Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-14-2015, 07:57 PM   #1
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,615
Fast Q primes in our future?

If you don't like zooms, drool over these:

Ricoh 4.4mm F1.4(1/1.7")?????????????So-net???

Ricoh 45mm F1.8(1/1.7")?????????????So-net???

04-14-2015, 08:27 PM   #2
Senior Member
mythguy9's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 274
Are these patents from last year?
04-14-2015, 10:35 PM   #3
Site Supporter
CWRailman's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Photos: Albums
Posts: 495
Such additions to the Q lineup make a lot more sense than some of the suggestions I have seen folks make on this board. But then it all depends on price. The 08 caused a lot of anticipation until the price was announced.
04-15-2015, 04:27 AM   #4
Senior Member
sapporodan's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 123
More prime lenses would be truly wonderful, especially if they can keep them to around the same size as the 01. Although I am more of a zoom shooter something about the Q and the 01 feels so nice.
Hasn't there been a rumour floating around of a macro prime being developed?

CWRailman - Your right about the shock of the 08 price, for a ultra wide-angle zoom it's very well priced, but compared against the other Q lenses it does seem expensive.

Don't know if it's any coincidence but I've noticed SRS Microsystems who generally stock a lot of Pentax gear here in the UK and have always supported the Q are now running out of stock on almost all of their Q lenses and they are selling the 06 for the amazingly cheap price of 109!
Might just be awaiting new stock, or maybe they are clearing it all out for some other reasons.

04-15-2015, 05:46 AM   #5
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,615
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mythguy9 Quote
Are these patents from last year?
They appeared about the same time as the macro patent.
04-15-2015, 07:20 AM   #6
Marketplace Reseller
dcshooter's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Washington DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,116
Wow, 13 elements on the 4.4 and 11 on the 45. That's a lot of elements for what are presumably going to be some very tiny lenses!
04-15-2015, 07:29 AM   #7
kwb
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 126
Thanks, what is interesting to me is that both of the lenses have a "zoh-koh" or an image circle radius of 5mm, or 10mm diameter. Q7's 1/1.7" sensor measures 9.3mm diagonally, and considering SR, the image circle should be somewhat larger than the sensor. This kind of gives you the idea of how much larger the image circle should be.

And this also seems to mean that there's not much head room in Q system to support larger sensor. For example 2/3" sensor already measures 11mm, so it's too big at least for these lenses even if you can somehow put the sensor itself on Q.
04-15-2015, 09:10 AM   #8
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,615
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
Wow, 13 elements on the 4.4
That's the same number as in the Samyang 24mm/1.4.
Welcome to the world of fast wide angle primes!

I would like Ricoh to start using HD coatings on their Q lenses.
The one downside to the Q 08 is flare, because SMC is not good enough anymore.

04-15-2015, 01:13 PM   #9
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,731
QuoteOriginally posted by sapporodan Quote
CWRailman - You're right about the shock of the 08 price, for a ultra wide-angle zoom it's very well priced, but compared against the other Q lenses it does seem expensive.
Pricing for Q lenses is uneven.
01, with both a shutter and glass, costs around $160 from distributors in Japan.
PK-PQ adapter, with just a shutter, costs over $200 from distributors in the USA.
In this case, I'm guessing that 01 development and tooling costs were covered in the years when the 01 was packaged with Q kits,
while PK-PQ adapters sell slowly (partly because of the pricing) and so they're still trying to recover development and tooling costs.

If my logic explains their pricing, they will continually price new lenses higher than people like me want to pay, which means that they will continue to have a vicious circle of uncovered development/tooling costs causing prices so high that volume is too low to ever cover those development/tooling costs.
04-15-2015, 01:53 PM   #10
Site Supporter
CWRailman's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Photos: Albums
Posts: 495
With a few exceptions, most successful zoom lenses, success being defined as value returned to the photographer on money invested, fall into the three to one or better zoom ratio. The main reasons I say the 08 was grossly over priced was that it does not come close to being a 3 to 1 or better. In fact I cringe every time someone calls it a zoom lens. Considering the Q series target market, the 08 should have been designed for and priced near or less than the 06. Based on the $480 average price of the 08, a knowledgeable photographer building a tool box of photographic equipment would be much better off investing that money in a previously owned K7 with the standard 18-55 zoom. If these are actually new Primes, I hope Pentax does not make the same marketing mistake in setting the price. I know marketing has not been one of Pentaxs strong suits in fact though I have been a dedicated Pentax user since the early 1970s, sometimes I believe they would have difficulty in packaging and selling ice in the desert.
04-15-2015, 02:26 PM   #11
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Lake District
Posts: 221
QuoteOriginally posted by CWRailman Quote
Based on the $480 average price of the 08, a knowledgeable photographer building a tool box of photographic equipment would be much better off investing that money in a previously owned K7 with the standard 18-55 zoo.
I generally see your points. But the 08 is much wider than the Kit lens mentioned, and on a Q7, it's quite pocketable for me. This all makes it a very different proposition.
But yes, buying the 08 hurt a bit! But I've not regretted it.
J
04-15-2015, 03:07 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
The 08 was not compact, inexpensive, fast, or a prime. From what I've seen, it's nice optically, but my guess is that it's not what most Q users wanted. I'd be surprised if they sold many of them.

My phone has a wide prime. So should my Q.
04-15-2015, 08:34 PM   #13
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,731
QuoteOriginally posted by CWRailman Quote
With a few exceptions, most successful zoom lenses, success being defined as value returned to the photographer on money invested, fall into the three to one or better zoom ratio. The main reasons I say the 08 was grossly over priced was that it does not come close to being a 3 to 1 or better. In fact I cringe every time someone calls it a zoom lens. Considering the Q series target market, the 08 should have been designed for and priced near or less than the 06. Based on the $480 average price of the 08, a knowledgeable photographer building a tool box of photographic equipment would be much better off investing that money in a previously owned K7 with the standard 18-55 zoom.
Actually, when mounted on my Q7, the 08 would be roughly equivalent to an 18-28mm lens mounted on a 35mm camera; on a K-7, the Sigma 10-20mm lens would be the comparable lens. Two-to-one actually is a typical range for a very wide-angle zoom lens like this Sigma lens. This Sigma lens costs $379 at B&H, BTW, so the 08 price looks better than I had thought - but I still don't want it; in the days of film cameras, prime wide-angle was much more common than zoom wide-angle, and looking at these costs, I'm ready to go back to that concept, just as I am often satisfied using the f/1.9 01 lens in the stead of the f/1.7 50mm prime lens that I routinely used on my Super Program (and the corresponding typical wide-angle lens would be a 28mm f/2.8 lens, which would translate roughly into a 6.0mm lens on the Q7, so the proposed 4.4mm lens would be much better)
04-16-2015, 09:03 AM   #14
Loyal Site Supporter
pacerr's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Henry, TN
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,850
One thought here. When speaking of 'zoom range' the percentage of change rather than just countin' millimeters is often overlooked.

The 10mm between 10-20 doubles the range whereas 10mm between 95-105mm is less than . . . mmm, wait, let me take off a shoe here . . . the point is it's a LOT less significant in practical use.

Same with the percentage change of the angular FOVs and the apparent effect on perspective -- especially when combined with a change in crop effect.
04-16-2015, 06:44 PM   #15
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 69
Q lenses are absurdly expensive because they're complex. It's much easier to design lenses for larger formats. That said, 8mm cine lenses from 50 years ago can give great results on the Q, so I wonder.

I think Reh's financial loop analysis makes sense.
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!
camera, mirrorless, patents, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q primes, q-s1, q10, q7, ricoh, telephoto prime, wide angle prime
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fast Autofocus primes 0zerec Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 03-26-2015 08:17 AM
Focus confirm with fast primes in low light aruk5 Pentax DSLR Discussion 14 09-24-2014 07:25 AM
K-5 IIs, AF, and fast primes MadMathMind Pentax K-5 2 02-07-2014 10:08 AM
future of the q bluefoam Pentax Q 9 08-21-2013 11:35 PM
Hoya/Pentax - answer to questions about our future ogl Pentax News and Rumors 171 04-07-2009 12:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:15 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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