Ricoh to buy Pentax camera business from Hoya

GordonZA · 07-02-2011, 11:42 PM

After reading the announcement on the Ricoh website, the current plans are definitely to grow the Pentax brand and to expand/enhance the DSLR range as well as to grow the interchangable lens lineup.

They are also keeping the Pentax name.

Personally I think this is very good news!

Now we as Pentax fans need to positively persuade Ricoh give us what we are asking for... get them to work with us...

jsherman999 · 07-02-2011, 11:46 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by ogl

I sold DA35/2.8 macro without any regrets. It's only ONE lens which I ever sold without regrets.
Rather mediocre lens as universal lens.
Worse than my FA LIMITED in terms of bokeh, resolution and sharpness.
It's the VERY GOOD lens to shoot macro jewelry or close macro object.
35 mm is rather short for good macro. The bokeh is from really bad till average.
AF speed is no very good.
If we compare this lens with real LIMITED serie lenses, we can see easily that
LIMITED mark at this lens is just marketing trick. They put rather macro lens in metal body and called it LIMITED.

DA 35ltd macro is among the best lenses I've shot.

Quote:

P.S.
There is no such term "micro-contrast" - it's fiction.

Read ---> Understanding Lens Contrast.

.

steve1307 · 07-03-2011, 12:24 AM

How sad it must be to live in Ogl-world

nothing but negative 24hrs/day for 100+ posts

DA35 is not good enough
18-135 is rubbish (because Klaus said so)
where are all the new lenses HOYA? ( oops Ricoh)
Ricoh is an empty place at photo market, this new direction will be the death of K-mount
Ricoh is into consumer business (bad for K5 and 645D)
there will be no APS-C mirrorless
NC-1 (Q) tiny sensor, dust prone, expensive

ogl, .... get some sleep.... then tomorrow, go outside and take some photos.

Clavius · 07-03-2011, 12:26 AM

Originally posted by ogl

P.S.
There is no such term "micro-contrast" - it's fiction.

Who is this guy??

Originally posted by jsherman999

DA 35ltd macro is among the best lenses I've shot.

Agreed, I've owned and used many lenses, but this one is extremely good.

Eagle_Friends · 07-03-2011, 12:37 AM

Originally posted by ogl

I sold DA35/2.8 macro without any regrets. It's only ONE lens which I ever sold without regrets.
Rather mediocre lens as universal lens.
Worse than my FA LIMITED in terms of bokeh, resolution and sharpness.
It's the VERY GOOD lens to shoot macro jewelry or close macro object.
35 mm is rather short for good macro. The bokeh is from really bad till average.
AF speed is no very good.
If we compare this lens with real LIMITED serie lenses, we can see easily that
LIMITED mark at this lens is just marketing trick. They put rather macro lens in metal body and called it LIMITED.
Tokina 35/2.8 macro is almost 1.5-2 times cheaper. Built very good.

P.S.
There is no such term "micro-contrast" - it's fiction.

Sorry to hear that the DA 35mm Macro wasn't what you expected it to be. Outside of the FA Limited Primes, I think the DA 35mm has the second highest following behind the DA 15mm f4. And my god, what a magnificent lens.

Have you by chance read up on this article?

An Optical Paragon - photo.net

A very good read about the lens in question.

Emacs · 07-03-2011, 12:48 AM

Originally posted by rparmar

It has excellent sharpness, distortion and other figures. The bokeh is lovely, especially at close focus. The micro-contrast is astounding. Build is the usual high Limited quality. It is the best flower lens I have used (and I still own three macros). Your opinion does not accord with mine.

I'm not a macro freak, so your shot won't show me anything.
Its resolution figures is worse than one of ever cheap DA35, the bokeh is quite nervous actually, the micro contrast makes this lens unusable when shooting portraits (or force a "lucky" one who have this nonsense to perform a large amount of PP).
As I said previously, It's 2 times (at least) overpriced tokina macro lens with SMC coatings and limited built quality. Sorry fanboys, but it's truth. They both have identical optical schemes.

_lyan_ · 07-03-2011, 01:07 AM

I can't see why someone would buy a 35mm macro lens to shoot portraits... except for some specific subjects. If you want a soft lens, just use FA 50mm f/1.4 (or DA*55mm, or FA 77mm) wide open..
Do you shave using machete?

Clavius · 07-03-2011, 01:09 AM

Originally posted by Emacs

I'm not a macro freak, so your shot won't show me anything.

You don't have to be a freak to be into macro. If you're into photography then that shot should tell you the excellent depth of field and high resolution.

Originally posted by Emacs

the micro contrast makes this lens unusable when shooting portraits (or force a "lucky" one who have this nonsense to perform a large amount of PP).

Really? Would you really use a macro lens for portaits?? Macro lenses are supposed to be sharp with good microcontrast. Using them for portaits would be... ahum... misusage. It's the wrong tool for the job, don't blame the tool. 35mm is to short for portaits too, when you shoot a portrait with the 35mm you emmediately see the "horseface"-effect.

Originally posted by Emacs

It's resolution figures is worse than one of ever cheap DA35,

I can't seem to find those figures actually. Can you please provide a link?

Wasn't this thread about my boss (Ricoh) buying Pentax, btw?

TZH · 07-03-2011, 01:36 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

Wasn't this thread about my boss (Ricoh) buying Pentax, btw?

Could you suggest your boss to lower the prices .

Emacs · 07-03-2011, 01:38 AM

Originally posted by _lyan_

I can't see why someone would buy a 35mm macro lens to shoot portraits... except for some specific subjects. If you want a soft lens, just use FA 50mm f/1.4 (or DA*55mm, or FA 77mm) wide open..
Do you shave using machete?

It's 52.5 lens, perfectly suitable for group portraits.

Emacs · 07-03-2011, 01:43 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

I can't seem to find those figures actually. Can you please provide a link?

Photozone. The DA @ f2.4 (2.2 actually) is about the same resolution figures (In excellent-very good-good terms of photozone) as this "Ltd".
BTW, if they managed to call it "Ltd", why didn't they name the 100WR a limited too?

_lyan_ · 07-03-2011, 01:55 AM

Originally posted by Emacs

It's 52.5 lens, perfectly suitable for group portraits.

It just has the angle of view (hope it's the correct translation) of a 52.5 mm, it's a 35mm lens. And group portraits aren't really what I call "portrait photo". I still can't understand why someone would buy a macro lens when fine details aren't relevant for the photos to take. It's just a waste of money. If you don't need a macro, don't buy one.

asdf · 07-03-2011, 01:59 AM

Originally posted by _lyan_

It just has the angle of view (hope it's the correct translation) of a 52.5 mm, it's a 35mm lens. And group portraits aren't really what I call "portrait photo". I still can't understand why someone would buy a macro lens when fine details aren't relevant for the photos to take. It's just a waste of money. If you don't need a macro, don't buy one.

Emacs is the photographer responsible for the following:

30 Catastrophic Russian Wedding Photos: Pics, Videos, Links, News

Clavius · 07-03-2011, 02:01 AM

Originally posted by Emacs

Photozone. The DA @ f2.4 (2.2 actually) is about the same resolution figures (In excellent-very good-good terms of photozone) as this "Ltd".
BTW, if they managed to call it "Ltd", why didn't they name the 100WR a limited too?

On Photozone, the DA35LTD was tested on a K10D. But the DA35 was tested on a K5. That is the difference in resolution right there.

And guess what, Photozone itself states: "Please note that the tests results are not comparable across the different systems!"

Why do you think they say that?

ogl · 07-03-2011, 02:04 AM

Originally posted by jsherman999

DA 35ltd macro is among the best lenses I've shot.

I can't argue against it...I even trust you.

But...It's slow and worse than my rest Pentax lenses.

07-03-2011, 12:48 AM	#471
Emacs Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Moscow Posts: 1,223	Originally posted by rparmar It has excellent sharpness, distortion and other figures. The bokeh is lovely, especially at close focus. The micro-contrast is astounding. Build is the usual high Limited quality. It is the best flower lens I have used (and I still own three macros). Your opinion does not accord with mine. I'm not a macro freak, so your shot won't show me anything. Its resolution figures is worse than one of ever cheap DA35, the bokeh is quite nervous actually, the micro contrast makes this lens unusable when shooting portraits (or force a "lucky" one who have this nonsense to perform a large amount of PP). As I said previously, It's 2 times (at least) overpriced tokina macro lens with SMC coatings and limited built quality. Sorry fanboys, but it's truth. They both have identical optical schemes. Last edited by Emacs; 07-03-2011 at 01:36 AM.

07-03-2011, 01:09 AM	#473
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by Emacs I'm not a macro freak, so your shot won't show me anything. You don't have to be a freak to be into macro. If you're into photography then that shot should tell you the excellent depth of field and high resolution. Originally posted by Emacs the micro contrast makes this lens unusable when shooting portraits (or force a "lucky" one who have this nonsense to perform a large amount of PP). Really? Would you really use a macro lens for portaits?? Macro lenses are supposed to be sharp with good microcontrast. Using them for portaits would be... ahum... misusage. It's the wrong tool for the job, don't blame the tool. 35mm is to short for portaits too, when you shoot a portrait with the 35mm you emmediately see the "horseface"-effect. Originally posted by Emacs It's resolution figures is worse than one of ever cheap DA35, I can't seem to find those figures actually. Can you please provide a link? Wasn't this thread about my boss (Ricoh) buying Pentax, btw? Last edited by Clavius; 07-03-2011 at 01:16 AM.

07-03-2011, 01:38 AM	#475
Emacs Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Moscow Posts: 1,223	Originally posted by _lyan_ I can't see why someone would buy a 35mm macro lens to shoot portraits... except for some specific subjects. If you want a soft lens, just use FA 50mm f/1.4 (or DA55mm, or FA 77mm) wide open.. Do you shave using machete? It's 52.5 lens, perfectly suitable for group portraits. Last edited by Emacs; 07-03-2011 at 01:44 AM.*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax Lens Compatibility with Ricoh camera?	Chairman_Xi	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	03-08-2011 07:56 PM
Hoya Sells Pentax-Brand Survey Instrument Business	Biro	Pentax News and Rumors	18	12-12-2009 02:30 AM
HOYA CEO admits not keeping Pentax camera division in the HOYA group?	yakiniku	Pentax News and Rumors	61	10-18-2009 02:15 PM
If Hoya still buys Pentax and quits camera business..	RiceHigh	Pentax News and Rumors	51	05-17-2007 07:43 AM

07-02-2011, 11:42 PM	#466
GordonZA Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Planet Earth Photos: Albums Posts: 351	After reading the announcement on the Ricoh website, the current plans are definitely to grow the Pentax brand and to expand/enhance the DSLR range as well as to grow the interchangable lens lineup. They are also keeping the Pentax name. Personally I think this is very good news! Now we as Pentax fans need to positively persuade Ricoh give us what we are asking for... get them to work with us...

07-02-2011, 11:46 PM - 1 Like	#467
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Originally posted by ogl I sold DA35/2.8 macro without any regrets. It's only ONE lens which I ever sold without regrets. Rather mediocre lens as universal lens. Worse than my FA LIMITED in terms of bokeh, resolution and sharpness. It's the VERY GOOD lens to shoot macro jewelry or close macro object. 35 mm is rather short for good macro. The bokeh is from really bad till average. AF speed is no very good. If we compare this lens with real LIMITED serie lenses, we can see easily that LIMITED mark at this lens is just marketing trick. They put rather macro lens in metal body and called it LIMITED. DA 35ltd macro is among the best lenses I've shot. Quote: P.S. There is no such term "micro-contrast" - it's fiction. Read ---> Understanding Lens Contrast. .

07-03-2011, 12:24 AM	#468
steve1307 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,130	How sad it must be to live in Ogl-world nothing but negative 24hrs/day for 100+ posts DA35 is not good enough 18-135 is rubbish (because Klaus said so) where are all the new lenses HOYA? ( oops Ricoh) Ricoh is an empty place at photo market, this new direction will be the death of K-mount Ricoh is into consumer business (bad for K5 and 645D) there will be no APS-C mirrorless NC-1 (Q) tiny sensor, dust prone, expensive ogl, .... get some sleep.... then tomorrow, go outside and take some photos.

07-03-2011, 12:26 AM	#469
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by ogl P.S. There is no such term "micro-contrast" - it's fiction. Who is this guy?? Originally posted by jsherman999 DA 35ltd macro is among the best lenses I've shot. Agreed, I've owned and used many lenses, but this one is extremely good.

07-03-2011, 12:37 AM	#470
Eagle_Friends Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 971	Originally posted by ogl I sold DA35/2.8 macro without any regrets. It's only ONE lens which I ever sold without regrets. Rather mediocre lens as universal lens. Worse than my FA LIMITED in terms of bokeh, resolution and sharpness. It's the VERY GOOD lens to shoot macro jewelry or close macro object. 35 mm is rather short for good macro. The bokeh is from really bad till average. AF speed is no very good. If we compare this lens with real LIMITED serie lenses, we can see easily that LIMITED mark at this lens is just marketing trick. They put rather macro lens in metal body and called it LIMITED. Tokina 35/2.8 macro is almost 1.5-2 times cheaper. Built very good. P.S. There is no such term "micro-contrast" - it's fiction. Sorry to hear that the DA 35mm Macro wasn't what you expected it to be. Outside of the FA Limited Primes, I think the DA 35mm has the second highest following behind the DA 15mm f4. And my god, what a magnificent lens. Have you by chance read up on this article? An Optical Paragon - photo.net A very good read about the lens in question.

07-03-2011, 01:07 AM	#472
_lyan_ Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Bari, Italy Posts: 34	I can't see why someone would buy a 35mm macro lens to shoot portraits... except for some specific subjects. If you want a soft lens, just use FA 50mm f/1.4 (or DA*55mm, or FA 77mm) wide open.. Do you shave using machete?

07-03-2011, 01:36 AM	#474
TZH Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Kuala Lumpur Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 118	Originally posted by Clavius Wasn't this thread about my boss (Ricoh) buying Pentax, btw? Could you suggest your boss to lower the prices .

07-03-2011, 01:43 AM	#476
Emacs Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Moscow Posts: 1,223	Originally posted by Clavius I can't seem to find those figures actually. Can you please provide a link? Photozone. The DA @ f2.4 (2.2 actually) is about the same resolution figures (In excellent-very good-good terms of photozone) as this "Ltd". BTW, if they managed to call it "Ltd", why didn't they name the 100WR a limited too?

07-03-2011, 01:55 AM	#477
_lyan_ Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Bari, Italy Posts: 34	Originally posted by Emacs It's 52.5 lens, perfectly suitable for group portraits. It just has the angle of view (hope it's the correct translation) of a 52.5 mm, it's a 35mm lens. And group portraits aren't really what I call "portrait photo". I still can't understand why someone would buy a macro lens when fine details aren't relevant for the photos to take. It's just a waste of money. If you don't need a macro, don't buy one.

07-03-2011, 01:59 AM	#478
asdf Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Canada Posts: 1,252	Originally posted by _lyan_ It just has the angle of view (hope it's the correct translation) of a 52.5 mm, it's a 35mm lens. And group portraits aren't really what I call "portrait photo". I still can't understand why someone would buy a macro lens when fine details aren't relevant for the photos to take. It's just a waste of money. If you don't need a macro, don't buy one. Emacs is the photographer responsible for the following: 30 Catastrophic Russian Wedding Photos: Pics, Videos, Links, News

07-03-2011, 02:01 AM	#479
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by Emacs Photozone. The DA @ f2.4 (2.2 actually) is about the same resolution figures (In excellent-very good-good terms of photozone) as this "Ltd". BTW, if they managed to call it "Ltd", why didn't they name the 100WR a limited too? On Photozone, the DA35LTD was tested on a K10D. But the DA35 was tested on a K5. That is the difference in resolution right there. And guess what, Photozone itself states: "Please note that the tests results are not comparable across the different systems!" Why do you think they say that?

07-03-2011, 02:04 AM	#480
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by jsherman999 DA 35ltd macro is among the best lenses I've shot. I can't argue against it...I even trust you. But...It's slow and worse than my rest Pentax lenses.