The Ricoh way.....

Kunzite · 09-02-2013, 01:31 PM

Surprised to find out that specifications don't tell the whole story

mecrox · 09-02-2013, 02:34 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Barry Pearson

Surprised in what way?

Sometimes I use the "Metadata" feature in Lightroom to examine what focal lengths I use in various situations. I don't find clustering around the focal lengths of the Limited lenses. The majority of the time I use focal lengths much greater than the Limiteds. For a significant portion of the rest of the time I use the wide angle ends of my DA 10-17mm Fisheye and my DA 12-24mm f/4. The rest is largely covered by my DA 17-70mm f/4. That is why I say "I have never identified a situation where I would put one on my camera rather than another lens".

If I were travelling the world but could only take 2 of my lenses, they would certainly be my DA 12-24mm f/4 and my DA* 60-250mm f/4. (But I would prefer a WR version of the 12-24mm - I rely on WR a lot). If I were travelling the world with a severe weight restriction, I would take my Q system. whenever I am using my K-5IIs, it is so heavy that using a light lens won't turn it into a light-weight system.

I sometimes use prime lenses, but for specific purposes: my 55mm for portraits when I am interacting to do head & shoulders portraits; my 100mm for Macro work; my 300mm for action work when I don't need the flexibility of my 60-250mm (but I really want a WR 1.4x Teleconverter so that I have a 420mm version); and my Sigma 500mm f/4.5 for specialist work such as birding.

Interesting choice of words. Do you see your photography as work? Perhaps it is if you earning your living from it. I like the Limiteds because I can put one on the camera and then go out for a stroll, taking the kind of shots which suit that lens and walking past the others. It's not work, it's a pleasure. I'd quite like a long lens - I've never owned one beyond my current M 120mm. But it would be pretty heavy and bulky to take around, I imagine. That would be too much like work.

Barry Pearson · 09-02-2013, 11:42 PM

Originally posted by mecrox

Interesting choice of words. Do you see your photography as work? Perhaps it is if you earning your living from it. I like the Limiteds because I can put one on the camera and then go out for a stroll, taking the kind of shots which suit that lens and walking past the others. It's not work, it's a pleasure. I'd quite like a long lens - I've never owned one beyond my current M 120mm. But it would be pretty heavy and bulky to take around, I imagine. That would be too much like work.

Photography is my hobby, not work. Since my K-5IIs isn't a carry-everywhere camera, (too big and heavy), I use it where I specifically intend to take photos. Then how I configure it depends on what I intend to take photos of.

I am building my Q system as a carry-everywhere system, or at least partial system. (I don't expect to carry the whole system on my body everywhere. I'm still evolving what I do - I'm now using that camera where I wouldn't have had a camera on me before).

If I am visiting a stately home and garden, I might tour the place using my main K system lenses, then tour again using just my Macro lens. On the latter tour I typically "take the kind of shots which suit that lens and walk past the others". That means close-ups.

paranoia23 · 09-03-2013, 02:40 AM

btw ... ricoh is listed as one of 30 corporations in the NIA (Natur-Aktuen-Index)... which is a german stock index where the corporations are selected by ecologicyl and economical criteria (as technical pioneering position).

take a look into the complete list:
Natur-Aktien-Index - Die Unternehmen im NAI

ricoh is listed on position 7 of 30 so they invest 4,1% of their stock.

i dont know if ecological perspectives count in the US ... in europe they do.

gazonk · 09-03-2013, 02:58 AM

Originally posted by paranoia23

btw ... ricoh is listed as one of 30 corporations in the NIA (Natur-Aktuen-Index)... which is a german stock index where the corporations are selected by ecologicyl and economical criteria (as technical pioneering position).

I guess there's no hope of a revival of radioactive lenses, then?

**Billy Joe** · 09-07-2013, 08:22 AM

Originally posted by Barry Pearson

Given that I am not the only one who has never seen Limited lenses as part of the attraction of Pentax systems, I suggest that there is actually more to Pentax than Limited lenses!

I have looked repeatedly at the specifications and reviews of every Limited lens. They appear lovely, but .... I have never identified a situation where I would put one on my camera rather than another lens. If I have missed something, it is obscure rather than important - to me.

There is little more to pentax than the limited lenses and backwards compatibility... If all you are looking at using are your zoom lenses, then any of the other manufacturers can and do beat pentax hands down.

The 16-50---- 50-135 zooms have had a history of SDM failures. The 12-24 is a really nice lense, but sadly not WR, so it is easily matched by the competitors... The 60-250 is a nice lens, but awfully big and heavy for an F4 zoom, I compared it to my tamron 70-200 2.8 and prefer the IQ of the tammy.at 2.8 to the Pentax at F4. And the Sigma 100-300 f4 is a better choice for a f4zoom in my opinion. And lets not even discuss the PTTL Flash system..

Put an DA15, FA43 or FA77 on your camera just once, in my humble opinion those and the old russian glass are the only reason to still be sticking with pentax... but opinions are about as worthless as the pentax flash system... So to each their own.

Transit · 09-07-2013, 04:03 PM

Originally posted by Billy Joe

.........
The 16-50---- 50-135 zooms have had a history of SDM failures. ...

I don't think that is true regarding the 50-135...
same goes for the rest of what you said really

**Billy Joe** · 09-07-2013, 04:13 PM

Originally posted by Transit

I don't think that is true regarding the 50-135...
same goes for the rest of what you said really

You are so right... I completely made up the history of SDM failure... There are many of us who have never bought the DA 50-135 because of the ongoing issues with the first two DA* zooms. And because of the history there is no way most of us would ever buy it used.

Shall we fact check some more of my lies... 8^)

**monochrome** · 09-07-2013, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by Billy Joe

You are so right... I completely made up the history of SDM failure... please

The 16~50 was once known to have an uncommonly high incidence of SDM failures, which seem to have abated more recently. I don't recall the 50~135 having been prone to an unusual SDM failure rate. Some, sure, but it's old news anyway -- linky linky.

Of course we could be wrong and you could be correct. I'm interested in your citations - can you provide links?

**Billy Joe** · 09-07-2013, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by monochrome

Uhm - K-x, K-01, Film Cameras.

Ain't his job. You sling the hash, you post the source.

When I bought my K100d there were two lenses I wanted. A FA 50 1.4 and the DA50-135... There were so many failures on both the da* zooms that many would not go near it.

In fact, I remember it the opposite way from your recollection. I remember the long zoom failing more often than the shorter one. But that could be because that was the lens I wanted.

The link you posted... on the second post it says it was just rumored... no official word from Pentax that the motors have been redesigned or parts replaced. Is there another official source?

**monochrome** · 09-07-2013, 04:58 PM

Originally posted by Billy Joe

The link you posted... on the second post it says it was just rumored... no official word from Pentax that the motors have been redesigned or parts replaced. Is there another official source?

Nice redirect from "where are your links?"

But OK - Of course not, and you know that. There's been plenty of discussion around Pentax having fixed the problem, quietly made it known they did, but never officially acknowledged the problem existed or the fix was made.

But I'm out of this discussion. It isn't my pot and I never should have stepped in. Go ahead and grab another paddle.

**Billy Joe** · 09-08-2013, 08:20 AM

Originally posted by monochrome

Nice redirect from "where are your links?"

But OK - Of course not, and you know that. There's been plenty of discussion around Pentax having fixed the problem, quietly made it known they did, but never officially acknowledged the problem existed or the fix was made.

But I'm out of this discussion. It isn't my pot and I never should have stepped in. Go ahead and grab another paddle.

It is not always about "links"... as you just showed, links on the internet dont mean a whole lot. Your link to "news" which was really just hearsay. The only real news about the lens SDM problems could only come from Pentax/Hoya/Ricoh... and at least until now they have never even admitted the problem so how could they discus the fix?

I got no dog in this fight... as I will never own the either of the da*s. My original post was directed to Barry who was essentially saying that the limited lenses were not really a factor in choosing pentax. To me it is probably the main reason. As the zooms and flash system are not better than the competition.

Apapukas · 09-11-2013, 07:47 AM - **2 Likes**

I believe we expect Ricoh to show us something wonderful too fast. It is simply too fast to judge.

I try to look at Ricoh's work from a weightlifter's point of view.

Building a new technology is a long and hard process that requires extreme dedication and sacrifices. Just like building your body. It is hard.

When Pentax was under Hoya, it really lost its shape. Now when Ricoh bought Pentax we expect great results ASAP. It doesn't work that way. Don't believe? Go to the gym and try to build yourself an excellent physique in 1.5 years. At the gym, usually everyone who has been lifting under 3 years is considered a noob, so why do we expect progress from Ricoh so fast?

It takes up to half a year to get back into your best shape and it takes at least another year to finally show some results. It has been near 2 years since Pentax is "training" under Ricoh and it can take up to another year to see what kind of muscles Pentax has built and what kind of coach Ricoh actually is

**fs999** · 09-11-2013, 08:07 AM

My 50-135 works fine since the first day and I will never sell it...

Barry Pearson · 09-11-2013, 08:23 AM

Originally posted by Billy Joe

I got no dog in this fight... as I will never own the either of the da*s. My original post was directed to Barry who was essentially saying that the limited lenses were not really a factor in choosing pentax. To me it is probably the main reason. As the zooms and flash system are not better than the competition.

I didn't say the Limited lenses were not such a factor for anyone. I said they were not such a factor for me and a couple of other Pentax users I know.

Hence there are certainly other reasons for choosing Pentax!

09-07-2013, 04:13 PM	#233
Billy Joe Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 374	Originally posted by Transit I don't think that is true regarding the 50-135... same goes for the rest of what you said really You are so right... I completely made up the history of SDM failure... There are many of us who have never bought the DA 50-135 because of the ongoing issues with the first two DA* zooms. And because of the history there is no way most of us would ever buy it used. Shall we fact check some more of my lies... 8^) Last edited by Billy Joe; 09-07-2013 at 04:22 PM.

09-07-2013, 04:19 PM	#234
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by Billy Joe You are so right... I completely made up the history of SDM failure... please The 16~50 was once known to have an uncommonly high incidence of SDM failures, which seem to have abated more recently. I don't recall the 50~135 having been prone to an unusual SDM failure rate. Some, sure, but it's old news anyway -- linky linky. Of course we could be wrong and you could be correct. I'm interested in your citations - can you provide links? Last edited by monochrome; 09-07-2013 at 04:31 PM.

09-07-2013, 04:31 PM	#235
Billy Joe Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 374	Originally posted by monochrome Uhm - K-x, K-01, Film Cameras. Ain't his job. You sling the hash, you post the source. When I bought my K100d there were two lenses I wanted. A FA 50 1.4 and the DA50-135... There were so many failures on both the da* zooms that many would not go near it. In fact, I remember it the opposite way from your recollection. I remember the long zoom failing more often than the shorter one. But that could be because that was the lens I wanted. The link you posted... on the second post it says it was just rumored... no official word from Pentax that the motors have been redesigned or parts replaced. Is there another official source? Last edited by Billy Joe; 09-07-2013 at 04:40 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ricoh announces company name change - no more Pentax Ricoh Imaging, just Ricoh.	rawr	Pentax News and Rumors	528	10-28-2013 04:39 PM
Ricoh promises some very high-end Ricoh products this year...	JohnBee	Pentax News and Rumors	33	06-28-2012 04:50 AM
RICOH Establishes PENTAX RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.	Adam	Homepage & Official Pentax News	20	10-13-2011 03:31 AM
Camera on the way, lenses on the way, what am I missing?	Balog	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	30	07-08-2010 01:38 PM
[joke] Revolutionary way to clean your sensor, the Pentax way !	thibs	General Talk	9	02-13-2008 03:42 AM

09-02-2013, 01:31 PM	#226
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Surprised to find out that specifications don't tell the whole story

09-02-2013, 02:34 PM - 1 Like	#227
mecrox Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Oxford, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,375	Originally posted by Barry Pearson Surprised in what way? Sometimes I use the "Metadata" feature in Lightroom to examine what focal lengths I use in various situations. I don't find clustering around the focal lengths of the Limited lenses. The majority of the time I use focal lengths much greater than the Limiteds. For a significant portion of the rest of the time I use the wide angle ends of my DA 10-17mm Fisheye and my DA 12-24mm f/4. The rest is largely covered by my DA 17-70mm f/4. That is why I say "I have never identified a situation where I would put one on my camera rather than another lens". If I were travelling the world but could only take 2 of my lenses, they would certainly be my DA 12-24mm f/4 and my DA* 60-250mm f/4. (But I would prefer a WR version of the 12-24mm - I rely on WR a lot). If I were travelling the world with a severe weight restriction, I would take my Q system. whenever I am using my K-5IIs, it is so heavy that using a light lens won't turn it into a light-weight system. I sometimes use prime lenses, but for specific purposes: my 55mm for portraits when I am interacting to do head & shoulders portraits; my 100mm for Macro work; my 300mm for action work when I don't need the flexibility of my 60-250mm (but I really want a WR 1.4x Teleconverter so that I have a 420mm version); and my Sigma 500mm f/4.5 for specialist work such as birding. Interesting choice of words. Do you see your photography as work? Perhaps it is if you earning your living from it. I like the Limiteds because I can put one on the camera and then go out for a stroll, taking the kind of shots which suit that lens and walking past the others. It's not work, it's a pleasure. I'd quite like a long lens - I've never owned one beyond my current M 120mm. But it would be pretty heavy and bulky to take around, I imagine. That would be too much like work.

09-02-2013, 11:42 PM	#228
Barry Pearson Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Stockport Posts: 964	Originally posted by mecrox Interesting choice of words. Do you see your photography as work? Perhaps it is if you earning your living from it. I like the Limiteds because I can put one on the camera and then go out for a stroll, taking the kind of shots which suit that lens and walking past the others. It's not work, it's a pleasure. I'd quite like a long lens - I've never owned one beyond my current M 120mm. But it would be pretty heavy and bulky to take around, I imagine. That would be too much like work. Photography is my hobby, not work. Since my K-5IIs isn't a carry-everywhere camera, (too big and heavy), I use it where I specifically intend to take photos. Then how I configure it depends on what I intend to take photos of. I am building my Q system as a carry-everywhere system, or at least partial system. (I don't expect to carry the whole system on my body everywhere. I'm still evolving what I do - I'm now using that camera where I wouldn't have had a camera on me before). If I am visiting a stately home and garden, I might tour the place using my main K system lenses, then tour again using just my Macro lens. On the latter tour I typically "take the kind of shots which suit that lens and walk past the others". That means close-ups.

09-03-2013, 02:40 AM	#229
paranoia23 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 188	btw ... ricoh is listed as one of 30 corporations in the NIA (Natur-Aktuen-Index)... which is a german stock index where the corporations are selected by ecologicyl and economical criteria (as technical pioneering position). take a look into the complete list: Natur-Aktien-Index - Die Unternehmen im NAI ricoh is listed on position 7 of 30 so they invest 4,1% of their stock. i dont know if ecological perspectives count in the US ... in europe they do.

09-03-2013, 02:58 AM	#230
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by paranoia23 btw ... ricoh is listed as one of 30 corporations in the NIA (Natur-Aktuen-Index)... which is a german stock index where the corporations are selected by ecologicyl and economical criteria (as technical pioneering position). I guess there's no hope of a revival of radioactive lenses, then?

09-07-2013, 08:22 AM	#231
Billy Joe Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 374	Originally posted by Barry Pearson Given that I am not the only one who has never seen Limited lenses as part of the attraction of Pentax systems, I suggest that there is actually more to Pentax than Limited lenses! I have looked repeatedly at the specifications and reviews of every Limited lens. They appear lovely, but .... I have never identified a situation where I would put one on my camera rather than another lens. If I have missed something, it is obscure rather than important - to me. There is little more to pentax than the limited lenses and backwards compatibility... If all you are looking at using are your zoom lenses, then any of the other manufacturers can and do beat pentax hands down. The 16-50---- 50-135 zooms have had a history of SDM failures. The 12-24 is a really nice lense, but sadly not WR, so it is easily matched by the competitors... The 60-250 is a nice lens, but awfully big and heavy for an F4 zoom, I compared it to my tamron 70-200 2.8 and prefer the IQ of the tammy.at 2.8 to the Pentax at F4. And the Sigma 100-300 f4 is a better choice for a f4zoom in my opinion. And lets not even discuss the PTTL Flash system.. Put an DA15, FA43 or FA77 on your camera just once, in my humble opinion those and the old russian glass are the only reason to still be sticking with pentax... but opinions are about as worthless as the pentax flash system... So to each their own.

09-07-2013, 04:03 PM	#232
Transit Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Whanganui NZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,624	Originally posted by Billy Joe ......... The 16-50---- 50-135 zooms have had a history of SDM failures. ... I don't think that is true regarding the 50-135... same goes for the rest of what you said really

09-07-2013, 04:58 PM	#236
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by Billy Joe The link you posted... on the second post it says it was just rumored... no official word from Pentax that the motors have been redesigned or parts replaced. Is there another official source? Nice redirect from "where are your links?" But OK - Of course not, and you know that. There's been plenty of discussion around Pentax having fixed the problem, quietly made it known they did, but never officially acknowledged the problem existed or the fix was made. But I'm out of this discussion. It isn't my pot and I never should have stepped in. Go ahead and grab another paddle.

09-08-2013, 08:20 AM	#237
Billy Joe Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 374	Originally posted by monochrome Nice redirect from "where are your links?" But OK - Of course not, and you know that. There's been plenty of discussion around Pentax having fixed the problem, quietly made it known they did, but never officially acknowledged the problem existed or the fix was made. But I'm out of this discussion. It isn't my pot and I never should have stepped in. Go ahead and grab another paddle. It is not always about "links"... as you just showed, links on the internet dont mean a whole lot. Your link to "news" which was really just hearsay. The only real news about the lens SDM problems could only come from Pentax/Hoya/Ricoh... and at least until now they have never even admitted the problem so how could they discus the fix? I got no dog in this fight... as I will never own the either of the da*s. My original post was directed to Barry who was essentially saying that the limited lenses were not really a factor in choosing pentax. To me it is probably the main reason. As the zooms and flash system are not better than the competition.

09-11-2013, 07:47 AM - 2 Likes	#238
Apapukas Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Lietuva, Vilnius Posts: 627	I believe we expect Ricoh to show us something wonderful too fast. It is simply too fast to judge. I try to look at Ricoh's work from a weightlifter's point of view. Building a new technology is a long and hard process that requires extreme dedication and sacrifices. Just like building your body. It is hard. When Pentax was under Hoya, it really lost its shape. Now when Ricoh bought Pentax we expect great results ASAP. It doesn't work that way. Don't believe? Go to the gym and try to build yourself an excellent physique in 1.5 years. At the gym, usually everyone who has been lifting under 3 years is considered a noob, so why do we expect progress from Ricoh so fast? It takes up to half a year to get back into your best shape and it takes at least another year to finally show some results. It has been near 2 years since Pentax is "training" under Ricoh and it can take up to another year to see what kind of muscles Pentax has built and what kind of coach Ricoh actually is

09-11-2013, 08:07 AM	#239
fs999 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Luxembourg Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,638	My 50-135 works fine since the first day and I will never sell it...

09-11-2013, 08:23 AM	#240
Barry Pearson Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Stockport Posts: 964	Originally posted by Billy Joe I got no dog in this fight... as I will never own the either of the das. My original post was directed to Barry who was essentially saying that the limited lenses were not really a factor in choosing pentax. To me it is probably the main reason. As the zooms and flash system are not better than the competition. I didn't say the Limited lenses were not such a factor for anyone. I said they were not such a factor for me and a couple of other Pentax users I know*. Hence there are certainly other reasons for choosing Pentax!