[NickLarsson]

Canon.

And even if the answer had been 'no', that doesn't mean Pentax couldn't have been the first.

Hasselblad also.

[Caat]

Given it's a telephoto of that length I would be very surprised if it weren't able to cover a 35mm image circle simply by virtue of its inherent design.

I think the DFA moniker on K mount lenses is a red herring as regards FF. The two macro lenses were DFA because they were the first lenses introduced with coatings optimised for digital sensors. So in effect they were film lenses that could be used on digital. They weren't digital lenses with a 35mm image circle. The same broadly applies to the 645 DFA lenses. At the time of the macro releases Pentax's film cameras were still current models and there are still today a number of active 645 film users - hence the use of DFA in both cases; they existed in markets where film and digital were contemporaneous. That's my take anyway.

What I think is more interesting is the orange ring rather than green. Could this be indicative of deliberate 35mm compatibility? Then in future marketing Pentax can use the green ring for APS-C lenses and the orange ring for FF lenses.

OK so I read the press release properly and the orange ring indicates it's an HD lens:

Featured in the middle of the lens barrel, a red anodized ring serves as a distinct, radiant symbol of the new HD PENTAX lens series.

Which is just really odd if you ask me. It indicates that it's part of a separate series. So will we have DA, DA* and HD? (perhaps HD*?) Maybe HD is the new FF. Pentax can be very confusing.

[bossa]

Do you mean the RED ring on the barrel? That signifies that the lens is a member of the new HD series of lenses.

PS: Oops! I should have quoted you as I see you've now answered your own question.

[Caat]

Do you mean the RED ring on the barrel? That signifies that the lens is a member of the new HD series of lenses.

PS: Oops! I should have quoted you as I see you've now answered your own question.

lol. Indeed, although I really should read press releases before I open my mouth. I still don't quite see why HD coating needs a new ring colour by itself.

[gazonk]

This is why I wouldn't be surprised if Pentax also announced an APS-C K-3 at Photokina. The K-5II only really makes sense as a fill-in, not as a range topper.

+1

Suppose the K-3 is announced in a few days and really is a "pro APS-C", then suddenly the K-5 II starts to make a lot of sense - what's not to like about a refined version of the K-5, after all?

[Caat]

+1

Suppose the K-3 is announced in a few days and really is a "pro APS-C", then suddenly the K-5 II starts to make a lot of sense - what's not to like about a refined version of the K-5, after all?

This has been my thinking all along.

However, I have been wondering if Pentax might have been better off announcing the K-3 first (assuming of course it exists). And then filling the gap with the K-5II afterwards - it would have been a less opaque strategy.

[Ishpuini]

+1

Suppose the K-3 is announced in a few days and really is a "pro APS-C", then suddenly the K-5 II starts to make a lot of sense - what's not to like about a refined version of the K-5, after all?

If Pentax had only announced a K-5 II I would agree, but they also announced the K-5 IIs, which is aimed at a more demanding audience. Wouldn't a K-3 announcement cannibalize the sales of a K-5 IIs even before it was available? Why go through the effort to announce a relatively exotic solution to offer more resolution if you're following it up immediately by a higher MP camera? Doesn't seem to make sense to me. Hence I don't expect anymore concrete announcements at Photokina. Which doesn't mean Pentax may not show a number of mock-ups to indicate things to come in a more distant future?

Wim

[gazonk]

If Pentax had only announced a K-5 II I would agree, but they also announced the K-5 IIs, which is aimed at a more demanding audience. Wouldn't a K-3 announcement cannibalize the sales of a K-5 IIs even before it was available?

But if there's a K-3 and a K-3s - maybe it makes sense again?

[Caat]

If Pentax had only announced a K-5 II I would agree, but they also announced the K-5 IIs, which is aimed at a more demanding audience. Wouldn't a K-3 announcement cannibalize the sales of a K-5 IIs even before it was available? Why go through the effort to announce a relatively exotic solution to offer more resolution if you're following it up immediately by a higher MP camera? Doesn't seem to make sense to me. Hence I don't expect anymore concrete announcements at Photokina. Which doesn't mean Pentax may not show a number of mock-ups to indicate things to come in a more distant future?

The existence of the K-5IIs does present an issue for the K-3 but it was always going to at all points in time where the two cameras co-exist. Assuming the K-5IIs has a life span of 12 months I would expect a 24mp APS-C within that time span. The problem you raise will be there whenever the camera gets announced - be that in a week or six months+. If Pentax are worried about the K-5IIs cannibalising sales from the K-3 then taken to its logical conclusion we won't be seeing a K-3 for absolutely ages. Which I can't believe as this would be hugely damaging to Pentax's market share.

I might be more inclined believe that Pentax would delay the launch of a K-3 to save K-5IIs sales if the K-5IIs was anything but a two year old K-5 without an AA filter and a theoretically better AF system.

I would expect the K-3 to be sufficiently higher-end to enter a different bracket to the K-5IIs regardless of the lack of an AA filter (of course the K-3 might not have one either). The K-5IIs is aimed at a pure photographer who isn't concerned with video (which surely would be an issue) and just wants an excellent photographic tool. I would expect the K-3 to be this and more.

[timcatn]

There is the possibility that Pentax sees the K5-II as a dry run test for their new AF system. If it is well received then great. Put in the K3 and off we go. If not, they have the chance to correct it before putting the K3 on sale. Just my 2 cents.

[janneman]

However, I have been wondering if Pentax might have been better off announcing the K-3 first (assuming of course it exists). And then filling the gap with the K-5II afterwards - it would have been a less opaque strategy.

My idea too. But we are talking Pentax here, aren't we?

[Giklab]

Can you please provide a source (or multiple sources, if needed) for SDM~PZD?

Tamron -18-270mm F/3.5-6.3(Model B008)

No matter which ultrasonic motor you're looking at, they all use the same principle, even though the designs and materials may differ. The motors use piezoelectric elements to move something, and every material that produces that effect is called piezoelectric.

It's just that Tamron is the only one calling that motor PE. FWIW, their "new" one is called USD . Both seem quite reliable.

[Giklab]

Pentax has made a distinction between SDM and DC. That distinction seems to hold up in that the SDM lenses require a good bit of maintenance (see the SDM Survey here on this forum) but the DC lenses have 0 failures. Sorry, you can use the same technology and have different implementation of it from a design and engineering perspective and one application can be flawless and the other a mess. That appears to be the case here.

I get your point, but would you mind explaining how does it relate to what I said?

[ElJamoquio]

You would think that if it was FF capable, Pentax would have the brains to label it as a DFA lens

You would've thought that with the DA 50mm F/1.8, too, or the DA 35mm F/2.4.

[Ishpuini]

But if there's a K-3 and a K-3s - maybe it makes sense again?

Indeed it would.

The existence of the K-5IIs does present an issue for the K-3 but it was always going to at all points in time where the two cameras co-exist. Assuming the K-5IIs has a life span of 12 months I would expect a 24mp APS-C within that time span. The problem you raise will be there whenever the camera gets announced - be that in a week or six months+. If Pentax are worried about the K-5IIs cannibalising sales from the K-3 then taken to its logical conclusion we won't be seeing a K-3 for absolutely ages. Which I can't believe as this would be hugely damaging to Pentax's market share.

I might be more inclined believe that Pentax would delay the launch of a K-3 to save K-5IIs sales if the K-5IIs was anything but a two year old K-5 without an AA filter and a theoretically better AF system.

I would expect the K-3 to be sufficiently higher-end to enter a different bracket to the K-5IIs regardless of the lack of an AA filter (of course the K-3 might not have one either). The K-5IIs is aimed at a pure photographer who isn't concerned with video (which surely would be an issue) and just wants an excellent photographic tool. I would expect the K-3 to be this and more.

I was indeed talking about an immediate launch of a K-3. If they give the K-5 IIs some time to sell and then introduce the K-3 it would be different. Of course, announcing a camera that will appear 6 months from now is a possibility, but I don't think it would include all specs, and will only be done if it promises to be sth really special.

Anyway, we'll find out next week.

Wim