[Rondec]

Full frame or not, that is the question. A lens like the 56mm f1.2 will give similar performance probably to the FA 77 on the K-1 and lag a bit behind the coming DFA 85mm f1.4. The thing is that the Fuji mount is probably not compatible with a larger sensor and none of the lenses they have are either. Meaning that you are where you are with it. If you never want to try full frame, then that is probably fine, but if in the back of your mind you think maybe down the road you would like to try it out, it won't be an option.

I am with Kunzite on the wide angle lens. I own the DFA 15-30 f2.8 which is plenty fast -- there is no zoom close to that fast and wide in the Fuji ecosystem, but I want something that is slower and smaller for landscape situations, where I am stopped down anyway. I guess we'll see. f2.8 or even f4 would be fine for my purposes.

[clackers]

Full frame or not, that is the question. A lens like the 56mm f1.2 will give similar performance probably to the FA 77 on the K-1 and lag a bit behind the coming DFA 85mm f1.4.

Handholding portrait photographers, take note - no image stabilization on the Fuji.

[bigfoxkiB]

The 325-Point Intelligent Hybrid AF System on X-T2 is really scary, though.
Not as professional as everyone, but seems to me Fuji use fast lens+fast AF to compensate for the lack of SR.

[clackers]

The 325-Point Intelligent Hybrid AF System on X-T2 is really scary, though.
Not as professional as everyone, but seems to me Fuji use fast lens+fast AF to compensate for the lack of SR.

That's not a shake reduction system, Bigfoxxie.

It is obviously a concern on Fuji because they put stabilization into their zooms.

BTW, real world focus performance is suspect because the points aren't on a dedicated module, they're just some of the pixels stolen from the sensor (so they're limited in size) and they have an awkward focus first with CDAF (with its problems) then try to finish the job with PDAF process, AFAIK.

[bigfoxkiB]

That's not a shake reduction system, Bigfoxxie.

It is obviously a concern on Fuji because they put stabilization into their zooms.

BTW, real world focus performance is suspect because the points aren't on a dedicated module, they're just some of the pixels stolen from the sensor (so they're limited in size) and they have an awkward focus first with CDAF (with its problems) then try to finish the job with PDAF process, AFAIK.

I was just adding how scary it is the have that many AF points.
So they use both CDAF and PDAF for one focus...?

[clackers]

So they use both CDAF and PDAF for one focus...?

Yeah, and it gets worse.

I think many of the so-called focus points are not big enough to do the job.

For instance, I think at f8 the Sony ones fail and the camera becomes exclusively CDAF.

Not sure what happens with Fuji or m43.

[emalvick]

Lot of good discussion on both sides of the debate. I won't be going Fuji any time soon (except maybe for their fixed lens system), but I would like a faster lens at the wide end. Having a new child in my house (and shooting with a K3), I wouldn't mind a prime at the 20-24 mm end of the spectrum that is around f1.7 to 2.0. I know there are ones like the Rokinon one (MF) and older Sigma and Pentax ones, but it seems they aren't necessarily the greatest. So from my perspective I would hope Pentax might make something. While I know such lenses aren't going to be that compact, they'd be more compact (and probably more reliable) than the zooms in the 15-35 range (Pentax, Sigma).

I also acknowledge I could solve my problems by buying a K-1, but I think I need to wait a year or two before my wife will let me, and I'd end up needing lenses like the 24-70 and then 70-200. LBA (and I guess the camera) are dangerous things and slippery slopes. I am happy with APS-C and my K-3, so I'd rather not open a new can of worms just yet.

p.s. I know a new daughter should be a good reason for the K-1 and some lenses, but I played that card when I got the 31-43-77 trio. I kind of just wish there was the 20 or 24 to make a 4-pack of great (fast) primes.

[clackers]

Having a new child in my house (and shooting with a K3), I wouldn't mind a prime at the 20-24 mm end of the spectrum that is around f1.7 to 2.0. I know there are ones like the Rokinon one (MF) and older Sigma and Pentax ones, but it seems they aren't necessarily the greatest. So from my perspective I would hope Pentax might make something. While I know such lenses aren't going to be that compact, they'd be more compact (and probably more reliable) than the zooms in the 15-35 range (Pentax, Sigma).

I also acknowledge I could solve my problems by buying a K-1, but I think I need to wait a year or two before my wife will let me, and I'd end up needing lenses like the 24-70 and then 70-200. LBA (and I guess the camera) are dangerous things and slippery slopes. I am happy with APS-C and my K-3, so I'd rather not open a new can of worms just yet.

p.s. I know a new daughter should be a good reason for the K-1 and some lenses, but I played that card when I got the 31-43-77 trio. I kind of just wish there was the 20 or 24 to make a 4-pack of great (fast) primes.

You should really check out the old Sigma.

You'll be able to get great shots up close of your child, and indoors - t's f1.8, autofocus, nine bladed, good colours, and a quasi-macro.

Its softer corners on FF will not be an issue for you on the K-3.

[emalvick]

You should really check out the old Sigma.

You'll be able to get great shots up close of your child, and indoors - t's f1.8, autofocus, nine bladed, good colours, and a quasi-macro.

Its softer corners on FF will not be an issue for you on the K-3.

You're referring to the 24-mm one? I guess I didn't think much about it. I was considering the 18-35 1.8, but saw such variable reviews have ditched that idea, and my own experience with the older 30 1.4 was such that I have started avoiding considering Sigma at all. But, it is an idea. I'm also considering the old Pentax 24 2.0 on the used market. My current tendency with the 31 1.8 (which covers what I need 90% of the time) is to shoot it at an f-stop of 2 to 2.8 (1.8 dof ends up a tad shallow or difficult to focus because she is always moving).

I think my hope at the moment is to just hear what Pentax has planned assuming they make some specifics of their lens roadmap known. I think I'll still go for an older lens just because it seems the current plans seem to end up as $1000 lenses, which I don't really need to spend. Contrary to the complaints about flair and CA with older lenses, I find they are all manageable.

[clackers]

You're referring to the 24-mm one? I guess I didn't think much about it. .

It's a film era lens, emalvick, but in Pentax land we're not afraid of legacy glass.

Screw drive, so less problems than HSM in integrating with the camera.

[emalvick]

I'm not afraid of legacy glass, but usually my legacy glass has been of the Pentax branded variety and a few old Tamron ones. As I said, I've not had great luck with Sigma in its modern glass, so I didn't necessarily think of it in terms of its legacy, although saying that it is screw-drive would make me more comfortable.

In fact, I love legacy glass of the Pentax A and M variety, but my baby won't sit still long enough for me to usually use them.

So, thank you for the clarification. I'll keep on the look out for that and perhaps still the FA*24. They both would seem to be a good choice.

[clackers]

So, thank you for the clarification. I'll keep on the look out for that and perhaps still the FA*24. They both would seem to be a good choice.

Yes. I'll think you'll find the FA*24 to be pricey, though.

[aurele]

and my own experience with the older 30 1.4 was such that I have started avoiding considering Sigma at all

(i am considering this lens, so would you mind developping a bit the kind of issue you had, please ? It would be very helpfull )

The link for the reviews of the FA*24mm f2. It's a great lens.
SMC Pentax-FA* 24mm F2 AL [IF] Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

[Jonathan Mac]

I am in the same boat but too invested in Pentax to consider moving completely to Fuji. I have been waiting for seven years for Pentax to produce a 35mm f/1.4 for APS-C cameras and still nothing, so I recently bought the Fuji 35mm f/1.4 to use on my X-M1 and it's wonderful, everything I want from such a lens. I'd love to have one for my K3.

The nearest equivalents for Pentax are the DAL 35/2.4 (too slow, too plastic, not good enough image quality) and the DA 35mm macro limited (wonderful image quality and a pleasure to use but still not f/1.4).

Pentax used to hold the crown for a dedicated APS-C lens line-up but they lost it when Fuji brought out the X system and they don't appear to be making any effort at all to get it back. Now with the K-1 out I think they will focus on only FF lenses and APS-C will be neglected even further.

[aurele]

I am in the same boat but too invested in Pentax to consider moving completely to Fuji. I have been waiting for seven years for Pentax to produce a 35mm f/1.4 for APS-C cameras and still nothing, so I recently bought the Fuji 35mm f/1.4 to use on my X-M1 and it's wonderful, everything I want from such a lens. I'd love to have one for my K3.

The nearest equivalents for Pentax are the DAL 35/2.4 (too slow, too plastic, not good enough image quality) and the DA 35mm macro limited (wonderful image quality and a pleasure to use but still not f/1.4).

Pentax used to hold the crown for a dedicated APS-C lens line-up but they lost it when Fuji brought out the X system and they don't appear to be making any effort at all to get it back. Now with the K-1 out I think they will focus on only FF lenses and APS-C will be neglected even further.

Fuji can make compact fast prime due to the short flange distance, for Pentax it would be bigger i think

I had the 35/2.4 and i wasn't really satisfied with it. It was very inconsistent wide open, and the rendering was not really appealing IMHO.

I have the DA*16-50 and the DA*55, and i'm looking for something as good as those. The Sigma 30 is appealing, as the Samyang. Though choice ....