[normhead]

It could be you're right, I'm certain you've followed this more intensely than have I over the past 4 years. Many of the DFA decisions make little sense to me, but then I have always enjoyed the smaller form factor of Pentax, the optical excellence from their lenses when compared to similar spec competitors produces, and am not enamored of FF. My perspective has been that, as one example, our 55-300 is an amazing piece of glass in its category. No, it's not the 60-250 or a 70-200, but it is a great consumer VERY wide reach zoom that has vibrant colors and very good overall performance as a consumer zoom. However, perhaps the way forward it going higher end and looking like Nikinon?

Sounds a bit like the conversation Kenspo and I had a few years ago. My point that guys like me who treasured portability with very good IQ were being ignored in the new strategy which seems to favour big heavy lenses with excellent IQ. I argued pentax was abandoning part of their user base. maybe not the part that wants those big huge lenses and were buying Sigma Art lenses, but those of us who carry our gear long distances and need light weight and small size.

The thing is, almost everything I need I can get, so it looks like Pentax is trying to expand their appeal a bit. I can go out with my Sigma 8-16, DA 18-135 and DA 55-300 PLM and be ready for anything I might encounter on a kit or canoe trip. I usually add the 100macro as well. With a K-3 or K-P type camera that's a small compact do everything kit. My problem with other systems, is, I don't need smaller than that. As long as I can put together a nice lightweight kit for a trip, I have no reason to look for lighter/smaller.

And as I've pointed out before, I'm 70 years old with an artificial hip and two torn rotator cuffs, and with nice shoulder bags I easily carry my 6 pound Tamron 300 2.8 and another 4 or 5 pounds of lenses on 5 Km walks (3miles). When I see people insisting they need smaller lighter, I look at myself, and think "I'm doing fine and look at all these things wrong with me." What the heck is wrong with these dudes? Are they that decrepit? Or are they just super lazy?

Tess always thinks I cry too much. The only problem with that being what's the downside? I, on most days don't get enough exercise. Adding 10 pounds to your daily walk would be good thing for most of us. It's painful to listen to people saying a 2 pound camera and a one pound lens is too much. The way I see it, before I get to that degree of limitation, I'd rather be dead, and carrying the gear I might need will help me stay in shape and avoid that day ever happening. It's a choice. maybe for some of us lighter gear and continuing to get out is the healthy option, but my guess is given the laziness I see all around me is, it's way more likely to be attitude at play here more than physical limitations.

Just a note to those continuously arguing for lighter smaller gear in public. if normhead reads that, he's going to assume you are a wuss. Part of my plan to shame everyone into being more active for better health. Some people where 10 pounds of weights on your walks. I seriously can't see how 10 pounds of camera gear is in some way less desirable.

---

Last edited by normhead; 01-02-2019 at 10:55 AM.

[Docrwm]

Sounds a bit like the conversation Kenspo and I had a few years ago. My point that guys like me who treasured portability with very good IQ were being ignored in the new strategy which seems to favour big heavy lenses with excellent IQ. I argued pentax was abandoning part of their user base. maybe not the part that wants those big huge lenses and were buying Sigma Art lenses, but those of us who carry our gear long distances and need light weight and small size.

The thing is, almost everything I need I can get, so it looks like Pentax is trying to expand their appeal a bit. I can go out with my Sigma 8-16, DA 18-135 and DA 55-300 PLM and be ready for anything I might encounter on a kit or canoe trip. I usually add the 100macro as well. With a K-3 or K-P type camera that's a small compact do everything kit. My problem with other systems, is, I don't need smaller than that. As long as I can put together a nice lightweight kit for a trip, I have no reason to look for lighter/smaller.

And as I've pointed out before, I'm 70 years old with an artificial hip and two torn rotator cuffs, and with nice shoulder bags I easily carry my 6 pound Tamron 300 2.8 and another 4 or 5 pounds of lenses on 5 Km walks (3miles). When I see people insisting they need smaller lighter, I look at myself, and think "I'm doing fine and look at all these things wrong with me." What the heck is wrong with these dudes? Are they that decrepit? Or are they just super lazy?

Tess always thinks I cry too much. The only problem with that being what's the downside? I, on most days don't get enough exercise. Adding 10 pounds to your daily walk would be good thing for most of us. It's painful to listen to people saying a 2 pound camera and a one pound lens is too much. The way I see it, before I get to that degree of limitation, I'd rather be dead, and carrying the gear I might need will help me stay in shape and avoid that day ever happening. It's a choice. maybe for some of us lighter gear and continuing to get out is the healthy option, but my guess is given the laziness I see all around me is, it's way more likely to be attitude at play here more than physical limitations.

Just a note to those continuously arguing for lighter smaller gear in public. if normhead reads that, he's going to assume you are a wuss. Part of my plan to shame everyone into being more active for better health. Some people where 10 pounds of weights on your walks. I seriously can't see how 10 pounds of camera gear is in some way less desirable.

I have no problem with the gear I have, or with the new gear. It's simply a question of scope and direction for Pentax. How old is the K3 now? I realize that the KP and K1 came out after it did but neither is a replacement for the K3. The limiteds have been updated with new coatings, which I am sure is nice. But I do find it interesting that among Pentax's dedicated user base, as Doundounba pointed out, the interests that top the list by a LARGE margin are APS-C. It is my hope that Pentax understands this and we will see a new APS-C K7/5/3 follow-on camera soon. Heck, under many conditions I find my K5IIs to be superior to my K3 and the K5 was originally released in 2010, the IIs in 2012, and the K3 in 2013! Even the K3II is approaching 4 years old.

[monochrome]

It could be you're right, I'm certain you've followed this more intensely than have I over the past 4 years. Many of the DFA decisions make little sense to me, but then I have always enjoyed the smaller form factor of Pentax, the optical excellence from their lenses when compared to similar spec competitors produces, and am not enamored of FF. My perspective has been that, as one example, our 55-300 is an amazing piece of glass in its category. No, it's not the 60-250 or a 70-200, but it is a great consumer VERY wide reach zoom that has vibrant colors and very good overall performance as a consumer zoom. However, perhaps the way forward it going higher end and looking like Nikinon?

There’s a large space between Nikonon and Leica, especially if your primary market is Japan. Our frame is the west. We can’t understand.

[Docrwm]

There’s a large space between Nikonon and Leica, especially if your primary market is Japan. Our frame is the west. We can’t understand.

Just as the Q was a success in Japan and not really outside the home islands, Pentax is primarily a domestic company at the end of the day.

[ThorSanchez]

It could be, in the current era, Pentax realizes smaller bodies and smaller,slower lenses is now ‘owned’ by Sony and Fuji mirrorless. It could be, in the current era, Pentax believes value-priced, feature-rich dSLR bodies and Best-In-Class lenses is the new hallmark.

That would be unfortunate, since a lot of us Pentaxians are very fond of the tiny, high-quality limited primes. But recent history does seem to be pointing in that direction.

[clackers]

Just as the Q was a success in Japan and not really outside the home islands, Pentax is primarily a domestic company at the end of the day.

Yeah, we can see that Kenspo and the gaijin Ambassadors got advance copies of new products but seemed to have had little to do with the initial planning and testing. He seemed to complain that he was not in the loop.

The credits for the K-1 sample images including lens compatibility results were all Japanese names, and many were clearly just company employees, not even pro photographers.

[ThorSanchez]

And as I've pointed out before, I'm 70 years old with an artificial hip and two torn rotator cuffs, and with nice shoulder bags I easily carry my 6 pound Tamron 300 2.8 and another 4 or 5 pounds of lenses on 5 Km walks (3miles). When I see people insisting they need smaller lighter, I look at myself, and think "I'm doing fine and look at all these things wrong with me." What the heck is wrong with these dudes? Are they that decrepit? Or are they just super lazy?

It's often a tradeoff with other needs. On a daily three mile walk you're not carrying much else and three pounds of gear is nothing. You're absolutely right that most people should have no issue carrying that and more.

But on a week or two vacation each thing that goes in my personal item under the seat of the airplane needs to be carefully considered. When I went to Iceland in June at least 3/4ths of the weight of my personal bag was camera gear. Some folks might want or need to bring other things that can't be checked. Or with Economy Basic tickets you may not even have a checked bag. Carry-on bags are often limited to 10 kg.

Before I had kids I'd go on one or two long hiking weekends a year with friends. My camera was a little Canon Elph point-and-shoot, that went along with 25-30 pounds of camping gear in a pack on my back for 30-40 miles. The difference between the Elph and my K-3ii is almost the weight of a modern down sleeping bag, or quite a bit of food. The volume and weight of the DSLR and lens is bigger than my backpacking stove. If I went on another trip like that I'd have to really think long and hard about taking the K-3ii or just my phone.

But having said all that, I'm sure some people want a smaller, lighter camera just because it would be nice, not because they really need it. Most of my photos aren't from Iceland or 20 miles down the trail.

[monochrome]

That would be unfortunate, since a lot of us Pentaxians are very fond of the tiny, high-quality limited primes. But recent history does seem to be pointing in that direction.

As am I - but - I do not believe screw drive is the future; in-lens focus motors pose a serious engineering challenge if absolute (small) size is your brand identifier.

[savoche]

Oh. I voted the DFA18 - but that was before I noticed there was a DFA70-300 on the list. If it'll be anything like the DA55-300 in size I'd get that as soon as it out. I "need" that for travelling.

[ThorSanchez]

As am I - but - I do not believe screw drive is the future; in-lens focus motors pose a serious engineering challenge if absolute (small) size is your brand identifier.

I don't doubt small lenses with motors are an engineering challenge. But bon't other brands have pancake lenses with built in focusing motors? I know little about other brands, but something like this Fuji seem to fit the bill and appears to be about the size of the 40mm Limited.

[monochrome]

I don't doubt small lenses with motors are an engineering challenge. But bon't other brands have pancake lenses with built in focusing motors? I know little about other brands, but something like this Fuji seem to fit the bill and appears to be about the size of the 40mm Limited.

I believe that’s a MILC X-mount lens with a short register distance and mount diameter (a 27mm lens, 41mm FF equivalent)). K-mount has a 45.46mm register distance and a much wider mount diameter.

Then you have to compare Limited-quality materials and details, and make it fast AF (so bigger motor or new technology) and consider the limitations of the K-Mount analog design, versus electronic mounts. It’s just a lot of engineering work for each lens, using money Pentax doesn’t have for APSc and Fuji does have.

[TwoUptons]

I’d be interested in the DFA 70-300, but it depends on quality, size, and price...
If it were magically as good as and inexpensive as the DA, just with better coverage, it would probably beat out the 70-200 f4...
That said, it will probably not be all of those things and I have a cheap, decent 70-300 already...

As for weight, I’m in the camp where it’s far less expensive to get 1kg off the photographer than 100g off the camera... but the travel weight would be more of an issue for airplane travel...

-Eric

[richard0170]

I don't doubt small lenses with motors are an engineering challenge. But bon't other brands have pancake lenses with built in focusing motors? I know little about other brands, but something like this Fuji seem to fit the bill and appears to be about the size of the 40mm Limited.

I have this lens on my Xpro 1, but I think it and the 18mm Fuji do are the only compact APSc lenses out there comparable to the Pentax Ltds. It is very nice but it is also slow to focus despite its internal motor, even compared to screwdrive. It is also not noticeably quieter than my Ltd 40mm, 35mm or 15mm. I can't comment on their 18mm as I do not have one. Also, as its is focus by wire, the MF sucks.
Personally I do not mind the noise of screw drive lenses. It gives me a sense that the camera is doing its job!

[gaweidert]

Several likes but what I need is a new 1.4x teleconverter. So I voted for that. A 2x one would be real nice too.

[beholder3]

Interestingly the lens choice with 1 vote (the 70-300) seems to be part of the priority plan from the manufacturer: Nippon Camera Ricoh/Pentax 2019 Interview - PentaxForums.com

They have a lot of demands from full frame users, especially for lightweight tele zooms.
- They 85mm on the roadmap has been put back, but it is still coming (the strong implication is that prioritizing the tele zooms pushed back the 85mm).