[Jonathan Mac]

I love the DA limited primes and have all the SMC ones but I acknowledge that there are things that could be done to improve them without changing their essential design philosophy (small, high quality, not the fastest but very high image quality). I had a think about what I'd choose to change on each, keeping it well within what I'd consider to be entirely possible.

DA 15mm - Sharper in the corners at larger apertures.
DA 21mm - Sharper at larger apertures, get rid of whatever causes green-blob flare, increase speed to f/2.8 at least.
DA 35mm - A focus limiter. Definitely no changes needed in the optics here.
DA 40mm - Sharper at larger apertures.
DA 70mm - It could be a little sharper wide open but not much. A closer minimum focus distance.

I think all of these changes would be easily achievable without any significant impact on size or cost.

Of course, in-lens focus motors could be added but I suspect that would increase size and cost, but here I'm really concentrating on factors which would improve images rather than nice-to-haves.

I'd be interested to see what others think.

[shardulm]

DA 21mm - Sharper at larger apertures, get rid of whatever causes green-blob flare, increase speed to f/2.8 at least.

To achieve an f2.8 or better on this wide an angled lens the size of the front element and the contributing elements won't remain the same and it will loose its charm as an almost pancake lens..

[The Squirrel Mafia]

Nice improvement list. The one thing I'd like for them to do is to weather seal these lenses.

[tvdtvdtvd]

I'm certainly not an optics engineer, but I suspect that the corrections necessary to make the DA15 sharper in the corners
or the DA40 sharper wide open, etc, would entail additional optical elements, ie, bigger lens. Perhaps I'm wrong and the improvements
in lens design over the last 15 years would allow for a radically better lens with the same number of elements, but I suspect
that's not the case. Making the DA21 faster would most definitely entail an increase in size.

Certainly things like WR or internal motors would make them larger. How much larger is the question? Would they still be worthy
of the Limited badge? The DA20-40 is certainly a good case for both WR and internal motor in a compact build, bearing in mind
that the DA20-40 is the largest DA Limited by far.

I think WR sealed, internal zoomed versions of the DA Limiteds would be a nice addition but I'd hate to see the current models
go away >if< they became appreciably larger. In other words, I'd prefer to see both DA Limited and DA Limited Clone WR DC
on offer rather than have a bigger DA Limited Clone WR DC replace DA Limited.

That all said, the FA77 has always been a marvel for packing in so much performance into such a small form. I'd hate to see
that lens monkeyed with in order to 'modernize' it.

[pres589]

My two cents, take as such; those are all optical design changes and/or changes in how the lens elements are made (machined instead of molded) to reduce surface irregularity and such save for adding a focus limiter to the DA 35.

The DA 21 never made a lot of sense to me; it's like a 35mm lens on full frame but it's not fast and the magic happens when it's stopped down a bit from an already relatively slow max aperture. If it was a full frame I could maybe see an f3.2 max aperture as it would be a pretty wide angle lens. As it is, it's like, what is this for? A slow street lens? I know some folks have and really like it, I just don't quite get it myself.

Likewise, saying that the DA 15 needs to be sharper wide open, why? It's a landscapes lens in my mind (although I have used it to take group photos a couple of times) and will be used often at f8 or f11 which is where starburst magic happens anyway. What I would really like is for a WR variation on the SMC version with its straight aperture blades. Or better yet, seal it up even better to the AW level. And that would increase the size and weight but I'm cool with that.

As long as the lens is pretty sharp in the center wide open I don't really think there's an issue. I don't mind soft edges on an f1.x prime as long as the center is nice and sharp. Same really for any lens. I agree with Henri Cartier Bresson's famous quote; "Sharpness is a Bourgeoise Concept"

[house]

Tweak the design to prevent wobble over time. All my limited wobble a fair bit and could be a bit more robust.

I wouldn't change any of them optically. For the size they are well judged. I'm annoyed with my da 15 but I realise I should just get another, non limited, lens. But there isn't a wide angle prime for pentax FF or apsc. I would consider FF if there was a good AF wide/uw prime.

[pres589]

Tweak the design to prevent wobble over time. All my limited wobble a fair bit and could be a bit more robust.

I wouldn't change any of them optically. For the size they are well judged. I'm annoyed with my da 15 but I realise I should just get another, non limited, lens. But there isn't a wide angle prime for pentax FF or apsc. I would consider FF if there was a good AF wide/uw prime.

The DA 21 and DA 14 are both wide angle primes available new today. There are a lot of options on the used market from 28mm and wider; 20, two 24's, and 28 from Sigma, a 24 and two 28's from Pentax, and the Tamron 14 FF lens (that is probably quite rare, I never hear anyone talk about it). Maybe something I'm not thinking of but those all exist and all have autofocus.

What annoys you about the DA 15? It seems like a polarizing lens, that people either quite like or quite don't. Those kinds of situations exist with other lenses, like the FA 43 or DA 35 f2.4, where as there are some lenses that everyone seems to like, like the FA 77 or M 50 1.7.

[Madaboutpix]

Wishlist of worthwhile improvements to the DA Limiteds? Hmm, let me think:

• Don't mess too much around with them; you have something unique there, Ricoh. Therefore, evolve them, but don't kill them nor their character.
• For their next revision, give them all WR, as you've done with the DA20-40.
• They started out as wonderfully compact lenses chiefly housed in metal. They needn't be super-fast-aperture, and it would be great if they kept their small filter sizes. But do make sure that the screws that hold them together stay locked in their places. I've never had any issue with this myself, but I have read too many user reports where this seemed to be a problem.
• Bring back the smc-style starbursts that got lost in the HD updates. (The HD coatings were a worthwhile new feature BTW.) Are the improvements in bokeh through the changed aperture mechanism really that earth-moving?
• Okay, a little more corner sharpness for the wider focal lengths, if possible, but keep the great contrast and colours.
• If you can, keep them affordable (in the not too high three-digit range). One of their many attractions is that they are an affordable luxury.

Can't think of much more I would want to be changed right now. Except maybe: Can we have a gorgeous 50- or 55-mil DA Limited as a possible upgrade from the capable-but-plasticky DA50? (Don't get me wrong: I love my DA50 a lot.)

[Trickortreat]

I love the DA limited primes and have all the SMC ones but I acknowledge that there are things that could be done to improve them without changing their essential design philosophy (small, high quality, not the fastest but very high image quality). I had a think about what I'd choose to change on each, keeping it well within what I'd consider to be entirely possible.

DA 15mm - Sharper in the corners at larger apertures.
DA 21mm - Sharper at larger apertures, get rid of whatever causes green-blob flare, increase speed to f/2.8 at least.
DA 35mm - A focus limiter. Definitely no changes needed in the optics here.
DA 40mm - Sharper at larger apertures.
DA 70mm - It could be a little sharper wide open but not much. A closer minimum focus distance.

I think all of these changes would be easily achievable without any significant impact on size or cost.

Of course, in-lens focus motors could be added but I suspect that would increase size and cost, but here I'm really concentrating on factors which would improve images rather than nice-to-haves.

I'd be interested to see what others think.

Only thing I can think of is making the focusing ring not rotate during auto focus.

[pres589]

Can't think of much more I would want to be changed right now. Except maybe: Can we have a gorgeous 50- or 55-mil DA Limited as a possible upgrade from the capable-but-plasticky DA50? (Don't get me wrong: I love my DA50 a lot.)

The whole point of the DA 50 1.8 is to have an inexpensive lens lens that gives good value/IQ for the money. Secondary goals were probably (I say probably because I have no way of knowing this but it seems likely to me) a lens that is lightweight. Something that could give today's shooters good reasons to still have a prime around. Your idea would kill the cheapness and the lightness.

What might be nice going forward is a revival of the M/A/F/FA 50 1.7 optics with a metal build and WR and such. Modern features and styling something like the DA 100 Macro or DA 35. Basically what you're talking about but with slightly better optics. And then remove the FA 50 1.4 from production.

[kiwi_jono]

I don't think there is too much wrong with these lenses optically - given the size constraints (i.e. I would not want to sacrifice size for quality).

I would love to see them upgraded to WR but event that might involve a certain amount of repackaging to achieve (as they were never designed to make space for WR seals etc).

[ramseybuckeye]

WR. I recently purchased the 20-40 over the 21 because WR makes it that much more useful to me.

[StiffLegged]

Definitely add WR to the spec for all the primes.

[Madaboutpix]

The whole point of the DA 50 1.8 is to have an inexpensive lens lens that gives good value/IQ for the money. Secondary goals were probably (I say probably because I have no way of knowing this but it seems likely to me) a lens that is lightweight. Something that could give today's shooters good reasons to still have a prime around. Your idea would kill the cheapness and the lightness.
What might be nice going forward is a revival of the M/A/F/FA 50 1.7 optics with a metal build and WR and such. Modern features and styling something like the DA 100 Macro or DA 35. Basically what you're talking about but with slightly better optics. And then remove the FA 50 1.4 from production.

Oh, I certainly got the DA50 not least because of its incredible value. And while I haven't shot the vintage 50s you're mentioning, I suspect that the DA50 has the better optics. In fact, it has impressed me so much in the IQ department that I could easily imagine it alternatively offered as an HD DA50 with a slightly more solid build, just like Ricoh did with the HD FA35. I would be willing to admit that its rendering could perhaps have a little more "character" (as opposed to almost being "clinical") for the Limited designation, but sharp and contrasty that little DA50 is, no doubt.

[sergysergy]

I think improving the sharpness of the 15mm is the most necessary one.