[biz-engineer]

Perhaps will create a black&silver FA combination , as it was suggested ( to keep our World in a healthy balance ) .

The Yin and the Yang of the lenses.

---------- Post added 26-02-21 at 09:16 ----------

The secret of Pentax, is that Pentax is probably the only brand where you can buy lenses for a lifetime. No silly change on lens mount. Buy the lenses once and upgrade the bodies as sensor technology slowly improves, your good to go for a decade or more.

[Sandy Hancock]

The secret of Pentax, is that Pentax is probably the only brand where you can buy lenses for a lifetime. No silly change on lens mount. Buy the lenses once and upgrade the bodies as sensor technology slowly improves, you're good to go for a decade or more.

Another paragraph to send to Ricoh's marketing department.

[biz-engineer]

Another paragraph to send to Ricoh's marketing department.

Well. If you bought FA limited lenses ten years ago, you could sell them and make a profit on them years later. That totally different for mainstream brands and third parties (sigma, tamron), where if you bought a lens from them ten years ago, the value is closed to zero now. I'd put the Pentax limited in the same category of Leica glass, such that the prices of the very same lenses may increase over time.

[iheiramo]

The secret of Pentax, is that Pentax is probably the only brand where you can buy lenses for a lifetime. No silly change on lens mount. Buy the lenses once and upgrade the bodies as sensor technology slowly improves, your good to go for a decade or more.

I hope they keep up to it. I bought DFA*85 with expectation to be able to use it for about 30 years and still have some value left. That way it didn't seem so expensive
Especially when compared to sporting equipment in same price group that will be worthless and in need of upgrade in 10 years.

[biz-engineer]

I hope they keep up to it. I bought DFA*85 with expectation to be able to use it for about 30 years and still have some value left. That way it didn't seem so expensiveEspecially when compared to sporting equipment in same price group that will be worthless and in need of upgrade in 10 years.

I can confirm, that's what I realized doing prints of my photos. I realized that if I had bought a 645z years ago, I would need anything else for until it stops working, or I stop photography or I get into health issues when aging myself. The life span of good glass can be a lot longer than the lifetime of cheap glass.

[Lowell Goudge]

The Yin and the Yang of the lenses.

---------- Post added 26-02-21 at 09:16 ----------

The secret of Pentax, is that Pentax is probably the only brand where you can buy lenses for a lifetime. No silly change on lens mount. Buy the lenses once and upgrade the bodies as sensor technology slowly improves, your good to go for a decade or more.

Another paragraph to send to Ricoh's marketing department.

Marketing department?

[ffking]

I bought DFA*85 with expectation to be able to use it for about 30 years

I think a lot of people here would be exceptionally happy to be able to use any lens for the next 30 years

[iheiramo]

I think a lot of people here would be exceptionally happy to be able to use any lens for the next 30 years

Yeah, longevity of the lens is not the only uncertainty here

EDIT: ...And I'm one of the "young" members here...

[mikesbike]

I did not sell my FA 35mm f/2 in order to acquire the HD version, although I do think there to be some improvement to be had under some circumstances, nor do I intend to do so even after now having bought a K-1 II where it will again see more use. I've always been more than satisfied with its performance as is. My FA Limiteds were all bought years ago, with the recent exception of the 31mm. It and the others were had at good sale or rebate prices, which was a rare opportunity for Limiteds. HD versions might very well come with some price increases over the original versions.

That said, whatever improvements are brought to these fine lenses, in terms of build and coatings would be a welcome upgrade in the Pentax lens lineup.

[Rondec]

Buying lenses isn't an investment -- at least not in the way most people refer to investment. You'd make more money buying Bit Coin (at least till its bubble pops) or sports cards or just about anything else and keeping it for ten years than buying lenses. If a bunch of people decide to sell their SMC limiteds, the used price will drop some. That's the way of things. MIJ versions always seem more in demand and won't drop.

The improvements probably make the most sense on the wider end of things. I don't own the FA 77 any more, but when I did, I wasn't exactly shooting directly into the sun and I was really happy with the out of focus rendering it provided. On the FA 31 (which I do own), I don't think the rounded aperture blades will make a big difference (I don't shoot a lot of shallow depth of field stuff with it), but it does flare some and if HD coatings reduce that, it would be a benefit.

That said, I am happy with the FA 31 current version and don't plan to upgrade.

[robbiec]

Nope, I won't be buying straight off, rather refresh my K-3 with the v3 version and get the DFA21 Limited first, the the DFA* Wide then the K-1 v3 then wait for a set of macro refreshes, 50/2.8, 200/4 and 100/2.8 - I think that's me sorted to 2027 or thereabouts.

[mikesbike]

Perhaps one of the most practical aspects of these lenses' updates will be the SP coating against grime, etc. All in all, a good move by Pentax.

---------- Post added 02-28-21 at 03:52 PM ----------

but it does flare some and if HD coatings reduce that, it would be a benefit.

I guess we will see some comparative testing down the road to find out. One thing that will not change is the FA 31mm Ltd having quite a bit of vignetting wide open when used on the K-1 or other FF body. This aspect did not show up in previous lab tests, as these were done on APS-C bodies. After acquiring the K-1 II and this lens, I found out about this issue quite easily on my own. The good news is, the light falloff situation diminishes rapidly upon stopping down some.

[Rondec]

Perhaps one of the most practical aspects of these lenses' updates will be the SP coating against grime, etc. All in all, a good move by Pentax.

---------- Post added 02-28-21 at 03:52 PM ----------



I guess we will see some comparative testing down the road to find out. One thing that will not change is the FA 31mm Ltd having quite a bit of vignetting wide open when used on the K-1 or other FF body. This aspect did not show up in previous lab tests, as these were done on APS-C bodies. After acquiring the K-1 II and this lens, I found out about this issue quite easily on my own. The good news is, the light falloff situation diminishes rapidly upon stopping down some.

Vignetting is the price you pay for a smallish (for the aperture) lens. For landscape (my main use of it) I stop down and as you say it goes away. For people photos, it generally isn't a big deal as long as they aren't standing on the very edge (which usually they aren't).

[angerdan]

1. Is there that much difference between SMC and HD with rounded aperture blades Limited lenses?
2. The HD's apparently are cheaper , why?
3. Will value of SMC's drop dramatically?
4. Are HD's much better in photo IQ?
5. Should we all rush and sell all SMC's and order HD's in the anticipation of much more pleasurable experience?

1. depends on situation
2. R&D costs should be covered now and the market for screwdriven AF lenses without WR can grwo with lowered prices
3. Depends on how many switch their copies to HD and sell the smc ones
4. only in specific light situations, but sharpness/resolution is all the same
5. That wouldn't be the Pentax way. better adding a limited lens which is missing in the personal lineup.

And remember the Pentax (FA) Limited Lenses Special Site:
FA Limited | PENTAX Limited Lens Special Site | RICOH IMAGING

[aslyfox]

. . . I guess we will see some comparative testing down the road to find out. One thing that will not change is the FA 31mm Ltd having quite a bit of vignetting wide open when used on the K-1 or other FF body. . . . .

1 I am no photography expert, I'm just some one who posts a lot

2 was this always true, even with film?

if not, why would this be given that the FA limiteds were developed for the " full frame " 35 film negative