[fuent104]

Your investment, or company's own investment?
And I see no other company than Pentax and Leica that stick so firmly to their own legacies, and their mounts, as hard as they can and better than anybody else.
Therefore they were always my only choices in imaging needs — I considered no other company just on the basis of that virtue you underscore too.

So please tell me, what was your point exactly?

My point, as I stated, was that the horse / car analogy did not apply. I still don't see that it does. Unless slow, variable aperture zooms are somehow innovative. And I would not consider weather sealing, and especially not build quality, to be innovative. I guess my point was that I don't see where the pentax automobile is to everyone else's horse.

[Zygonyx]

Well, as owner of the recent and first limited zoom, my own and sole advise to those who criticize it is simple : try it !

IMHO, in addition to build quality and iq. that both look excellent, something else has to be adressed which can possibly be understood as "versatility" or "complementarity" of this lens with K-3 /5 bodies : no other lens is that perfectly "balanced" with Pentax SLR.

[tclausen]

Well, as owner of the recent and first limited zoom, my own and sole advise to those who criticize it is simple : try it !



IMHO, in addition to build quality and iq. that both look excellent, something else has to be adressed which can possibly be understood as "versatility" or "complementarity" of this lens with K-3 /5 bodies : no other lens is that perfectly "balanced" with Pentax SLR.

Would love to try it, but nobody in my neck of the woods seem to have it, so it has to wait until I hit Japan next.

That said....the DA Ltd zoom, while nice (I am sure) and while I'd love to "support Pentax", is a lens I have a hard time justifying even to myself. I have a preference for primes and almost never use anything else - and prime-wise, that range is really well covered by the 21-31-40-43 Ltd's (and my preference of one hereof is well documented on this site, I think).

Pentax made a bold move with the 20-40: setting themselves up for competition against themselves, in a range where some of their finest glass exists already, and has a cult-following. I know that that's what's holding me back, intellectually. Then again, didn't someone say something about "if you do not canibalise your own successful market, then somebody else will, eventually".

I'd be really interested in seeing how the 20-40 matches up against each of the primes listed. It might just be that it outshines each and everyone of the primes (except for,speed) - and that would be quite a feat...and also quite a "Pentaxy" thing to do.

In conclusion, Pentax, loan me a 20-40 for testing, please

[Kunzite]

What you are talking about is essentially the abandonment of much of the current base of users. I don't know why you think we should be of good cheer about that. To be honest, and I'm sorry if this offends you, because that is not my goal, but your optimism is virtually impossible to distinguish from propaganda.

That couldn't be farther from the truth.
People like monochrome (and I, for that matter) tries to understand Pentax. What's their current status, how's the market, what can realistically be done, what are they planning to do. Assuming there is no plan means claiming they're acting chaotically, which is a ridiculous assumption.

A plan is not:
- propaganda
- making past mistakes disappear
- making their current situation irrelevant
- solving all problems at once, e.g. materializing 85mm f/1.4s and 200mm macros, or an entire "full frame" product line.
A plan is something to be executed step by step, and will take time to complete. Since opinions about what and how differs in critical aspects, obviously their plan will not make everyone happy. From what I can see, people valuing Pentax, and not in a hurry to get something they don't have will be the happiest; while people wanting a complete departure from Pentax traditional value should not waste time and jump ship asap
A plan doesn't even means things will get "better" (for some random definition of "better"); Hoya had a plan, which was mostly cost cutting and finding a buyer. Ricoh has a plan, and it's based on steady growth, in an attempt to become a major camera player.

Understanding is not:
- propaganda
- denying their past mistakes
- denying their current situation, gaps in product range, product deficiencies etc
- making wild claims about Pentax becoming #1 overnight, or making "killer" products out of the blue.
Monochrome never did anything like that; your rant is thus misplaced.

But then, both understanding and admitting there must be some sort of a plan doesn't go well with "PentaxIsDoomed" - which is the accepted truth on this forum

[Zygonyx]

Would love to try it, but nobody in my neck of the woods seem to have it, so it has to wait until I hit Japan next.

That said....the DA Ltd zoom, while nice (I am sure) and while I'd love to "support Pentax", is a lens I have a hard time justifying even to myself. I have a preference for primes and almost never use anything else - and prime-wise, that range is really well covered by the 21-31-40-43 Ltd's (and my preference of one hereof is well documented on this site, I think).

Pentax made a bold move with the 20-40: setting themselves up for competition against themselves, in a range where some of their finest glass exists already, and has a cult-following. I know that that's what's holding me back, intellectually. Then again, didn't someone say something about "if you do not canibalise your own successful market, then somebody else will, eventually".

I'd be really interested in seeing how the 20-40 matches up against each of the primes listed. It might just be that it outshines each and everyone of the primes (except for,speed) - and that would be quite a feat...and also quite a "Pentaxy" thing to do.

In conclusion, Pentax, loan me a 20-40 for testing, please

I understand your position, and also own all other Limiteds that in my opinion are not that much overshadowed by the new zoom : if you prefer compactness (all of them) or starburst (smc 21) or thinner DOF (all of them but 21) you still need the primes...
HD Limited zoom is a perfect multipurpose kit lens for K-3

[bilybianca]

I would like just one, very limited, lens update. FA* 200mm Macro with weather sealing. Anyone else who'd like that? Anyone who owns the old one, is tired of it and want to give it to me?

Kjell

[bvg]

Maybe Ricoh just wants to eliminate an unnecessary technological process and make uniform coating for all lenses.

[woodywesty]

I would like just one, very limited, lens update. FA* 200mm Macro with weather sealing. Anyone else who'd like that? Anyone who owns the old one, is tired of it and want to give it to me?

Kjell

You do have to wonder just what the heck is going on in the heads of Ricoh management. I am very thankful that they bought and saved Pentax and I love my new K3 but what "new" lenses have they come out with? A 560mm telescope instead of a camera lens and a 20-40mm zoom that competes with the best primes they make....boy, there's a couple money makers... yet still no teleconvertor. Where are their heads?? Maybe they have a plan but they never tell us or ask us anything.

[monochrome]

But then, both understanding and admitting there must be some sort of a plan doesn't go well with "PentaxIsDoomed" - which is the accepted truth on this forum

Actually Gray and fuent104 are correct in their suspicion and disappointment. The only argument I have with them and other members in their camp is - the Loyal User Base has left. Maybe one individual thinks of himself as loyal, and a user, and a base customer, but the bulk of the Pentax base of buyers from a decade ago shoots something else now. I'd love to see a list of inactive UserID's of member who joined from 2006 - 2008 and who made 500 or1000 posts.

Any person who has used Pentax for a decade or more has waited more than long enough for indication of direction and execution - and what they / we have gotten is nearly 15 years of false starts - since the MZ-1 - mistakes, bad management, poor products (the plastic part of the FA range) and utter financial mismanagement. I'm frustrated too. I was intensely critical of everything Ned Bunnell did.

The US still suffers from his vandalism. Pentax USA was restructured as a Distributor, providing no native services whatsoever, contracting everything out to third-parties (Website management, Webstore, Customer Service, Repair, etc.), selling at high volume and low prices, creating a FALSE SENSE of a Value Brand and destroying any claim of superior product quality. The anger buyers feel today at the price hikes is misplaced. It should be directed at Pentax USA and the falsely low prices set under Hoya to move product and goose factory volumes - making Pentax ready to sell - and earn commissions and bonuses for the few managers still in place.

Pentax USA didn't even add the K-01 to the Web page until six weeks after its announcement, while Europe and Canada prominently featured it the day it was announced. I believe New Bunnell killed the K-01.

Ricoh bought the husk of a once fine company and is trying to turn it into a money-earning enterprise. Unfortunately Hoys neglected any kind of ongoing capital investment to keep Pentax current. The product gaps we see today, the fractured marketing and brand management, the appearance of cosmetic changes to nice lenses followed by price increases that don't make sense, the introduction of a seemingly anachronistic zoom lens when seemingly obvious gaps are ignored - all these are the fault of Hoya.

Yet most people can't connect the dots. They want to lash out at the messenger. They aren't willing or able to understand the historical cause of current problems. It is understandable - I do the same.

Pentax will never be the Pentax we've all hoped it would remain. That company is gone and it will never return. Never. It is entirely possible the FA Limiteds are financially impossible to manufacture today. It is entirely possible there are too many hand operations, or glass grinding machines that can make the elements are worn out and can't be replaced. It is entirely possible that SMC coating machines are worn out and can't be replaced because the SMC patents have expired. Maybe they can't make them any more, and an FA Limited isn't the same without SMC. I don't know and neither does anyone else outside Ricoh.

Every single point of anger with Ricoh's decisions has an explanation that, if known, would at least make sense. I seriously doubt Ricoh intentionally wants to drive away whatever is left of The Loyal User Base and start over today. Yet what is left of the The Loyal User Base is twenty years older than when times were good. Sooner than we want The Loyal User Base will be dead. If Ricoh doesn't start building tomorrow's Loyal User Base today - then 20 years from now Pentax will be dead. Again. That's just a fact.

Nikon and Canon won. Pentax will be around and viable but it will be different. Change is.

Maybe, just maybe, a nimble, smaller company can exploit a few inherent weaknesses in the necessity to service the CaNikon infrastructure and do some brilliant things. I choose to be optimistic about that possibility and a realist about the past and present.

If others think that's propaganda they have the right. If they're sick up to their chins of "Ricoh has a Plan" well, yeah, I get that.

Doesn't change anything. Good things are coming. May not be what you want or need. May be different than old Pentax - will be different than old Pentax. Everything will have RICOH on it somewhere. So what?

If it can mount the stuff I have and new stuff does things the stuff I have doesn't, then I'm happy. Even if 50 is 75 and 85 is 130. Or 5~15 is 28~70.

But no one has to be happy about it. I choose to.

[monochrome]

You do have to wonder just what the heck is going on in the heads of Ricoh management. I am very thankful that they bought and saved Pentax and I love my new K3 but what "new" lenses have they come out with? A 560mm telescope instead of a camera lens and a 20-40mm zoom that competes with the best primes they make....boy, there's a couple money makers... yet still no teleconvertor. Where are their heads?? Maybe they have a plan but they never tell us or ask us anything.

Actually, they ask their customers questions all the time. I can only assume not enough of their customers want the things you and we want or they'd make them and sell a lot of them.

Unless you think Ricoh is the General Motors of cameras.

[Kunzite]

monochrome, I understand the lack of confidence in Pentax execution, given what happened. I almost lost my patience myself - in the last Hoya years - and Nikon was starting to look quite compelling; even though Pentax had all I needed.
It's only because I can connect the dots (and maybe I have few more dots to connect than the average forumist ) that I'm at ease with my decision to stay with Pentax.

I think it's critical to realize first that things have changed - it's Ricoh Imaging now, not Hoya Corporation - and second, what does it means i.e. what's Ricoh's plan (and how it would suit each individual's needs); the only alternative being to close our eyes, decide things can't possibly change and jump ship. That's why I cannot accept the dismissal of informed opinions such as yours, which tries to present things how they are - and the most likely course of action.
I don't think your efforts should be called "propaganda"; that's not a "right", that's dismissing your efforts.

[tclausen]

I understand your position, and also own all other Limiteds that in my opinion are not that much overshadowed by the new zoom : if you prefer compactness (all of them) or starburst (smc 21) or thinner DOF (all of them but 21) you still need the primes...

HD Limited zoom is a perfect multipurpose kit lens for K-3

Ahyes, the solution is - of course - to take LBA to the extreme and "own them all". I'm not sure that that proposal will pass muster with the CDFO (Chief Domestic Financial Officer), though....

Still want to find an occasion to try the 20-40, though, its a sufficiently unique lens ....

[audiobomber]

DC motor is obviously out of question because that would change the design completely.

I believe that new FA ltds that included QS, WR and DC drive would be total redesigns which would be very expensive and likely optically different than the current somewhat over priced FA lenses.

Are you forgetting about the Tokina 16-50mm and 50-135mm? They are optically identical to Pentax designs, but have different coatings and barrel, including SDM, QS and weather-proofing. Surely the same could easily be done with the FA Limiteds.

[Fogel70]

Are you forgetting about the Tokina 16-50mm and 50-135mm? They are optically identical to Pentax designs, but have different coatings and barrel, including SDM, QS and weather-proofing. Surely the same could easily be done with the FA Limiteds.

There is lots of more space for a motor in a large f/2.8 zoom, than in a small prime lens. And most likely Pentax/Tokina f/2.8 zoom lens barrel was designed for built in motor. After all Canon lenses require built in motor for AF. Removing AF motor on Nikon version is probably not to hard.

DA55 could have been much more compact if having screw-drive instead of SDM. With SDM motor FA77 would probably end up in about the same size as Nikon AF-S 85/1.8G. IMO FA Ltd series would loose much of it's advantage in a design like that.

[lytrytyr]

I see no other company than Pentax and Leica that stick so firmly to their own legacies, and their mounts, as hard as they can and better than anybody else.

Not really.

Pentax dumped 110 (four-thirds) many years ago, and has recently dumped 67.
Leica dumped the R mount. And so it goes . . .