[DSims]

18-70, seems like an update to the 17-70, adding a faster aperture and WR. A competitor to the Sigma 17-70?

I'm afraid you mean slower aperture, unfortunately. Now it's an f/4.5 lens.


People argue that a variable aperture lens doesn't have to be inferior (in IQ), but in practice it usually is. Perhaps this is because - more often than not - it's used as a marketing gimmick to produce a cheaper lens which sounds faster, rather than an actual design optimization.

f/3.5-4.5 lenses seem to be an exception - perhaps because f/3.5 doesn't sound so impressively fast in the first place, and the design becomes a little less marketing-driven.


My FA28-105/3.2-4.5 also happens to produce quite nice images. So 18-70/2.8-4.5 is basically the same lens in an APS-C design. But the original FA is a kit lens with a low price tag, so I'm very forgiving of any flaws. This new "replacement" would now have to straddle 1 1/3 stops variance in aperture. And because it starts at f/2.8, I'm afraid it will come with a much higher price tag.

---

Last edited by DSims; 01-29-2014 at 02:13 PM.

[6BQ5]

OK, so getting back to the rumour thing here...

I welcome any and all new Pentax / Ricoh / K-mount cameras ! !

Personally, I am not too worried about mega-pixel count but I know a lot of people are because it's a "mine's bigger than yours" impression. I'm still plenty happy with my 16 MP K-30. Isn't Nikon's DF camera outfitted with a 16 MP sensor? I'd rather have a sensor with low noise and excellent IQ vs. one with a high pixel count that can be used to average out noise when resizing down images. 20 MP seems fine to me. I don't know about that AA filter. Let it disappear all together.

As far as styling goes, I would absolutely love a camera body design that brings us back to smaller sized bodies like the Sony A7r. Asahiflex noted his love for the ZX-5n style. I'm cool with that. A Spotmatic style camera with a few wheels and buttons would work for me. Put a wheel on the front of the body like the Q.

I've always been confused with the numbering scheme of the K bodies. The numbers bounce around all over in an attempt to restart the sequence. Maybe the K-50 / 500 is the anchor here and we'll see K-60, K-70, K-80, etc. as the midrange model line up. Entry level models could be K-600, K-700, K-800, etc. Where will the K-3 sequence go? Will roman numerals be appended like the K-5? K-3 ii, K-3 iii?

[thibs]

I'm wondering now if this KL will essentially be the Pentax rendition of Nikon's Df, in much the same way that the Ricoh GR mimics the Coolpix A.

The GR mimics the Coopix A, did I read correctly ?

EDIT: ouch, flame wars in between, I repsonded before I read all the thread. Please disregard...

[Rondec]

I'm afraid you mean slower aperture, unfortunately. Now it's an f/4.5 lens.


People argue that a variable aperture lens doesn't have to be inferior (in IQ), but in practice it usually is. Perhaps this is because - more often than not - it's used as a marketing gimmick to produce a cheaper lens which sounds faster, rather than an actual design optimization.

f/3.5-4.5 lenses seem to be an exception - perhaps because f/3.5 doesn't sound so impressively fast in the first place, and the design becomes a little less marketing-driven.

Well, if it is f2.8 to f4 in the 17-70 range, then it doesn't really lose any speed to the 17-70. This would be reasonable to replace the 16-50 f2.8, if it was f2.8 till 40mm (probably unlikely) and pretty sharp wide open. Adding the additional range would be nice.

I can deal with variable aperture lenses. Use program mode is probably the easiest way...

[monochrome]

The GR mimics the Coopix A, did I read correctly ?

Well, Nikon did release the Coolpix A one month before the GR, so Ricoh just quickly slapped together a response, right? Isn't that what they call 1st Mover Advantage?

[eurostar]

I'm afraid you mean slower aperture, unfortunately. Now it's an f/4.5 lens.

I totally agree. From a DA*16-85/3,5, like it was rumored many months ago, we are now at a 18-70 with variabile aperture. It would have been better to just release the old DA17-70/4 with HD and WR. I would buy it in an instant.

[thibs]

I totally agree. From a DA*16-85/3,5, like it was rumored many months ago, we are now at a 18-70 with variabile aperture. It would have been better to just release the old DA17-70/4 with HD and WR. I would buy it in an instant.

And half the forum moaning because it means SDM so it will fail in the next 3 weeks if you ever buy and you're crazy because SDM is crap and Pentax is doomed ?

No thank you

[thibs]

Well, Nikon did release the Coolpix A one month before the GR, so Ricoh just quickly slapped together a response, right? Isn't that what they call 1st Mover Advantage?

That must be it ...

[DSims]

Well, if it is f2.8 to f4 in the 17-70 range, then it doesn't really lose any speed to the 17-70. This would be reasonable to replace the 16-50 f2.8, if it was f2.8 till 40mm (probably unlikely) and pretty sharp wide open. Adding the additional range would be nice.

I can deal with variable aperture lenses. Use program mode is probably the easiest way...

I'm afraid you're right - it is unlikely it could get anywhere near 40mm at f/2.8. If it did it would suddenly jump the full 1 1/3 stops from 40-70mm, which could be very annoying in an of itself.

You probably deal with variable aperture lenses better than I do. I find it a pain in the rear sometimes. Plus, there are few such lenses I really like the IQ from. I'd rather have a high quality constant f/4, set the aperture to f/4.5, and shoot away. If I really needed more speed at the wide end I'd select a different lens in the first place.

When I put a zoom on, I pick one that's right for the conditions. And I expect to use most of its zoom range. So if f/4 is good enough at the long end, it's usually good enough at the wide end as well. It's unlikely I'd be looking for narrower DOF at the wide end when I put on a zoom.

[thibs]

My FA28-105/3.2-4.5 also happens to produce quite nice images. So 18-70/2.8-4.5 is basically the same lens in an APS-C design. But the original FA is a kit lens with a low price tag, so I'm very forgiving of any flaws. This new "replacement" would now have to straddle 1 2/3 stops variance in aperture! And because it starts at f/2.8, I'm afraid it will come with a much higher price tag.

f/4 to f/4.5 is 2/3 of a stop? since when ?
And after all... f/4.5 is so much slower than f/4, you'll probably have to bump up ISO so much you'll end up with noise and get resolution down to 1MPix.

[jimr-pdx]

We're getting snippy here about a rumor, FCOL. Let's save our venom for the facts - and even then, some specs will be ideal for some, and suck for others.
I'll skip this thread for a few weeks and join in to crab about the reality - I hope this lens works for me, but we'll see.

[DSims]

f/4 to f/4.5 is 2/3 of a stop? since when ?

Oops - sorry, my mistake - thanks for correcting me. I guess I usually think of f/3.5-4.5 as being about a stop, when in reality it's only 2/3 of a stop. So in my mind I counted down from f/3.5 to f/2.8 and came up with the error!

And after all... f/4.5 is so much slower than f/4, you'll probably have to bump up ISO so much you'll end up with noise and get resolution down to 1MPix.

The point is it's slower, so we're going backwards with a newer model. And now I'd probably have to shoot at f/5, which seems out of the realm of anything fast within this "normal-ish" zoom range.

We're getting snippy here about a rumor, FCOL. Let's save our venom for the facts - and even then, some specs will be ideal for some, and suck for others.
I'll skip this thread for a few weeks and join in to crab about the reality - I hope this lens works for me, but we'll see.

Well you're right if it were only about a rumor. But it's a reality that's happened many times in the past, and it appears to be Pentax' direction for the immediate future - which makes it very relevant.

Witness the new DA20-40/2.8-4 Ltd. It may be a fantastic lens - I haven't had my hands on it, and I've only seen a few sample images. But at $1000 it's three times the price of the already excellent FA20-35/4 I had. So there's also an underlying feeling that Pentax may be offering us roughly the same product - or in the case of this rumor, possibly less - for a much higher price.

I'm also afraid that little tiny details - such as starting at f/2.8 instead of f/3.2 - suddenly disqualifies it as a kit lens, which again could significantly raise the price while giving us little in return.

So while they're still rumors, I think many of us recognize they resemble the reality we've been seeing lately.

[Alizarine]

Seems there are new product rumors again.. That is nice.

Liking the idea of that long comsumer zoom, especially if it will be WR!

[lytrytyr]

Witness the new DA20-40/2.8-4 Ltd. It may be a fantastic lens - I haven't had my hands on it, and I've only seen a few sample images. But at $1000 it's three times the price of the already excellent FA20-35/4 I had. So there's also an underlying feeling that Pentax may be offering us roughly the same product - or in the case of this rumor, possibly less - for a much higher price.

The last FA 20-35/4 I saw for sale new in the US (through last summer) was around USD 550.
The DA 20-40/2.8-4 was on sale for USD 900 in November.
Given the virtually silent DC in-lens motor, WR, and wonderful IQ,
it is way more than "roughly the same product".

[Uluru]

I'm not certain why people don't follow the thought that having the same lens 7 years ago and now, isn't the same. Even a slow lens from 7 years ago is faster today, as the ISO performance gain on modern cameras clearly allows for it.
And I expect modern designs from Pentax will go in that direction, by providing you rather uncompromised and unique image quality, than fast aperture and unnecessary bulk. DA20-40 is such an example.