[SpecialK]

My K-5 recently died a hideous death. I replaced it with a new one, and I'll get the old one fixed someday.

In the space between death and re-ordering, I did, for the fun of it, look at Canon-mount lenses (I had Canon in my film days, and have a couple P&Ss now).

I leaned toward Pentax in 2006 because they had the fisheye zoom, and they were a popular brand - years ago. I see Canon has one as well, for 3-4X the cost. Luckily, Tokina makes one for only about 1.5X. (My Pentax 10-17 was $320 after rebate).

The Canon wide/normal 2.8 zooms are $1,600-2,400. Ouch. 2-3X the cost of similar Tamron, Sigma or Pentax.

The long end (400mm plus) is pretty interesting. 400, 600, 800, or more - Canon has it. For half the cost of a car.

Sigma even makes a Canon-mount 300-800 zoom that seems like a lot of fun. The Pentax 560, at $7,000 may drive interested people toward the Sigma 500 which is slightly shorter but a little faster, and much cheaper. I opted for the Sigma 150-500 which is adequate but ho-hum (and just under $1,000).

As far as primes go, I know the Canon 35 and 50 are cheaper than Pentax. But do they have any thing like the FA/DA Limiteds? I have not heard about them. The Limiteds seem to be the Pentax grail, but no one has died from not owning one or all, I don't think. Other lenses can work, too.

Tilt and shift? Jeez I had one, briefly. There are 2 or 3 for Canon. Anything other than the Hartblei for Pentax?

So, maybe it is economically sensible to be a Pentaxian. Canon LBA would be hard to resist.

[Adam]

My K-5 recently died a hideous death. I replaced it with a new one, and I'll get the old one fixed someday.

In the space between death and re-ordering, I did, for the fun of it, look at Canon-mount lenses (I had Canon in my film days, and have a couple P&Ss now).

I leaned toward Pentax in 2006 because they had the fisheye zoom, and they were a popular brand - years ago. I see Canon has one as well, for 3-4X the cost. Luckily, Tokina makes one for only about 1.5X. (My Pentax 10-17 was $320 after rebate).

The Canon wide/normal 2.8 zooms are $1,600-2,400. Ouch. 2-3X the cost of similar Tamron, Sigma or Pentax.

The long end (400mm plus) is pretty interesting. 400, 600, 800, or more - Canon has it. For half the cost of a car.

Sigma even makes a Canon-mount 300-800 zoom that seems like a lot of fun. The Pentax 560, at $7,000 may drive interested people toward the Sigma 500 which is slightly shorter but a little faster, and much cheaper. I opted for the Sigma 150-500 which is adequate but ho-hum (and just under $1,000).

As far as primes go, I know the Canon 35 and 50 are cheaper than Pentax. But do they have any thing like the FA/DA Limiteds? I have not heard about them. The Limiteds seem to be the Pentax grail, but no one has died from not owning one or all, I don't think. Other lenses can work, too.

Tilt and shift? Jeez I had one, briefly. There are 2 or 3 for Canon. Anything other than the Hartblei for Pentax?

So, maybe it is economically sensible to be a Pentaxian. Canon LBA would be hard to resist.

Pentax doesn't cater as much to pros, so it makes sense for them not to support long lenses, etc. Same goes for tilt-shift: not really worth it would a full-frame sensor.

If only Pentax were able to be more consistent in the lineup (i.e. put SDM in all modern lenses), I'd be happy.

[carrrlangas]

If only Pentax were able to be more consistent in the lineup (i.e. put SDM in all modern lenses), I'd be happy.

Please no, Long live srew drive. Noisy, yes. But cheap, light, easy to fix, reliable...

[Adam]

Please no, Long live srew drive. Noisy, yes. But cheap, light, easy to fix, reliable...

So is SDM when implemented by anyone else: but cheap to fix it isn't

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[southlander]

So is SDM when implemented by anyone else: but cheap to fix it isn't

Oh, I don't know about that Adam. Seems to be plenty of Sigma HSM complaints circulating the 'net.

[Adam]

Oh, I don't know about that Adam. Seems to be plenty of Sigma HSM complaints circulating the 'net.

Stuff always breaks, but if you look at Canon for instance, they just went all-out SDM (or whatever they might call it) decades ago. As technology moves forward IMO it's hard to justify using an older system (in new products) for much longer, even if it's tried and tested.

[Mazhe]

I remembered seeing this some times ago :
LensRentals.com - Lensrentals Repair Data: 2012-2013

Yet I'd welcome more DC and SDM motorisation in lineup: it's becoming more and more of a (perceived) handicap those days.

[drypenn]

I just fear that as electronics find their way into our glasses, sooner or later, it will erode future long-term value. A broken SDM 10 years from now will not be as valuable as a 10-year old working screw-driven glass, ceteris paribus. I guess I'll stick with the slow-as-molasses, noisy screw-driven lenses.

Electronics make everything faster, more efficient, but once they stop working, it's almost always cheaper to replace the entire thing.

[pinholecam]

Stuff always breaks, but if you look at Canon for instance, they just went all-out SDM (or whatever they might call it) decades ago. As technology moves forward IMO it's hard to justify using an older system (in new products) for much longer, even if it's tried and tested.

From my own experience with Canon lenses, the electronics is a bad thing if one wants longevity in the lenses.
Canon lenses almost don't work at all if the electronics fail (aperture and focus depends on it)
Freaked me out enough to sell off most Canon lenses I had quickly accumulated and just stay with Super Takumars.

The problem is marketing, and the buyer (esp. layman) expects electronics on lenses to make them faster, cheaper, better.
Obviously they forgot about durable or thats not in the priority list in today's throwaway society.

[pinholecam]

As far as primes go, I know the Canon 35 and 50 are cheaper than Pentax. But do they have any thing like the FA/DA Limiteds? I have not heard about them. The Limiteds seem to be the Pentax grail, but no one has died from not owning one or all, I don't think. Other lenses can work, too.

Seems like there are now cheap DA35 and DA50 as well, based on the recent lens sales (don't know if prices will stay though).
The DA50 for example was mentioned to be about U$140 locally just 1-2wks ago (Singapore).

The Canon 35/50mm have very poor builds too.
But they do get the job done.

[Adam]

From my own experience with Canon lenses, the electronics is a bad thing if one wants longevity in the lenses.
Canon lenses almost don't work at all if the electronics fail (aperture and focus depends on it)
Freaked me out enough to sell off most Canon lenses I had quickly accumulated and just stay with Super Takumars.

The problem is marketing, and the buyer (esp. layman) expects electronics on lenses to make them faster, cheaper, better.
Obviously they forgot about durable or thats not in the priority list in today's throwaway society.

That's why metal manual focus lenses are the way to go if you want longevity And Pentax does a great job there.

[carrrlangas]

But even modern pentax lenses are still mechanical for the most important parts. Aperture and manual focus should work even if electronic circuit and motors failed. Better to have an aperture ring just in case...

[ak_kiwi]

Personally I prefer DC focusing.
The 18 -135 speed is light years ahead of either SDM (50 -135) or HSM (latest 70 - 200)
But then I am talking sports photography.....

[asp1880]

Please no, Long live srew drive. Noisy, yes. But cheap, light, easy to fix, reliable...

... and compact. The limiteds are so tiny in part because they have screw drive AF.

Regards,
--Anders.