[c.a.m]

Thanks C.A.M.

You're welcome. Hope you found that site to be of some interest.

Several posts in this thread have pointed to a number of 'fast' lenses (i.e., wide aperture) in the Pentax lines. The situation may not be as dire as you might have presumed.

Anyways, there are compact lenses as well as the more recent D-FA* lenses, which are heavier and bulkier, but demonstrate superlative optical performance.

Personally, I shoot with an APS-C format camera, and really enjoy the DA Limited lenses. If I wish to shoot with a wider aperture, I use older 'vintage' lenses such as the SMC 50mm f/1.2, SMC Takumar 50/1.4, or Pentax-F 50/1.7. They're all capable of producing pleasing images.

- Craig

---

Last edited by c.a.m; 06-30-2019 at 05:51 AM. Reason: Typo

[Kerrowdown]

Tell her I'd mount her on my camera anytime.

Passed your message on, but she mumbled something about too much snow where you stay...

[normhead]

Passed your message on, but she mumbled something about too much snow where you stay...

Is she serious or is she just playing hard to get?

[Kerrowdown]

Is she serious or is she just playing hard to get?

Knowing her as I do... it's probably a bit of both.

---

Last edited by Kerrowdown; 06-30-2019 at 11:32 AM.

[angerdan]

1. Does anybody know why Pentax's doesn't like to produce lenses between F1.2 to F2.0?
2. There are only 4 lenses in its current K mount / APS-C line up,
3. I realize the lenses would be a little bigger and weigh more, but looking at all the pics on 500px, most pictures are from lenses with F ranges that Pentax doesn't make.
4. Does anybody know the logic behind Pentax's thinking?

1. That's not true, Pentax always had f1.4 primes between 24 and 85mm focal length.
2. Your numbers aren't correct. Pentax currently has 9 lenses between f1.4-2.0 in the lineup.
   <= F2 Lenses | PentaxForums.com
3. First of all they are sold much more expensive. So if not enough people buy them, they wouldn't be made.
   Second only 19% of camera owners buy primes, all others going zoom and kit lenses.
   Lenses: what has demand and what has not - facts - PentaxForums.com
4. Economy and keeping up with the competition. Only products which will be accepted and with enough sales can help a company to make profit.
   How many f1.4 lenses from Pentax do you already own yourself?

PENTAX Limited Lens Special Site | RICOH IMAGING
Pentax prefers to make compact and light weight lenses.

The DFA line has slightly better performance, but it is still limited by the compactness and limited weight design philosophy.

The D FA line has no limitations. The D FA* 50mm is one of the best 50mm prime lens ever made, even better than Zeiss.
What do you even know about the current D FA lineup?
https://www.pentaxforums.com/lenssearch/?inproduction=0&series%5B%5D=D+FA&order=weight&sort=desc

[swanlefitte]

This is interesting.
500px Blog » » That ‘Most Used Cameras’ Stat Sharing Sites Like Promoting is Full of Holes
Here are the highest rated photos by brand of camera used to capture them:

1. Pentax
2. Nikon
3. Canon
4. Olympus
5. Sony

Apple makes three of the 5 most used cameras, right? They’re found on another list. The lowest rated photos by brand of camera used to capture them:

1. Apple
2. Google
3. Samsung
4. Panasonic
5. Leica

[swanlefitte]

Here is some info from 2013 so even older than the last stuff.
A fun look at the 500px "Popular" photos (part 2) - Exposure Triangle : photography
Check out the aperture as listed by category box plot. Very few photos are f /<2.0 The category 'family' has the most with 25%. It was also the only category that had more than 50% shot under f/4

[house]

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks"

Come on! Pentax does have a fairly weak lineup of fast primes. The only f 1.4s are ~50mm. The span under f2 goes from 31mm to 77mm ...

Pentax tend to produce curiously slow primes. They are nice lenses but for other reasons than speed. Protesting the charge that Pentax lacks fast glass is strange behaviour.

[swanlefitte]

Really weak? Really? I guess 7 compared to 8 means really weak? Then I suppose all are weak except canon because 8 must be weak compared to 9.
Focal lengths f/<=2
Sony e. 8
Panasonic g 6
Pentax k. 6 with 85 soon.(7)
Nikon f 8
Fuji x. 8
Canon ef. 9

[house]

Look at the lineup not just the numbers. As I said K mount 1.4s are ~50mm only.

Even so your numbers look wrong. Nikon for instance has more fast lenses than that? At least listed on their site.

Pretending Pentax is good at fast glass requires some very creative interpretation of data.

Fuji might have 8, haven't counted, but look at the focal lengths and speed. They have fast glass, Pentax doesn't in any meaningful way.

[texandrews]

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks"

Come on! Pentax does have a fairly weak lineup of fast primes. The only f 1.4s are ~50mm. The span under f2 goes from 31mm to 77mm ...

Pentax tend to produce curiously slow primes. They are nice lenses but for other reasons than speed. Protesting the charge that Pentax lacks fast glass is strange behaviour.

Well, I guess all this depends on the definition of fast first of all. But then there are the other points being brought up, which point to a dearth of actual need for primes faster than f1.8.

I think the fast prime desire is a mania---and more aspirational than anything else. You can't complain about big and heavy, then also opine about needing fast primes. You can't complain about Pentax lenses being expensive---they actually aren't---and then opine that there aren't fast primes---which would be even more expensive. & etc.

Everybody seems to complain about every manufacturer about this and that. Seems quite silly to me. I my decades long use of photography as an amateur, and artist, and a commercial professional, I have used cameras from 9 manufacturers. There have been ones I liked, ones I didn't so much but did like for certain things, ones I've loved.

[swanlefitte]

Even so your numbers look wrong. Nikon for instance has more fast lenses than that? At least listed on their site.

You are correct. They have 10.
20, 2x24, 2x28, 4x35, 6x50, 58, 2x85, 105, 135, 200.

22 lenses but 10 focal lengths. My point stands that the number of lenses is misleading.

[normhead]

"The lady doth protest too much, methinks"

Come on! Pentax does have a fairly weak lineup of fast primes. The only f 1.4s are ~50mm. The span under f2 goes from 31mm to 77mm ...

Pentax tend to produce curiously slow primes. They are nice lenses but for other reasons than speed. Protesting the charge that Pentax lacks fast glass is strange behaviour.

Compact fast primes.

1. 50 1.8
2. 31 1.8
3. 43 1.8
4.771.8
5.FA 50 1.4
6. DA 55 1.4

Larger primes
7 DFA 50 1.4.


These 7 are all in the catalogue. If you didn't count seven you are so sloppy you didn't even go to the Ricoh/Pentax site to count. What kind of lazy dumb ass make such pointless accusations without even looking doing basic count of what is currently on the shelves. And there are also in the catalogue 2 35 ƒ/2 lenses.

As well there's the
DFA 84 1.4
35 1.4

Easily available older lenses with better than acceptable IQ

10-FA* 85 1.4
11-13 FA 50 1.4 (Also F and SMC versions)
14-16 FA 50 1.7 (Also F and A versions)

17-19 There's a FA 24 ƒ/2. (Also and F and A version)

And there are at least 10 3rd party options.

With All due respect the OP owes the forum an apoloplgy for being too lazy to count, and you owe the forum an apology for backing up this person. If sub 2 lenses are so important to him, why didn't he do any research? Why was he so comfortable posting inaccurate information, and why are you so quick to back him up?

I you can't find fast glass for your Pentax, it's because you don't know how to use a search engine, and you probably shouldn't even be allowed on the internet.
And apologists for him aren't any better.

If not troll, he's darn close. Ignorant, in your face arrogant, not forum material.

Do 10 minutes of research before you post.

[house]

Always the reasonable chum right Norm..
Will have to do this point by point

Compact fast primes.

1. 50 1.8
2. 31 1.8
3. 43 1.8
4.771.8
5.FA 50 1.4
6. DA 55 1.4

Larger primes
7 DFA 50 1.4.

These 7 are all in the catalogue. If you didn't count seven you are so sloppy you didn't even go to the Ricoh/Pentax site to count. What kind of lazy dumb ass make such pointless accusations without even looking doing basic count of what is currently on the shelves. And there are also in the catalogue 2 35 ƒ/2 lenses.

Look again at my posts and read your rant again... You'll notice I've not counted Pentax lenses at all. Perhaps you're not using the quote reply correctly or you need to read more slowly. Talk about being allowed on the internet.

As well there's the
DFA 84 1.4
35 1.4

No there simply isn't.

Easily available older lenses with better than acceptable IQ

10-FA* 85 1.4
11-13 FA 50 1.4 (Also F and SMC versions)
14-16 FA 50 1.7 (Also F and A versions)

17-19 There's a FA 24 ƒ/2. (Also and F and A version)

And there are at least 10 3rd party options.

Not relevant to the discussion.

With All due respect the OP owes the forum an apoloplgy for being too lazy to count, and you owe the forum an apology for backing up this person. If sub 2 lenses are so important to him, why didn't he do any research? Why was he so comfortable posting inaccurate information, and why are you so quick to back him up?

The OP is correct in his general observation and his post was an open and interesting question to a discussion board. Some people have given good answers. Calling for an apology is absurd. A grown person isn't hurt by someone having the wrong idea about the tools he's using. Thing is the OP didn't even have the wrong idea. (just quoted the slightly wrong number)

I you can't find fast glass for your Pentax, it's because you don't know how to use a search engine, and you probably shouldn't even be allowed on the internet.
And apologists for him aren't any better.

If not troll, he's darn close. Ignorant, in your face arrogant, not forum material.

Do 10 minutes of research before you post.

The above is just shameful behaviour. Not only that but it's triggered by one of the smallest slights imaginable on the internet.


Back to the discussion
Pentax previous strategy of producing "slower" lenses made a lot of sense. For general photography the limiteds and other primes are imho well balanced in terms of speed and performance. Personally I've never demanded less dof than my DA 70 ltd. Light gathering is another matter as I'd prefer to shoot iso 100 all the time.

Only recently have I tried faster and better lenses than my limiteds (not Pentax). I've since understood the appeal of faster glass. For me it's faster at the wider angles that makes the most difference, dof remains workable and with sharpness across the frame as well as controlled field curvature a lot of creative opportunities as well as just workable shots become available.

[pschlute]

To the OP.

If Pentax does not produce the lens that can produce that winning shot for you.....perhaps you can post a photo where you were denied the result you wanted due to lack of equipment or even post an image with another lens/camera that you want to replicate ?

After 40+ years in photography I generally find that it is the fault of the photographer rather than the equipment, but am always willing to be proved wrong