nd choice: Get the F/FA 50 f/1.7 and an aftermarket hood.
3rd Choice: Sigma ART 35 f/1.4 - a bit too wide but such is life.

This assumes: the length comment made about the 55 was about focal length. If not then move it to 2nd.

08-04-2015, 11:37 AM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Tromsų, Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,026
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
You are asking for the impossible. No brand does it.

You want sharp at f/1.4-7 at $250 and 250g? No way. You are into Sigma Art lens territory. They manage to get pixel sharp wide open but at the cost of substantial weight and price.

WR and metal mounts add price. WR also definitely adds mass and bulk and perhaps focus resistance on the seals.

Flower shape hoods on the 50mm range are not really the norm. Not sure you know your research here. Generally the short barrels of the 50mm "normal" lens require a consistent round hood shape.

Manual focus rings also add cost and bulk and price, so they've mostly been kept small. Not much demand for them, TBH.

What you want is the Sigma Art or the DA*55. You just don't want the necessary piece or other compromises.

This isn't about massaging optical formulas; if you want wide open sharp you need mass and cost.
Why such a defense speak? I'm not attacking anyone. I'm just suggesting improvements and i don't think i'm beeng unrealistic. I'm not asking for a f/1 FF superzoom and i'm not asking for Sigma Art quality at pinhole weight.

I just ask for small improvements over the 125 gram 107 $ DA 50/1,8 and understand weight and cost will increase. I actually just hope (not demand) the weight and price wont be more then doubled. I don't expect Sigma Art performance and i don't expect f/1,4. I just hope for f/1,8 - f/2 and noticeable sharper then DA 50/1,8 from full aperture. I (of course) don't know how the optical formula should be changed but i would expect 1-2 special glasses and maybe 1-2 more lens elements.

WR is cheap in a prime lens with internal focus. Its basically just a rubber ring around the mount and hydrophobic surface at the sides of the focus ring. Pentax 40mm XS has metal mount and a total weight of 51 grams. It includes both a focus ring and 5 pieces of glass. How many percent of those 51 grams does a metal mount add? Lets say half the weight. Then the 50/1,8 modified to metal mount would increase its weight from 125 grams to 150 grams. Its still 100 grams left for the other improvements i ask for. The rubber ring and hydrophobic surface treatment probably weighs in at around 2 grams (and takes about 5 grams of metal from the trench in the mount). WR doesn't increase focus resistance. It actually reduces focus resistance on manual focus due to more slippery friction materials (think Teflon), and doesn't do anything to the friction when using AF.

I don't care whats the norm on hood shapes, i care whats effective and practical. In theory all hoods should be flower shaped, but in practice the corners of the flower shape would be impractically far from the lens front on tele lenses. The DA* 55mm hood is round because its a tele lens (optimized for APS-C). A 50mm optimized for FF should probably have the four indents to match the corners, just like the Sigma 30/1,4 has. Since i ask for a short lens of 3-4 cm the hood should be no longer. It should fit reversed on the lens even when its mounted. And there should also be a little gap between the reversed hood and the camera to get a grip around the lens when unscrewing the hood. With a 4 cm long lens the hood should be about 3 cm long. If thats not enough, the hood can be a two piece hood, one extending the other with a simple sliding mechanism.
08-04-2015, 11:37 AM   #25
Pentaxian
stillshot2's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Albums
Posts: 917
QuoteOriginally posted by Simen1 Quote
at least on the hood
Have you considered a screw on collapsible rubber hood? They work with any lens and can be had for $4.
08-04-2015, 11:56 AM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,728
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
It used to be that the "current generation" of lenses worked with cameras that were far, far older than nine years. Pentax took the belt-and-braces approach for the combined SDM/screw-drive lenses, and it's just as well they did. Why make us pay for an autofocus motor with every lens we buy? At least they still have the shake reduction in the body - they haven't been so unutterably stupid as to think about changing that yet. (Or have they?)
That's not true. Pentax has been selling lens-motor-only lenses for something like seven years now.
08-04-2015, 11:57 AM   #27
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,199
Petal hoods - do you find them on premium Canon or Nikon 50mm lenses? I haven't. Hoods are always a compromise. I can make any hood better than it is by making it huge but outside the field of view. That makes the hood barely useable but "better". I feel like petal hoods are superior but I note that they are rarely used on 50mm plus focal lengths probably because there is a serious drop in return on investment in cost, size, weight etc. The exception is in 50mm plus zooms - where premium one's sometimes have petal hoods. These are such large lenses this makes sense the penalty in size is not as easy to notice in this case and the performance gain when zoomed away from minimum focal length is worth it.
08-04-2015, 12:08 PM - 1 Like   #28
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Midwest
Posts: 98
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Not if they can't afford one, no. I reckon there's some people who hocked the farm (perhaps not literally) to get their dream camera, and why should they be forced to give it up and buy another if it's still working, in order to use newer and better optics? Why should ANYONE be forced to do that, regardless of their income?

It's bad enough that we have the DA/FA discrepancy. At least my film bodies can handle any DA lenses which cover the full frame, thanks to their (admittedly basic) program modes.
Such a user should get a used 16mp k-5, K-30, k-01 etc. first. They certainly won't be breaking the bank and they will be blown away by the image improvement at everything above iso 100. I always say glass is most important, but when I went from my K10D to K-5 it's night and day and was a better upgrade than a similar amount spent in glass to get 2-3 stop improvement in low light.
08-04-2015, 12:21 PM   #29
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,297
QuoteOriginally posted by Stickler Quote
Such a user should get a used 16mp k-5, K-30, k-01 etc. first.
What I meant was, they broke the bank to get their nine year old camera when it was new or near-new, and there was no such thing as a K-5, K-30 or K-01 to get, let alone a used one. Such a person would stretch the use of their camera as long as they could, saving the big purchases for carefully selected glass.

For anyone looking to buy today, I agree - used K-5's are dirt cheap, relatively speaking, to the point where they are almost the ideal entry-level Pentax DSLR. I like mine so much that if it died tomorrow I'd almost rather have another K-5 than a K-3, even though the -3 is currently far cheaper than what I paid for the -5.
08-04-2015, 12:31 PM   #30
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Midwest
Posts: 98
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
What I meant was, they broke the bank to get their nine year old camera when it was new or near-new, and there was no such thing as a K-5, K-30 or K-01 to get, let alone a used one. Such a person would stretch the use of their camera as long as they could, saving the big purchases for carefully selected glass.

For anyone looking to buy today, I agree - used K-5's are dirt cheap, relatively speaking, to the point where they are almost the ideal entry-level Pentax DSLR. I like mine so much that if it died tomorrow I'd almost rather have another K-5 than a K-3, even though the -3 is currently far cheaper than what I paid for the -5.
And what I meant was that upgrading an *istD to a 16mp body will always be better than even the most carefully selected glass. With film bodies I'm 100% with you, but that is no longer the world I live in.
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!
50mm, af, aperture, bit, cost, ff, filter, focus, hood, hoods, k-mount, lens, lens hoods, normal, pentax, pentax lens, plastic, prime, ricoh/pentax, rubber, slr lens, window, wish, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Send your FF wishlist to Ricoh mgbirder Pentax Full Frame 69 08-04-2015 06:40 AM
Need a "normal" prime for kids indoor. is S30 F1.4 (non-ART) suit for that? alexbird Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 09-15-2014 08:44 AM
Teleconverter for normal fast prime? DirkG Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 01-20-2013 05:43 PM
Possible Solution for Fast, Cheap(er), Normal Prime? Biro Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 01-10-2010 03:40 PM
Looking for a f/2 or better normal-wide (24-28mm) prime Egg Salad Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 09-08-2009 10:44 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:41 AM. | 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