[alpheios]

Then there FA31, FA43, DFA50, FA50, DA*55, FA77, DFA100, DA*200, DA*300, DA560 availble as primes with half being modern and 3 being the FA limited... Qucik check on sigma, there the 15mm fisheye, the 35mm f/1.4 art or 85mm f/1.4 for primes that make the lineup stronger.

On Pentax side, there also new primes on the roadmap, arround 24, 35, 50 and 85 on the way likely half release this year, the other half next year.


Not only the gap in available prime is small missing basically a wide apperture 24mm prime, a 135mm prime optimized for portraiture (rather than the DFA100 optimized for macro) and maybe a 400mm, but there alternatives readily available in zooms if you need them or on the used market.

If you want the most extensive lens line up, you have to go Canon, not even Nikon. That's just how it is. But lenses don't take photos. Photographers do. All of this are excuses to complain. If there not what you need there today, then go for an echosystem that has it or wait the 1-2 years needed to fill the holes. We are adults, not 5 years old petulant child.

You completely missed my point. My post was an answer to jatrax who stated that all you need are the the three f/2.8 zooms which is just nonesense because they might fit some photographers needs but not all. Again I'm not complaining about missing lenses. I know that new primes will come and what they will probably be. If you had read my second post below the one you quoted you would have gotten my point. I don't need excuses. I know my abilities and limitations very well.

---

Last edited by alpheios; 02-12-2017 at 09:56 AM.

[jatrax]

No..just tired of your constant whining and nagging Think i will do as many other, ignore you.

Fortunately that is fairly easy. But it constantly amazes me that people come here and waste their time just to stir up trouble.

Well said kenspo. Half the reason why I personally choose not to post on this site as often these days. Too much negativity.

While I fully agree, I must say that the negativity is FAR LESS than it used to be. We do still get the occasional troll but the doom has lifted and the real (not troll) complaints are valid and intended as constructive more often than not. Attitude here back in 2010, 2011, 2012 was much different.

Then let us take over this place with positive attitude

Best suggestion all month!!

My post was an answer to jatrax who stated that all you need are the the three f/2.8 zooms which is just nonesense because they might fit some photographers needs but not all.

Just to be clear, my post was mostly tongue in cheek and an answer to an obviously inflammatory post. I do prefer zooms when I am working, but I own and use a full complement of primes for use with personal projects. And you are quite correct that zooms are not for everyone, or even for all occasions. But the OP's statements were obviously false and inflammatory. Hence my perhaps poor attempt at a sarcastic reply to it. If you really want to use primes they are available albeit with some limitations, namely screwdrive and old, or manual focus. But they are available. And I have confidence that over time those old primes will be replaced by new glass that will exceed the abilities of even the best of us photographers.
However, that will not stop some from complaining that Pentax is Doomed because they do not have the 20mm f/1.8 lens they say they need in order to be a photographer. But of course they would never buy that lens anyway, they just want to complain.

If you (and I mean the OP and other complainers not @alpheios ) really want and need new prime lenses there is an easy way to get them. Buy a K-1 and the DFA 15-30, DFA 24-70, DFA 28-105 and DFA 70-200. There, you have firmly stated to Ricoh that there is money to be made by producing Pentax gear. Nothing anyone says matters a whit. Only what we actually do matters. So if you want new lenses, plunk down your hard earned cash and buy something with Pentax stamped on the side.

Save

[alpheios]

Just to be clear, my post was mostly tongue in cheek and an answer to an obviously inflammatory post.

Sorry, I didn't get that. Here we have the problem with a written discussion again. Irony and sarcasm often get misunderstood on the internet. Can't someone finally come up with a solution to this problem? I mean come on it's 2017.

[monochrome]

There's an 'x' between the printer and the envelope in the thread header.



Done.

[aurele]

i don't want a new 50mm, guys !
I was talking about the 50mm, because I wanted to illustrate what's becoming more simple, more standard on the market that pentax is not even able to go out.
Sure, I would like a 20, a 24 or a 28mm, a 85mm, a 135mm ... there are many "holes" in the K mount, or lenses that would need to be modernized, with new coatings and new motors technology...
But nothing...nothing, nothing, and nothing.

Feel free to jump ship anytime !

---------- Post added 12th Feb 2017 at 06:19 PM ----------

Then let us take over this place with positive attitude

Amen to that !!

[MadMathMind]

Dont't ask for A new lens, ask for a sign - a series of lenses to point towards tzhe future. All the 50ish lenses are just there with no particular sign where Pentax wants to be in the near future. Same with the handful of 35 mm lenses. With FF I do not care at all about old designs, a multitude of choices unless - Pentax skipped at least one generation of FF lenses. The rest of the world did not.

Everyone here wants to believe it's not the case, but the older designs don't have nearly the resolving power of the new ones. The DA*55 is pretty spectacular; the two FAs, while pretty nice, are quite a bit behind. The bigger issue is the fringing. The FA77 can be pretty bad but improves upon being stopped down (not that this helps me a ton, although I can tolerate it at f/2.8) and the FA*24....that thing fringes like MAD at all apertures. It can be a big detraction and it's something that modern designs can fix, which would be nice.

If what you are looking for is the unique image quality that only the best primes deliver, just continue to use your FA, FA43 or FA77. They are fast enough (f1.8/1.9), very nicely built, compact, light, AF, with outstanding overall IQ.

It is not obvious that this kind of specific design could easily be fitted with an electronic AF module.

They are not outdated because of the screwdrive AF, which works well and snappy on K3 (my son has the 31 and 77) and, I guess, even better on K1.

When what matters most is best and silent AF in FF, then go with D-FA 24-70 f2.8, or D-FA 28-105, or switch your K1 to APS-C (15MP is quite enough), and use DA 55 f1.4 for instance, or use a K3 if you need more MP. Or buy a cheap Nikon, Canon or Sony A7 body as a second system.

The screwdrive is just not as precise. It's really not. Or its the older lens design that does it. Not sure which. But the DA*55 does a much better job microfocusing for me, that's for sure.

I'm still trying to imagine what a 2kg 50mm would be like.....

The current Sigma Art comes close. Thing is a brick.

[BigMackCam]

The screwdrive is just not as precise. It's really not. Or its the older lens design that does it. Not sure which. But the DA*55 does a much better job microfocusing for me, that's for sure..

Interesting. Personally, I've found screwdrive to be amazingly accurate. The fastest AF lens I own is the FA50/1.4 - an old design by today's standards, but ever since I got the AF fine adjustment set up just right, I rarely get inaccurate focus with it on my K-3 and K-3II even wide open. I might occasionally get missed focus because of a poorly chosen target, but with a well chosen focus point, it's bang on all of the time. I'm prepared to believe screw-drive isn't as accurate, and I can certainly see why micro-adjustments from SDM, DC and other electronic drive systems could be more accurate than electro-mechanical. That hasn't been my personal experience, though...

[MadMathMind]

Interesting. Personally, I've found screwdrive to be amazingly accurate. The fastest AF lens I own is the FA50/1.4 - an old design by today's standards, but ever since I got the AF fine adjustment set up just right, I rarely get inaccurate focus with it on my K-3 and K-3II even wide open. I might occasionally get missed focus because of a poorly chosen target, but with a well chosen focus point, it's bang on all of the time. I'm prepared to believe screw-drive isn't as accurate, and I can certainly see why micro-adjustments from SDM, DC and other electronic drive systems could be more accurate than electro-mechanical. That hasn't been my personal experience, though...

Screwdrive is generally sufficient, esp if you're above f/3.5 or so. Where I notice it misses is below f/2.8. It doesn't miss by a lot, though, but I trust the DA*55 much more at f/2.2 than I do even my FA77 (which I've calibrated). It's not that screwdriven lenses are bad. But I have more trouble with them than the SDM lenses I've had.

For the most part, I get screen-size (40%? whatever 2550x1440 is) focus and that looks fine. But if you zoom, it's off by just a small amount. This does happen with the 55, but less so. In terms of resolution and contrast, the 77 and 55 are functionally identical, so my guess is that it has to do with the precision of focusing. It may also be the film-era design. So it's more like "screwdriven lenses are less precise" because they are older designs. I also think there's some firmware games that are played with the new DC/SDM lenses in the K-3II and K-1 that are not done with the older lenses.

[BigMackCam]

For the most part, I get screen-size (40%? whatever 2550x1440 is) focus and that looks fine. But if you zoom, it's off by just a small amount.

I guess that's down to the limitation of the PDAF focus points... I assume we're talking about PDAF, here?

Do you still get the screw-drive inaccuracy when using Live View?

[MadMathMind]

I guess that's down to the limitation of the PDAF focus points... I assume we're talking about PDAF, here?

Do you still get the screw-drive inaccuracy when using Live View?

Live view is completely unreliable with all lenses for me now since K-1 v1.3. I made a thread about it but no one knew anything. I almost never use it now as a result. I find it better to analyze the geometry (got to live up to my name!) and use PDAF with very clever focus point selection, using the electronic levels to tell me the plane in which I should focus.

This may be a function of exposure preview, however. I shoot all with flash and half the time the screen is all black or very dark.

[jatrax]

Sorry, I didn't get that. Here we have the problem with a written discussion again. Irony and sarcasm often get misunderstood on the internet. Can't someone finally come up with a solution to this problem? I mean come on it's 2017.

I have often used the <SARC> </SARC> tags, I forgot this time. But sometimes those are not understood either. Part of the problem is that this forum is international in nature and even for those of us who have English as a first language there are vast differences between the varieties. But that aside, I could have been more verbose and I should have been. Perhaps it is because I am not as prime-centric as some but if I need a particular focal length and it is available in a zoom and the image quality achieved from that zoom is adequate for the job / client then I see no problem. I'm certainly not going to run out and buy a prime that might be a meaningless 5% better over the zoom. And despite all the testing and comparisons between this lens and that lens the reality is that a decent lens with almost any recent camera will, in the real world, exceed the requirements of most any need.
So I stand by my original (sarcastic) post. If you need 15mm or 20mm or 24mm or 85mm it is available. Unfortunately it is available in a zoom right now, not a modern prime. I'm confident that the primes will come for those that want them. I might invest in some myself but for me they are a luxury for use when I want to have fun. When I need a shot for work I will be using the zooms. And that, whether anyone likes the decision or not, is why Ricoh delivered those three zooms first. In this day and age, primes are a luxury, zooms are a requirement.

[boriscleto]

I wonder if Yongnuo will ever do lenses in K-mount. Then Pentax wouldn't have to worry about low end lenses I would love a $94 AF 35/2 or a $190 100/2 or a $180 85/1.8...

[rawr]

I would love a $94 AF 35/2

The DA 35 f2.4 already exists, is excellent optically by all accounts, and is about the same price.

After using the Yongnuo 35/2 on Nikon, you really don't want one. Yongnuo have potential with lenses, but it will take a while for them to get good at it.

[mee]

Interesting to add to this topic, for those of you that are members on the Pentax full frame k1 Facebook group, you will have seen that the poll results for expected/wanted FF lenses hopefully being released this year are as follows:

46 votes for 85mm prime
31 votes for 20mm prime
16 votes for 135mm prime
14 votes for a 50mm

Thanks for sharing that with us.

The 85 and the 20 have such a large margin.. It isn't surprising to me. Those are two I expect to see shortly..

[wed7]

Thanks for sharing that with us.

The 85 and the 20 have such a large margin.. It isn't surprising to me. Those are two I expect to see shortly..

I echo this...