[RobA_Oz]

I imagine they will come out with lighter F/4 versions, but not plastic construction because wobbly and such.

There's no reason for plastic construction to be that way, although it can be, as my FA20/2.8 (not a big or heavy lens, BTW) will attest. I'd prefer if all lenses were as light and well-built as the early MF M42 Takumars (well, not all of them) and the K, M and A-series were (come to think of it, some of those weren't, either) but long barrels demand structural strength for stability, and fast optics require larger diameters. By the time you add diameter-increasing componentry like in-lens drive motors and WR sealing, the mass of structural material for the enclosure, let alone the internal sleeves etc is going to be greater, regardless of the material used.

Thank heavens the FA20's IQ is pretty good, especially matched with the K-1.

[jatrax]

I sure hope Pentax goes back to its roots and starts offering the lenses that made them famous instead of these monstrosities.

What exactly are those?
FA*28-70 f/2.8?
FA*80-200 f/2.8?
FA*250-600 f/5.6?

There is certainly a place for small and light. But I'm not sure Pentax's 'roots' are exclusively small. They have had a good number of excellent large heavy lenses. The difference is that those, meaning the f/2.8 monsters are all long out of production. The small and light, I assume you mean the Limited line, is still in production so no need to replace it when other areas are in dire need of attention.

I will not be getting the DFA*70-200 f/2.8 it is just simply too large for my needs, but others certainly do need it. I would vote for a small light, but still top quality, 70-200 f/4 or even a replacement for the 60-250 f/4. I do not need f/2.8 but if you do, then the size goes with it.

[virusn3t]

All new lenses [DFA] are optimized for FF, so, theyre bigger and heavier than those made for smaller formats like APSC, if Ricoh begin their FF era with small and slow lenses all the press could be "Ricoh cant engineer fast lenses!!!", so they bring quality fast lenses at expense of weight and size [and cost] for the "pros" who demand those lenses, im shure that in the long run we going to see smaller and slower (F4) lenses, but hey, Ricoh need the spotlights and that attention only can be obtained with lenses like the 15-30, 24-70, 70-200 and 150-450.

Give time to the time, some people wait decades to see the digital 35mm in Pentax, maybe in a few years those lenses that you seek will be in the shelves of the stores, im shure Ricoh would love to bring the FF with all the lenses they have in mind, just give them time.

[monochrome]

Sorry but I'm very disappointed at Pentax/Ricoh new lens line up. I know I'm going to get a lot of heat for this, but common now these new lenses are HUGE to say the least... I mean the 24-70mm also the 70-200mm although stellar lenses even beat out Canikon in the heft department. I sure hope Pentax goes back to its roots and starts offering the lenses that made them famous instead of these monstrosities.

Maybe zoom lenses are a lot harder to build and all the yada, yada, yada, but they sure did a good job with the 20-40mm. I would sacrifice convenience of an all purpose zoom for lenses such as these. Now it seems they are going in the wrong direction as the lenses get bigger, longer, fatter and heavier Sorry for the rant...

I own the 'lowly' HD Pentax-D FA 28-105mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR which I use with my K-1. It isn't a big heavy fast f/2.8 zoom. It isn't even a constant aperture f/4. but it is light (Weight 440 g (15.5 oz.)) and fast focusing, has a lot of the modern bells and whistles, and it really is a nice sharp walkaround general purpose zoom. And it is reasonably priced - a bargain, actually.

[fredralphfred]

. . . I would vote for a small light, but still top quality, 70-200 f/4 or even a replacement for the 60-250 f/4. I do not need f/2.8 but if you do, then the size goes with it.

I don't disagree with your post in general, but why do you think the 60-250 f/4 needs to be replaced? It sounds like an awesome lens for those few Pentax users that still shoot APS-C.

[clackers]

It sounds like an awesome lens for those few Pentax users that still shoot APS-C.

"Few"?

[bassek]

Just look at the DA14/2.8 and the DA15/4 side by side. See what the speed does to the size? Yes I know there are other factors too, but still...



When adding the requirements for a FF lens they get even bigger.

Seb

[BigMackCam]

Sorry but I'm very disappointed at Pentax/Ricoh new lens line up. I know I'm going to get a lot of heat for this, but common now these new lenses are HUGE to say the least... I mean the 24-70mm also the 70-200mm

Yes, they're big and heavy, but what else would you expect for fast, constant-aperture, full-frame glass? It's just not physically possible to design such an instrument with small dimensions and light weight. You can maybe decrease the weight a little, but that would entail a simpler optical design (fewer elements, resulting in potentially lower optical correction & quality) - or use cheaper, thinner materials for the lens barrel and enclosure (but then people would complain about the poor build quality).

Maybe zoom lenses are a lot harder to build and all the yada, yada, yada, but they sure did a good job with the 20-40mm. I would sacrifice convenience of an all purpose zoom for lenses such as these.

The DA20-40 is a lovely little lens, but its image circle only covers the APS-C sensor and it doesn't offer constant aperture, slowing to a maximum of f/4 at the long end - plus, of course, it has a very limited zoom range. Those design compromises allow it to be small and light. 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8 lenses are viewed (rightly or wrongly) as cornerstone lenses for full frame, as together they cover a vast range of shooting situations (I have them for my own non-Pentax full frame camera, and they get quite plenty of use - especially the 70-200). Ricoh / Pentax would have been roundly criticised - and rightly so - had it not offered these two key lenses. And, as I said earlier, high quality, fast, constant-aperture, full frame glass is big and heavy - it can't be any other way, unfortunately.

[surfar]

All the Pentax OLD lenses( the small ones) work on the K1....just use them if you don't like the DFAs!

[RMabo]

The new 24-70 and 70-200 are f/2.8 plus they are designed for 24x36 cameras (like the K-1). Comparing them to the APS-C only 20-40 f/2.8 - 4 design is unfair.
The D FA 70-200 f/2.8 is close to Pentax Classic FA Star 70-200 f/2.8 from the 90's.

[jatrax]

I don't disagree with your post in general, but why do you think the 60-250 f/4 needs to be replaced? It sounds like an awesome lens for those few Pentax users that still shoot APS-C.

The 60-250 is SDM and aside from any motor failure issues it is very slow to focus. The optics are superb but it needs updated to a newer motor and to be fully full frame compatible.
Besides I thought we were discussing FF lenses, at least it appeared the OP was.

[BigMackCam]

The 60-250 is SDM and aside from any motor failure issues it is very slow to focus. The optics are superb but it needs updated to a newer motor and to be fully full frame compatible.

SDM is the only thing I'm not keen on with the 60-250, but purely because of potential reliability issues further on. Honestly, I don't find it that slow to focus... it's certainly not rapid, but it's OK. I guess it depends on individual use-cases as to whether it's "fast enough". For some reason I don't find it to be all that great with AF-C tracking, but that could just be me and my lousy technique Somehow, I doubt they'll update it, given the availability of the 70-200 f/2.8...

[lytrytyr]

The DA20-40 is a lovely little lens, but its image circle only covers the APS-C sensor

Comparing them to the APS-C only 20-40 f/2.8 - 4 design is unfair.

Remember that the DA 20-40 evolved from the FA 20-35, and even as wide as 24mm, it does surprisingly well on FF:

PENTAX K-1 Laboratory | PENTAX K-1 Special site | RICOH IMAGING

[jatrax]

Honestly, I don't find it that slow to focus... it's certainly not rapid, but it's OK.

I primarily use it for landscape and for that it is fine, of course. But on moving targets I find it just takes too long to achieve a lock. Compared to the 16-85 or 18-135 or the new DFA 24-70 it is noticeably slow. As you say it depends on use case.

I am going to hope they do update it, or provide an f/4 version of the 70-200 which I would buy. The 60-250 range is very nice and with the baffle removed it works acceptably on FF so I think the optics could be used mostly as is. But it needs the new motor. Certainly there is a spot in the Pentax catalog for it, so perhaps they will get around to updating it in a few years. As others have said on APS-C it is excellent and with the baffle pulled out works fine on FF as well. I've no intention of selling mine but I do wish the AF was a bit faster.

[BigMackCam]

Remember that the DA 20-40 evolved from the FA 20-35, and even as wide as 24mm, it does surprisingly well on FF

Absolutely... but it's still an APS-C lens that does pretty well for 80% of its focal length range, with a variable aperture. Given that, it's no surprise that it should be so much more compact than a 24-70 f/2.8