Q Telephoto, DA 18-270, DFA 90mm Macro Leaked

mackloon · 09-08-2012, 04:03 AM

If it were WR I'd consider it.

Anvh · 09-08-2012, 04:44 AM

Originally posted by Docrwm

SDM and $900, no thanks

Makes me glad I have an 18-250 with good old fashioned, and reliable, screw drive technology. Now, if it's really DC technology like the 18-135WR that is a completely different story.

SDM is already 40+ years old so when does something become old fashion?

brush less DC is 50 years old.

fikkser · 09-08-2012, 05:25 AM

Why make the Q zoom f2,8? Why not 1,8? The big advantage with the Q system should be small and fast glass, not small and "slow" glass.

jogiba · 09-08-2012, 05:25 AM

SDM zoom lens for 1.5x crop K-mount bodies , no thanks , I would prefer to use my 28-300mm Tamron on a FF K-mount body.

jogiba · 09-08-2012, 05:29 AM

Originally posted by fikkser

Why make the Q zoom f2,8? Why not 1,8? The big advantage with the Q system should be small and fast glass, not small and "slow" glass.

They should make fast primes for the Q.

fikkser · 09-08-2012, 05:31 AM

Originally posted by jogiba

They should make fast primes for the Q.

sure, but if I could have a fast zoom I'd get it.

Sandy Hancock · 09-08-2012, 05:36 AM

Originally posted by fikkser

Why make the Q zoom f2,8? Why not 1,8? The big advantage with the Q system should be small and fast glass, not small and "slow" glass.

f2.8 *is* a fast zoom. What are you smoking?

sam-joseph · 09-08-2012, 06:10 AM

Just what do those soccer mums look like?
Sorry, off topic. It's to be hoped a new 18-270 zoom has fixed the lens creep problems of the DA 18-250.
While trying this lens out recently at a work-dinner, there were gasps from the ladies at the table when I turned the zoom ring and made the lens extend dramatically. I could only make one statement, "That happens to me all the time when I don't expect it".

Regards

Anvh · 09-08-2012, 06:14 AM

Originally posted by Sandy Hancock

f2.8 *is* a fast zoom. What are you smoking?

Not for such a small sensor, they can easily make f/2 and maybe even faster but they would be premium/pro level stuff though not something really for the Q

fikkser · 09-08-2012, 06:16 AM

Originally posted by Sandy Hancock

f2.8 *is* a fast zoom. What are you smoking?

Whats the point with a 2,8 zoom for the Q system? It's already too big to fit comfortably in the pocket, why not make it just a little bigger and use the advantages of the small sensor = small fast lenses. What did your mom smoke? f1,8 would be very nice.

Alizarine · 09-08-2012, 06:29 AM

Originally posted by fikkser

Whats the point with a 2,8 zoom for the Q system? It's already too big to fit comfortably in the pocket, why not make it just a little bigger and use the advantages of the small sensor = small fast lenses. What did your mom smoke? f1,8 would be very nice.

R&D and production costs, I guess. And as far as "pocketable" is concerned, I think Pentax just doesn't want the Q lenses to look like Sony E-mount lenses on the NEX... a "beercan-on-a-matchbox". Only compacts with retracting fixed lenses can ever be pocketable, at least with today's technology...

LFLee · 09-08-2012, 06:34 AM

Originally posted by fikkser

Whats the point with a 2,8 zoom for the Q system? It's already too big to fit comfortably in the pocket, why not make it just a little bigger and use the advantages of the small sensor = small fast lenses. What did your mom smoke? f1,8 would be very nice.

To be fair.... there is no zoom lens with f1.8 aperture (or there are?), as far as I know. A zoom lens with constant F2.8 is difficult to make and its expensive.

Anvh · 09-08-2012, 07:11 AM

Originally posted by Alizarine

R&D and production costs, I guess. And as far as "pocketable" is concerned, I think Pentax just doesn't want the Q lenses to look like Sony E-mount lenses on the NEX... a "beercan-on-a-matchbox". Only compacts with retracting fixed lenses can ever be pocketable, at least with today's technology...

But that is with a bigger sensor.
We are talking about a system where 8mm is normal so with an 8mm opening we would already have f/1
With Sony you need 30mm and so a 30mm opening, big difference!

**cheekygeek** · 09-08-2012, 07:14 AM

Originally posted by Sandy Hancock

f2.8 *is* a fast zoom. What are you smoking?

The previous poster may have a good point. F2.8 zooms ARE fast if we are talking longer flange to film/sensor distances and larger format sensors/films. But it makes sense to compare Q lenses to c-mount lenses made for 16mm movie cameras. They can have huge zoom ranges and yet very fast apertures (16-160mm f1.8; 22.5-90mm f1.5; etc.)

F2.8 does sound slow in comparison. Perhaps this indicates it is a fake. Or, if the black dot setting is macro, perhaps that accounts for the necessary "slowness".

**Deimos** · 09-08-2012, 07:20 AM

Originally posted by cheekygeek

The previous poster may have a good point. F2.8 zooms ARE fast if we are talking longer flange to film/sensor distances and larger format sensors/films. But it makes sense to compare Q lenses to c-mount lenses made for 16mm movie cameras. They can have huge zoom ranges and yet very fast apertures (16-160mm f1.8; 22.5-90mm f1.5; etc.)

F2.8 does sound slow in comparison. Perhaps this indicates it is a fake. Or, if the black dot setting is macro, perhaps that accounts for the necessary "slowness".

So if the crop factor would make the FL roughly 5.6x, how does that affect the "equivalent" aperture value to APS-C, f1.5 would be what roughly?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Macro benefits? dedicated Macro VS Telephoto/Macro choices	Tricktech	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	07-01-2012 11:17 AM
100mm f2.8 Macro - Fa or DFA?	stormtech	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	21	03-14-2011 02:44 AM
Pentax DFA 100mm f/2.8 Macro vs Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG vs Tamron AF 90mm f/2.8 Di SP	dyusem	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	02-13-2010 08:11 PM
Voigtländer Apo-Lanthar 90mm f3.5 SL Close Focus vs Tokina AT-X 90mm f2.5 1:2 macro	Patriot	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	06-02-2009 08:15 PM
Macro handling questions: Tamron 90mm SP and Pentax DFA 100mm	troyz	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	02-22-2009 01:17 PM

09-08-2012, 04:03 AM	#46
mackloon Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 415	If it were WR I'd consider it.

09-08-2012, 04:44 AM	#47
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by Docrwm SDM and $900, no thanks Makes me glad I have an 18-250 with good old fashioned, and reliable, screw drive technology. Now, if it's really DC technology like the 18-135WR that is a completely different story. SDM is already 40+ years old so when does something become old fashion? brush less DC is 50 years old.

09-08-2012, 05:25 AM	#48
fikkser Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Borlänge, Sweden Posts: 373	Why make the Q zoom f2,8? Why not 1,8? The big advantage with the Q system should be small and fast glass, not small and "slow" glass.

09-08-2012, 05:25 AM	#49
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	SDM zoom lens for 1.5x crop K-mount bodies , no thanks , I would prefer to use my 28-300mm Tamron on a FF K-mount body.

09-08-2012, 05:29 AM	#50
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	Originally posted by fikkser Why make the Q zoom f2,8? Why not 1,8? The big advantage with the Q system should be small and fast glass, not small and "slow" glass. They should make fast primes for the Q.

09-08-2012, 05:31 AM	#51
fikkser Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Borlänge, Sweden Posts: 373	Originally posted by jogiba They should make fast primes for the Q. sure, but if I could have a fast zoom I'd get it.

09-08-2012, 05:36 AM	#52
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,267	Originally posted by fikkser Why make the Q zoom f2,8? Why not 1,8? The big advantage with the Q system should be small and fast glass, not small and "slow" glass. f2.8 is a fast zoom. What are you smoking?

09-08-2012, 06:10 AM	#53
sam-joseph Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Newcastle, NSW, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,086	Just what do those soccer mums look like? Sorry, off topic. It's to be hoped a new 18-270 zoom has fixed the lens creep problems of the DA 18-250. While trying this lens out recently at a work-dinner, there were gasps from the ladies at the table when I turned the zoom ring and made the lens extend dramatically. I could only make one statement, "That happens to me all the time when I don't expect it". Regards

09-08-2012, 06:14 AM	#54
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by Sandy Hancock f2.8 is a fast zoom. What are you smoking? Not for such a small sensor, they can easily make f/2 and maybe even faster but they would be premium/pro level stuff though not something really for the Q

09-08-2012, 06:16 AM	#55
fikkser Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Borlänge, Sweden Posts: 373	Originally posted by Sandy Hancock f2.8 is a fast zoom. What are you smoking? Whats the point with a 2,8 zoom for the Q system? It's already too big to fit comfortably in the pocket, why not make it just a little bigger and use the advantages of the small sensor = small fast lenses. What did your mom smoke? f1,8 would be very nice.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-08-2012, 06:29 AM	#56
Alizarine Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Manila Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,185	Originally posted by fikkser Whats the point with a 2,8 zoom for the Q system? It's already too big to fit comfortably in the pocket, why not make it just a little bigger and use the advantages of the small sensor = small fast lenses. What did your mom smoke? f1,8 would be very nice. R&D and production costs, I guess. And as far as "pocketable" is concerned, I think Pentax just doesn't want the Q lenses to look like Sony E-mount lenses on the NEX... a "beercan-on-a-matchbox". Only compacts with retracting fixed lenses can ever be pocketable, at least with today's technology...

09-08-2012, 06:34 AM	#57
LFLee Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,292	Originally posted by fikkser Whats the point with a 2,8 zoom for the Q system? It's already too big to fit comfortably in the pocket, why not make it just a little bigger and use the advantages of the small sensor = small fast lenses. What did your mom smoke? f1,8 would be very nice. To be fair.... there is no zoom lens with f1.8 aperture (or there are?), as far as I know. A zoom lens with constant F2.8 is difficult to make and its expensive.

09-08-2012, 07:11 AM	#58
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by Alizarine R&D and production costs, I guess. And as far as "pocketable" is concerned, I think Pentax just doesn't want the Q lenses to look like Sony E-mount lenses on the NEX... a "beercan-on-a-matchbox". Only compacts with retracting fixed lenses can ever be pocketable, at least with today's technology... But that is with a bigger sensor. We are talking about a system where 8mm is normal so with an 8mm opening we would already have f/1 With Sony you need 30mm and so a 30mm opening, big difference!

09-08-2012, 07:14 AM	#59
cheekygeek Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Kearney, Nebraska USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,261	Originally posted by Sandy Hancock f2.8 is a fast zoom. What are you smoking? The previous poster may have a good point. F2.8 zooms ARE fast if we are talking longer flange to film/sensor distances and larger format sensors/films. But it makes sense to compare Q lenses to c-mount lenses made for 16mm movie cameras. They can have huge zoom ranges and yet very fast apertures (16-160mm f1.8; 22.5-90mm f1.5; etc.) F2.8 does sound slow in comparison. Perhaps this indicates it is a fake. Or, if the black dot setting is macro, perhaps that accounts for the necessary "slowness".

09-08-2012, 07:20 AM	#60
Deimos Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Kingdom of Wonder Posts: 1,777	Originally posted by cheekygeek The previous poster may have a good point. F2.8 zooms ARE fast if we are talking longer flange to film/sensor distances and larger format sensors/films. But it makes sense to compare Q lenses to c-mount lenses made for 16mm movie cameras. They can have huge zoom ranges and yet very fast apertures (16-160mm f1.8; 22.5-90mm f1.5; etc.) F2.8 does sound slow in comparison. Perhaps this indicates it is a fake. Or, if the black dot setting is macro, perhaps that accounts for the necessary "slowness". So if the crop factor would make the FL roughly 5.6x, how does that affect the "equivalent" aperture value to APS-C, f1.5 would be what roughly?