[normhead]

SO much talk of which lenses are available. I know many big spenders for whom the equivalents from other brands are the the 15-30, 24-70 and 70-200, and they then own maybe a 50 and a 35.

Pentax has all those things covered. If you start trying to satisfy the "that's not good enough for me" crowd you can end up losing a lot of money on lenses that don't sell. With my DFA 28-105 I bought a Rokinon 14 2.8 to cover wide angle, but I rarely use it. There's nice to have and have to have. We spend a lot of time discussing lens deficiencies with "nice to have" people. There are very few where who leave Pentax because they can't find something they have to have.

It's always amusing that people think Pentax should help out with their off brand purchases. The arguments for off brand availability helping the brand are at best spurious. Do you actually want customers who will just buy a camera body and then put cheaper lenses on it? I don't think those are the drones Pentax is looking for.

I've never seen any concrete analysis showing that off brand availability actually helps your brand. People seem to assume it's true but for some reason, no one has ever proved it.

Every lens I have, I have a contingency back up for, usually two or three. Even on FF, I have the FA 28-200, FA-J 18-35, FA 35-80, F 70-210, Sigma 70 macro, lenses I rarely use, but are there when I need them.If you have two lenses for every focal length you use, it's hard to understand people saying they need more choice. I always have the big "if I want really great IQ" lens, and smaller lighter slower versions for when it's not expected to be used but you want it along just in case.

Of course if you ask people what they need, and they say a Sigma or a Tamron lens, I'm not sure Pentax should be on your side. Buy your Tamron 150-600 and a cheap Canon or Nikon body to put it on. No one will think less of you for it.

The one thing I think Pentax has learned is, you can't make money from the little spenders. They are focussed on premium now. I was dismayed at the cost of the DFA 28-105 which some sites mistakenly call a "kit lens". It's one of the best lenses I've ever owned. My recently purchased 55-300 is similarly amazing. I've owned the Sigma 18-250 and the Sigma 70-300. The 55-300 PLM completely redefines that class of lens. When people complain about the lack of 3rd party support, I always wonder if they tried the Pentax version. With lenses like the 28-105 and 55-300 if you haven't, you're missing out. If you buy 3rd party, you've made it even harder to get off the "missing out" list, because you committed to another brand.

---

Last edited by normhead; 04-19-2019 at 06:56 AM.

[c.a.m]

@peterbond, welcome to Pentax Forums. Always great to be able to say 'hi' to a new member and active participant here.

Pentax lenses are overpriced

Without details, this sweeping statement is a bit difficult to understand. Would you have any recent examples and could you please indicate on what criteria this judgement is made? Does 'overpriced' mean just a bit higher in price compared to equivalent or similar lenses in other brands, or much more expensive? Does the statement refer to a few specific types of lenses?

I've not had reason to compare brands, so I must admit I'm not familiar with comparable lens prices. However, I have found that the Pentax lenses I've bought have been affordable.

- Craig

[clickclick]

It's all about targeting resources where a return is expected. Even Canon has confirmed it does not plan on releasing any new EF lenses in 2019 as it concentrates on new mirrorless releases (No new EF lenses from Canon until 2020? | Digital Camera World). But if you regularly peruse vendors like B&H, you'll have noticed with new releases like the DA* 11-18 and GR III (yes, I'm lumping Ricoh and Pentax brands together, since from all I can tell they share development resources), pre-order sales seemed good. Original shipments looked to have sold out, restock, and sell again, often becoming top sellers in their respective areas. I'd say Ricoh is doing a good job of targeting their resources where there is a return, and this will hopefully be the key to the survival of the Pentax brand. There is an enthusiastic, albeit small, community that does pull out the wallet. Keeping production and consumption in line will be the key to success in the changing camera markets.

And as I typed this, an email from Adorama just came in, and it lists the GRIII as one of their current top sellers, and that's across all brands and camera types.

[normhead]

I've not had reason to compare brands, so I must admit I'm not familiar with comparable lens prices. However, I have found that the Pentax lenses I've bought have been affordable.

What's affordable for one isn't affordable for others. Pentax no longer desires to be the "affordable" brand. When I look at flickr, and I see there are more Pentax shooters than Rebel Ti6 shooters, I wonder, why would you waste resources on entry level cameras in this market if you can sell more high end cameras?

As I noted when the K-1 came out. Pentax is focussed on quality, not the kind of rock bottom lenses that are "affordable". They aren't going to put a lot of effort into "bottom of the barrel" low margin product. I bought my FA-J 18-35 new in box, years after production ended. Cheap and dirty didn't sell.

After all these years, I've sent back more Sigma lenses than I've kept and as many failed as I have. Maybe they area good idea for light users who mostly want lens to keep in the closet for the odd time they need it. I haven't found them to be every day lenses, and 1/3 of the ones I've purchased have been so substandard new right out of the box I sent them back.

Of my 6 Sigma purchases 4 are now trash, or were trash as delivered. I've never had to return a single Pentax lens.

---

Last edited by normhead; 04-19-2019 at 07:18 AM.

[Marktax]

The other brands, most clearly Canon and Nikon, sell a lot of "album fillers" for the masses -- revenue-generating models like the endless variety of Canon Rebels. Pentax hasn't done that nearly as much, but instead makes hit records: K-5, K-3, K-1, some being image quality-dominant, like the clearly dominant K-5 class, and the K-1, their first full frame, yet knocking the ball completely out of the park. Models that some might refer to as album filler, like the K-01 or K-S1, are instead better thought of as innovative design experiments demonstrating the heritage of Pentax attempting new firsts, whether in design (K-S1) or new photographic capability. See their unparalleled timeline of "firsts":

• 1952: The first Japanese SLR (Asahiflex)[1]
• 1954: The world's first instant return mirror system (Asahiflex II)[1]
• 1957: The first time a pentaprism has been utilized in the viewfinder of a single lens reflex (SLR) camera (Asahi Pentax)[1]
• 1964: The world's first through-the-lens (TTL) metering system (Spotmatic)[1]
• 1966: Asahi is the world's first camera manufacturer to produce one million SLRs (after only in 14 years of manufacturing)[1]
• 1967: Opening of the first camera museum in Japan owned by a camera manufacturer located at Nishiazabu, Tokyo(Moved to Mashiko plant in 1993)[2]
• 1971: The world's first SLR camera with a TTL automatic-exposure control. This camera was the Pentax ES[3]
• 1971: The world's first Super Multi-Coated lenses (Takumar lens series)[4]
• 1976: The world's first light meter is invented by Pentax (in conjunction with Nippon electronics) and used by many brands afterwards.[5][6]
• 1976: The smallest and lightest SLR camera (Pentax MX and ME)[4]
• 1979: The world's first camera to incorporate the concept of push-button shutter speed control. This camera was the Pentax ME Super[4]
• 1980: The world's first through-the-lens autofocus camera. This camera was the Pentax ME F[4]
• 1981: The first camera manufacturer to reach the production milestone of 10 million SLR cameras (Asahi Optical)[4]
• 1984: The world's first multi-mode medium format camera. This camera was the Pentax 645[3]
• 1987: The first 35mm SLR camera to feature a built-in TTL auto flash (SF-1)[3]
• 1991: The world's first weather-resistant zoom compact camera is launched. That camera was the "PENTAX ZOOM 90WR"[7]
• 1995: The world's smallest autofocus SLR camera designed based on the concept of "intuitive operation" is launched. That camera was the PENTAX MZ-5[7]
• 1997: The world's first autofocus medium format SLR camera. That camera was the Pentax 645N[3]
• 2008: The world's smallest digital SLR camera equipped with an image sensor equivalent to the APS-C size format is launched. That camera was the PENTAX K-m[7]
• 2010: The world's first to introduce a digital medium format SLR camera. That camera was the Pentax 645D[3]
• 2011: The world’s smallest and lightest interchangeable lens camera (ILC) in a body significantly smaller than every other digital ILC body available on the market. That camera was the Pentax Q[3]
• 2012: The world's first medium format DSLR without IR cut filter especially for research, archival, and law enforcement use. This camera was the 645D IR[8]
• 2012: The first mirrorless camera to natively support a SLR lens lineup. This camera was the K-01[9]
• 2014: The world's first to achieve a score above 100 at DxO. The camera was the 645Z with a 101 DxO score[10]
• 2016: Pentax was the first to introduce a weather resistant and backside illuminated flexible tilt type LCD monitor with their first professional full frame DSLR. This camera was the Pentax K-1.

[c.a.m]

Pentax is focussed on quality, not the kind of rock bottom lenses that are "affordable".

I should clarify my use of the word.

Certainly, Pentax sells all sorts of quality lenses at various price ranges. By "affordable", I meant 'able to purchase' or 'reasonably priced' within the means of many buyers, not "cheap" or "bottom of the barrel" as in 'inferior quality'. For example, I think the current 28-105 lens would fall into the category of 'affordable'.


- Craig

[CarlJF]

...neither Tamron or Sigma are bothered about anyone with a K mount.

To be fair, they don't do much outside of Canon/Nikon mount. It's not specific to Pentax... To give you an idea, here's the numbers of Sigma/Tamron lenses available for different mounts:

Canon EF: 74
Nikon F: 72
Sony E: 31
Pentax K: 18
m43: 12
Fuji: 0

Anyway, it's not like it's that important. No matter the brand, if you need a very specific lens, the rule has always been buy the lens first and then buy the body that fits with it and not the other way around. Because either you really need it, and then you don't care having to buy a compatible body either, or you don't and then it's not that important anyway if you can't buy it, assuming you'll buy it if it was available which often isn't even the case. Because I don't know how many times I heard people from other brands telling "But Pentax doesn't have lens X" while they don't have it anyway and will more than probably never buy it...

---

Last edited by CarlJF; 04-19-2019 at 07:41 AM.

[normhead]

I should clarify my use of the word.

Certainly, Pentax sells all sorts of quality lenses at various price ranges. By "affordable", I meant 'able to purchase' or 'reasonably priced' within the means of many buyers, not "cheap" or "bottom of the barrel" as in 'inferior quality'. For example, I think the current 28-105 lens would fall into the category of 'affordable'.


- Craig

It's all relative. The 28-105 is relatively expensive, more than either Nikon or Canon's were and both of those are discontinued.

Looking at recent releases the cheapest among FF lenses apart from the 28-105 is the DFA 24-70 at $1600 CDN. Below them is host of 10 year old designs.

The 16-85, the start of the new trends in higher cost options is $900 CDN, You can get an 18-135 for half that.
The 28-105 is $700. The old kit lens the 18-55 for APS-c can be had for $150.

The 55-300 is $500.

The one relative thing about all these lenses is, they were designed under the "modern glass for modern sensors" (sharp edge to edge)design philosophy, as opposed to the "lenses for the way people take pictures" (extremely centre sharp, softer edges) design philosophy, and they are all more expensive and better performers than previous lenses of similar focal length and class, not to mention all WR.

I don't think "affordable" is the current focus. So users like you and I are just happy they threw us the "28-105" bone. It was expensive, but worth it. But not exactly "affordable " in a traditional sense.

Right now on sale at Henry's you can buy a Canon Ti6 for $449 with an 18-55, less than the cost of my DFA 28-105. Now that's affordable. The K-P body only also on sale is $1079. Pentax isn't interested in "affordable". They are ditching "affordable ( I bought my K-x kit for around 549, with an 18-55) and becoming "premium". That's their stated strategy.

[stevebrot]

I noticed that Leica is frequently brought up in threads on this all too frequent topic. One might ask, who makes lenses in Leica-M, how long have they been doing so, and has their existence made any difference in Leica camera sales or the viability of Leica as a camera maker. No, I don't mean L or M43, I am talking about mount that made the modern brand.

Hmmmm...

• Voigtlander/Cosina? Since launch of Bessa R2 in 2002, with the V/C line of lenses supporting V/C's line of M-mount more-affordable body. If there were any impact, it was likely on the sale of Leica lenses.
• Zeiss? I dunno, did they make M glass before launch of the Ikon ZM in 2005? Again, the impact was likely negative on both Leica cameras and lenses, at least on the used market.
• Kipon? New entry in M-mount, though it is unclear if the target is adapted MILC or Leica. In either case, I have a hard time imaging someone plunking down the buck for a new Leica body just so they can shoot Kipon lenses.
• 7artisans? Very recent into the M-mount market at sub-$500 price points for the line of three lenses. See Kipon (above).
• Lomography? See Kipon (above)
• Meyer-Gorlizt? See Kipon (above)

Question...should the availability of either the Tamron SP 70-200/2.8 or Sigma 70-200/2.8 (both ~$1200 or more) in K-mount sway one's decision to buy a K-1 or any other camera in the Pentax line? Does the current availability of the Tamron 70-210/2.8 Di at $769 make a Pentax camera more desirable? Should one be more inclined to buy a Nikon or Pentax body if Sigma were to support either mount for their 70mm f/2.8 "Art"? Does the current availability of the acclaimed Sigma 35/1.4 increase the likelihood of a person purchasing a K-1? How many people reading this thread bought this combo together?


Steve

[normhead]

Question...should the availability of either the Tamron SP 70-200/2.8 or Sigma 70-200/2.8 (both ~$1200 or more) in K-mount sway one's decision to buy a K-1 or any other camera in the Pentax line? Does the current availability of the Tamron 70-210/2.8 Di at $769 make a Pentax camera more desirable? Should one be more inclined to buy a Nikon or Pentax body if Sigma were to support either mount for their 70mm f/2.8 "Art"? Does the current availability of the acclaimed Sigma 35/1.4 increase the likelihood of a person purchasing a K-1? How many people reading this thread bought this combo together?

More the question, should Pentax even think about attracting customer's with a bias towards 3rd party lenses?
If you like those lenses there are lots of options to buy with them, both more expensive and less expensive that Pentax cameras. Why should Pentax even try and compete in the bodies for third party lenses market?

The acclaimed Sigma 35 1.4 Art? Really? Acclaimed by who? IN 2012? I look at DxO and there's a new "acclaimed" lens every month. Do they all get to stay acclaimed forever?

[lesmore49]

Is it me but it seems as if Pentax is increasingly being neglected when it comes to news and reviews in camera magazines and online sources. For instance, the most recent Digital Camera World magazine in the UK featured a review of 70-200mm lenses for a variety of camera brands but Pentax were conspicuous by their absence from the 8 lenses reviewed. Only Nikon, Canon and Sony compatable lenses featured. Moreover, it seems that third-party lens manufacturers Tamron and Sigma no longer seem to offer Pentax compatable lenses among their range, especially when it comes to new lenses that come along.
I fear for the Pentax brand if this trend continues.
Regards
Mike

I woudn't worry too much about Pentax fading into the sunset. 2019 marks the 100th anniversary...pretty good indicator of their stability...so given that... and the fact that I can get all the Pentax stuff I want...my view about Pentax' lifespan is.... so far...so good.

In all my years of photography...50 +...I've amassed a fair number of Takumar/Pentax lenses. In that period I've got three aftermarket lenses. Two were Bushnell, back in the early '70's and I've regretted those purchases since then. One was a Sigma , a 150-500 I bought about 7 years ago. It's actually been good, but I haven't used it as much as my Pentax 12-24, 18-135, 28-105, 100 Macro, 40, 70 Limiteds. The only reason I got the 150-500 was that I wanted a super telephoto for wild birds and at the time Pentax didn't have a new lens with that focal length.

So I don't miss not having a lot of Sigma/Tamron to pick, choose and buy.

I recently (March) bought a new camera. A Ricoh GR ll. I checked it out alongside a Fuji and in the end went with the Ricoh. One point being, that I have confidence that Ricoh/Pentax are still in the camera biz and will continue to be. I know some may say a fool and his confidence may soon be parted.

But I don't think that this is the case when it comes to Pentax/Ricoh. Maybe I'm wrong.

I've been wrong before, but being wrong mostly hasn't had huge ramifications.

I didn't think Ford and GM..North America... were going to dump all their sedan lines...and obviously I was wrong about that....and even though my wife and I prefer sedans...and have generally mostly had GM, with an occasional Ford sedan for decades...it's not the end of the world. Nissan for example, has some nice sedans and Honda has the Accord Sport...with a 2 liter turbo 4 cylinder. So there are other options .

[stevebrot]

More the question, should Pentax even think about attracting customer's with a bias towards 3rd party lenses?
If you like those lenses there are lots of options to buy with them, both more expensive and less expensive that Pentax cameras. Why should Pentax even try and compete in the bodies for third party lenses market?

Exactly...I just wanted people to figure it out from a personal perspective.

The acclaimed Sigma 35 1.4 Art? Really? Acclaimed by who? IN 2012?

By the PF Staff, I guess...

2013...

The Sigma 35mm F1.4 is nothing short of an optical masterpiece...

Sigma 35mm F1.4 DG HSM "Art" Review - Conclusion | PentaxForums.com Reviews

It is not for me (happy with my FA 35/2) but it is sort of nice to know it is there and well-reviewed.


Steve

[jeffdrew]

It’s business. Global market share for digital cameras continues to shrink under the crush of technologies designed to replace them. Serious photographers are also a shrinking market, imho. All camera & lens makers are feeling the pain. You and I care because we are engaged in this activity, but a few billion others have their phones, and that is all they feel they need...for now.

[Wheatfield]

Is it me but it seems as if Pentax is increasingly being neglected when it comes to news and reviews in camera magazines and online sources. For instance, the most recent Digital Camera World magazine in the UK featured a review of 70-200mm lenses for a variety of camera brands but Pentax were conspicuous by their absence from the 8 lenses reviewed. Only Nikon, Canon and Sony compatable lenses featured. Moreover, it seems that third-party lens manufacturers Tamron and Sigma no longer seem to offer Pentax compatable lenses among their range, especially when it comes to new lenses that come along.
I fear for the Pentax brand if this trend continues.
Regards
Mike

It must be right. I keep reading it on the internet.

[Kelvin 5500]

... I just found out recently that the new DFA 15-30 2.8 lens is basically a rebranded Tamron 15-30, minus the OS.... unfortunately it's 50% more expensive than a Tamron would be.

Typical U.S street price is only 10% more for the Pentax branded lens with VC image stabilization absent, although not needed. Also, Tamron branded lenses sold in the U.S. include a 6 year warranty versus the Pentax 1 year warranty. The weather sealing seems to be identical on both products. There is, of course, no available alternative for an auto focus 15-30mm F2.8 full frame lens with Pentax mount compatibility.

Dennis