[Sandy Hancock]

DA* 11-18
DA 20-40 Limited
DA 16-85

Next question?

[SunnyG.]

Please explain....if part of the current line up then 15-30 & 24-70 for FF, in DA 16-85, 18-50, 10-17, 12-24, 17-70, 18-135 20-40
Plus all the pre-digital camera lenses such as the 20-35 etc.

Not sure how many of those are "rebranded"

I was referring to the modern line of zooms pentax has for FF.

---------- Post added 11-01-20 at 11:59 PM ----------

I was referring to the modern line of zooms pentax has for FF.

---------- Post added 11-02-20 at 12:03 AM ----------

They like to hear us whine and complain, perhaps? What are you shopping for that you prefer to not bear the stigma of Tamron heritage? (The Tokinas are rebadged Pentax.)


Steve

Well I would like to have pentax designed lenses. Tamrons good no doubt. But why not a modern DFA 20-35mm? They have the legacy designs. They could modernise those.

---------- Post added 11-02-20 at 12:03 AM ----------

DA* 11-18
DA 20-40 Limited
DA 16-85

Next question?

I was referring to FF. Not APSC

[Michail_P]

I use the Sigma 10--20. Great lens and good value.

I have been considering to buy, lately. It’s nice to have a 10mm min range. Especially on aps c.

[SunnyG.]

The 13-18 and 24-70 were made by Tamron to Pentax specification.


Steve

You mean the 15-30 right? Cuz the 11-18 is a Pentax design. I get it, what your saying. But I think you didn't understand what I wanted to say. I am talking about natively designed glass for FF.

[Sandy Hancock]

Is there anything specifically wrong with the DFA15-30 and DFA24-70? Why does it bother you that they are based on Tamron designs?

Waiting for Pentax to design *exactly* the lens you desire (or in your case, re-hash an old one) is likely to lead to disappointment.

[SunnyG.]

Pentax are trying hard at the moment to release the new flagship aps-c DSLR. After that I expect they will be working hard on a new FF camera and a new MF camera. Some more FF primes are also wanted by many.

Why would you want them to make new versions of the 11-18 and the 15-30 both released within last 4 years ?

15-30 is based on the g1 version of Tamron, mean while the G2 version has already been released. 12-24 for FF maybe? Or 14-28? The lenses you mentioned are good lenses. But I want to use more Pentax designed lenses

---------- Post added 11-02-20 at 12:14 AM ----------

Full frame

---------- Post added 11-02-20 at 12:14 AM ----------

What sensor size are you referring to?

I am referring to FF

---------- Post added 11-02-20 at 12:15 AM ----------

(Laughs). Buy the DA*11-18 f2.8 and get back to us, Sunny!

That's APSC

[Sandy Hancock]

I am referring to FF

In your original post, you might have been thinking about full frame, but you certainly didn't refer to it

[yucatanPentax]

I imagine if Pentax is already selling a given lens in a given range, it isn't hot on the trail to replace it, even if the lens is a Tamron design. Maybe there just aren't sufficient design changes that could be made to improve the lens over current performance.

As it is, they do have Pentax coatings, don't they?

Aside from manual focus legacy lenses, plus the F and FA lines, in DFA covering the wide end, the modern lenses are:

15-30mm
24-70mm
28-105mm

With the first two lenses listed being F 2.8, it seems they've covered zoom ranges fairly well. I imagine that Pentax just decided, at least for now, that there was very little added value in the R&D of more lenses covering the same ranges.

In a world where DSLRs have a shrinking market size, with plenty of legacy lenses and a full range modern line available from 15mm up, where's the profit ... or the overall interest?

[Serkevan]

The G2 version of the 15-30 is not really a huge improvement in terms of optics so it's not such a big deal. The Pentax version is perfectly capable of taking great images.

If anything, they are missing a lightweight f/4 zoom, maybe in the whereabouts of 17-35 or so. And that's exclusively because of weight and size - there is no point to devote resources to low-impact refreshes when there *are* legitimate gaps in the lineup. I'd like to see *what* photos you could not take because of limitations on the 15-30.

[johnha]

The problem is that 'sensible' wide angle zooms have gone out the window.15-30 is the new 20-35 - manufacturers need it in their line-up, the problems of weight, size and filters as big as dinner plates are afterthoughts.

Once they have a big, heavy, expensive 15-30, a smaller, compact, easier to handle 20-35 would take sales off the 15-30 which had cost a huge amount of R&D resources. It's the price to be paid by having the prestigious 15-30 in the line-up because that's a 'must have' lens to be seen as a credible system.

[Serkevan]

The problem is that 'sensible' wide angle zooms have gone out the window.15-30 is the new 20-35 - manufacturers need it in their line-up, the problems of weight, size and filters as big as dinner plates are afterthoughts.

Once they have a big, heavy, expensive 15-30, a smaller, compact, easier to handle 20-35 would take sales off the 15-30 which had cost a huge amount of R&D resources. It's the price to be paid by having the prestigious 15-30 in the line-up because that's a 'must have' lens to be seen as a credible system.

That does not apply to Pentax - the R&D was done by Tamron. They added the 70-210/4 after the D FA* 70-200 f/2.8 after all.

I wouldn't put a lightweight wide zoom off the table... In my case (which I know is not all cases) the 15-30 is out. Never going to be bought. It's far too large and heavy for my uses and I do not need one stop more of light for a landscape lens I'll mostly use at f/8, so I'm glad Pentax didn't spend too much dev time and money in such a lens when a very good one could be sourced much more easily.

[johnha]

That does not apply to Pentax - the R&D was done by Tamron. They added the 70-210/4 after the D FA* 70-200 f/2.8 after all.

I wouldn't put a lightweight wide zoom off the table... In my case (which I know is not all cases) the 15-30 is out. Never going to be bought. It's far too large and heavy for my uses and I do not need one stop more of light for a landscape lens I'll mostly use at f/8, so I'm glad Pentax didn't spend too much dev time and money in such a lens when a very good one could be sourced much more easily.

Yup, that's why I'm happy with my FA20-35/4 in all respects (including IQ), the only minor drawback being the lack of WR (not bothered about SDM etc.). Even if there was a newer version, I'd stick with the FA as I need an aperture ring for my film cameras.

[Serkevan]

Yup, that's why I'm happy with my FA20-35/4 in all respects (including IQ), the only minor drawback being the lack of WR (not bothered about SDM etc.). Even if there was a newer version, I'd stick with the FA as I need an aperture ring for my film cameras.

I'm very happy with my M20/4 because I can toss it in a pocket as "but what if..." without worrying while the IQ is perfectly fine. I am, however, salivating at the thought of the silver D FA 21 Limited... particularly after the 77.

It is easy, they are there not for you, you are there for them. You have to "take pot luck" because that is what Ricoh serves. If you want a newly Ricoh (Pentax) designed and developed wide angle zoom, you have to buy an APS-C or use the K-1 in crop mode, that is how it works these days!

[Ben-G]

... or it's most probably the case to say that " we are there now all together for us ! " 😉

... and we are waiting a little for another marvellous SMC Fa Limited lens :
a georgous 21mm with an aperture ring, a godronated ring focus and a terrific optical Biogon scheme !!!

Best regards from Italy!
Ben