Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-09-2010, 12:23 AM   #16
Veteran Member
wlachan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,626
QuoteOriginally posted by alehel Quote
Seeing as the relatively new 100mm macro is built as it is does make me wonder why they didn't slap the ltd label on it. Looks like it fits quite well into the category.
Maybe the new 100 macro looks just too silly with its "unfinished" design to deserve the LIMITED tag? I think there is too much empty space in the middle of the body and looks like a mockup design instead of a finished product.

Seriously though, I cannot think of anything else being compact and good not being covered already. Perhaps it is time for Pentax to get serious on optical design and offer us some truly awesome optics w/o the bulk and high price tags like Canon or Nikon.

02-09-2010, 04:55 AM   #17
Veteran Member
eurostar's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albareto, Italy
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 813
A 28/2 and a really compact 90/3,5 mm would complete the line-up of DA limiteds. And maybe something sitting between the 15 and the 21: 18/3,5 (28mm equivalent).
02-09-2010, 05:10 AM   #18
Senior Member
apemen's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Ankara, TURKEY
Posts: 182
we have 70mm Ltd. 100 macro and a DA* 200mm.

so obviously we need -and I WANT - a limited lens like 135mm.
Since limiteds have odd focal length, it may be something like 120mm f/2.4 ?
02-09-2010, 05:13 AM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,255
QuoteOriginally posted by apemen Quote
we have 70mm Ltd. 100 macro and a DA* 200mm.

so obviously we need -and I WANT - a limited lens like 135mm.
Since limiteds have odd focal length, it may be something like 120mm f/2.4 ?
Better yet, make it 127, a Mersenne prime.

02-09-2010, 06:43 AM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,327
QuoteOriginally posted by pdo Quote
I think Pentax needs a prime in between 100-200mm.
Right, a DA*135mm f/2.8 would be nice (but I wouldn't buy one as long as my FA 135mm is still functional.)
02-09-2010, 06:51 AM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Copenhagen
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,845
There has been some debate earlier, how one lens which might be expected, could be a 135 mm. One option for this could be in the form of a limited edition f/3.5. It would be a really compact prime, easy to fit in the bag.
Another possibility could be 150/4. Others might prefer a DA* version, like 135/2.


With the new Nikon 24/1.4 :
Nikon releases 24mm f/1.4 G ED fast wideangle lens: Digital Photography Review
I would also like to see such a lens, or a Pentax 20/1.4. A price estimate would be 1.600 – 1.900 $.


Else a DA* 18/2 wouldn’t be a bad idea either.




QuoteOriginally posted by TKH Quote
So pleeeeeeeeeeeease Pentax build ring USM (SDM)!!

I dont need that. But I think we all loose a lot of Pentax friends. Think about all the money Pentax misses because a lot of people buy Sigma and Tamron 70-200 2.8.
I can't remember, are the Sigma and Tamron version in Pentax mount, ring type sonic lens ?
02-09-2010, 07:00 AM   #22
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,772
A fast, reasonably compact prime in the 17-18mm range would be useful. (There is no replacement for film's workhorse 28/2.8) Also, a 10-12mm ultrawide prime would be welcome.

Last edited by GeneV; 02-09-2010 at 07:11 AM.
02-09-2010, 07:14 AM   #23
Inactive Account




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 69
next Da Ltd. ?

The "smc Pentax D FA 100mm/2.8 WR Macro"
is a lovely lens, in the usual feel and quality of Limited Lenses.
It is almost a Limited Lens, with finest optical and mechanical quality,
and has the seal (WR) compared to the Limited Objective.

LG
Hartmut

02-09-2010, 07:26 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Untied States
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,882
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
A fast, reasonably compact prime in the 17-18mm range would be useful. (There is no replacement for film's workhorse 28/2.8) Also, a 10-12mm ultrawide prime would be welcome.
I still think the 17-18mm fast lens category is filled perfectly by the 15/4 and 14/2.8. Anything faster than the 15 would be big like the 14, and anything smaller than the 14 would be slow like the 15.

But a 10/5 rectilinear pancake or something like that would be perfect.
02-09-2010, 07:56 AM   #25
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,772
QuoteOriginally posted by wallyb Quote
I still think the 17-18mm fast lens category is filled perfectly by the 15/4 and 14/2.8. Anything faster than the 15 would be big like the 14, and anything smaller than the 14 would be slow like the 15.

But a 10/5 rectilinear pancake or something like that would be perfect.
I enjoy the 15 very much, but For me, 14-15 is not 17-18, it certainly does not fill that slot "perfectly." A difference in FOV of about ten degrees is significant to me. But then, I tended not to use a 24mm on film. The 65 degree FOV has been popular in all film formats.

Last edited by GeneV; 02-09-2010 at 08:03 AM.
02-09-2010, 08:14 AM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Untied States
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,882
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
I enjoy the 15 very much, but For me, 14-15 is not 17-18, it certainly does not fill that slot "perfectly." A difference in FOV of about ten degrees is significant to me. But then, I tended not to use a 24mm on film. The 65 degree FOV has been popular in all film formats.
It is a positive difference of degrees; i.e, the lens you want is longer than the ones that exist and not shorter. You can just crop down and get the same image you would out of a 17/18mm lens. It's just like asking Pentax to make a 23mm, 45mm, or 79mm Ltd lens. It wouldn't be worth it to anyone to put a large amount of effort into making such a similar lens.
02-09-2010, 08:35 AM   #27
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Singapore
Posts: 62
I'll love to have a DA 1:2.8 135mm Limited!
02-09-2010, 07:32 PM   #28
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,772
QuoteOriginally posted by wallyb Quote
It is a positive difference of degrees; i.e, the lens you want is longer than the ones that exist and not shorter. You can just crop down and get the same image you would out of a 17/18mm lens. It's just like asking Pentax to make a 23mm, 45mm, or 79mm Ltd lens. It wouldn't be worth it to anyone to put a large amount of effort into making such a similar lens.
Well, not worth it to you, but I'd like to use my pixels, thank you. If it is a matter of cropping we could all shoot everything with the 15 and crop it down. Why make a 21? In addition, I doubt they could make a compact 15 at F/2.8, but they definitely could make a small 17-18/2.8, because others do.

No, it is not too much to ask Pentax to make a lens that is the equivalent of one of the most popular film lenses on the planet. Nikon and even Olympus does it, and neither costs any more than a DA series lens.

But I do get that you won't be buying it.
02-09-2010, 07:42 PM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Untied States
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,882
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
Well, not worth it to you, but I'd like to use my pixels, thank you.
Your couple thousand pixels out of tens of millions? It's a very small difference. If you resize your image for, example, posting on the web or printing, you won't notice any difference. And you're welcome, but I don't know what you thanked me for.
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
If it is a matter of cropping we could all shoot everything with the 15 and crop it down. Why make a 21?
That is ridiculous hyperbole and unnecessary. I'm talking about a difference of two to three millimeters in focal length between a lens that exists and a lens you want. Not any more.
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
In addition, I doubt they could make a compact 15 at F/2.8, but they definitely could make a small 17-18/2.8, because others do.
Who "others"? Nikon's 18/2.8 is huge compared to the Pentax 15/4. Olympus' is pretty compact but only covers a 4/3 sized image circle and acts like a 35/2.8.
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
No, it is not too much to ask Pentax to make a lens that is the equivalent of one of the most popular film lenses on the planet. Nikon and even Olympus does it, and neither costs any more than a DA series lens.

But I do get that you won't be buying it.
As pointed out above, no, they don't do it. And there's no reason I wouldn't buy one, other than the fact that it will never exist.

Last edited by wallyb; 02-09-2010 at 07:47 PM.
02-09-2010, 08:49 PM   #30
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,772
QuoteOriginally posted by wallyb Quote
Your couple thousand pixels out of tens of millions? It's a very small difference. If you resize your image for, example, posting on the web or printing, you won't notice any difference. And you're welcome, but I don't know what you thanked me for.

That is ridiculous hyperbole and unnecessary. I'm talking about a difference of two to three millimeters in focal length between a lens that exists and a lens you want. Not any more.

Who "others"? Nikon's 18/2.8 is huge compared to the Pentax 15/4. Olympus' is pretty compact but only covers a 4/3 sized image circle and acts like a 35/2.8.

As pointed out above, no, they don't do it. And there's no reason I wouldn't buy one, other than the fact that it will never exist.
Do the math and tell me that the difference between 15mm and 21mm is in fact a couple of thousand pixels out of the "tens" of millions in my sensor, then I will accept the award for ridiculous hyperbole. That is the gap right now in the wide area--not two or three milimeters, but 6, and those millimeters are valuable real estate in this territory. The next lens after the 15mm is 40% longer and about 22 degrees narrower. Adding an 18 keeps the crop to no more than the 3mm which you cogently argue to be acceptable, not to mention that it would be nice to get a decent max aperture somewhere between 31 and 14.

Most of the lenses people ask for here won't exist. In reality, Pentax will probably just add third or fourth much-needed ~50mm or ~35mm to the line.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-mount, ltd, pentax lens, series, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:00 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top