[lytrytyr]

why is the roadmap always in a different spot on the web?

When I'm traveling on the road, my roadmap is always in a different spot.

[steve1307]

Unfortunately, no. Bad news for us DA 60-250 owners.

The DA 60-250 has unacceptably heavy vignetting from 85mm to 250mm when used with a full frame camera.

Sample images.

well i was a bit sceptical about the 60-250 when doing the post above.....

Google translated"
By the zooming, gloom is beginning to appear in the four corners ... slightly. 　"135mm" 　, "250mm" It was all right in the 60mm wide-angle end, but the shadow of vignetting may have occurred in the four corners lens barrel according to extend by zooming to the telephoto side. The check again in another place. 　"60mm" 　, "85mm" 　, "135mm" 　, "250mm" effect of zooming it has come out more clearly that it is the subject of this place. "
Oh yes that is perfectly clear now.

And the preview for the in depth review on this site also shows the corners pretty clearly.
DA* 60-250mm Lens and Full-frame - Photographic Articles - PentaxForums.com
appears to cover more than the APS-circle but not the FF.


The photozone test shows minimal vignetting on APS-C (compared to most APS-C lenses)

but looking at the result on the long end at f4 with an APS-C test, pretty obvious its going to be clearly darkened on FF

So... there a no DA zooms that are completely usable, uncropped, wide open at the FL extremities.
But i guess you could use it as a 1.1kg DA*60mm f4 prime


Well (as posted before) at least the patent on the "new" Telezoom on the roadmap has an "image height" 21.64mm ie a 43.28mm circle covering the full 36 x 24. No need to test that one with film whenever it comes out. We can test it on FF digital instead

[monochrome]

At this point, there is no "new FF body" on the horizon. Still just hopeful dreams of customers.

You might be surprised in about 9 months.

Nope there is.

^^

[dansamy]

You might be surprised in about 9 months.

^^

Did I miss an announcement somewhere?

[boriscleto]

Did I miss an announcement somewhere?

9 months would be Photokina where any FF announcement would be made. Which is why he included the

[dansamy]

Ahh. I see. I know when all the major gaming/Sci fi/comic cons are, but I don't know when the major photography ones are.

[monochrome]

Did I miss an announcement somewhere?

9 months would be Photokina where any FF announcement would be made. Which is why he included the

2nd to last line. Search more posts by user name.

[kenyee]

why is it a weird range for APS ? It's perfectly fine to me

Because Pentax has continuously told us:

"yes, we do have a 70-200 *equivalent* in our 50-135, so we don't need to re-release the FA70-200"

[lytrytyr]

Because Pentax has continuously told us:

"yes, we do have a 70-200 *equivalent* in our 50-135, so we don't need to re-release the FA70-200"

Nevertheless, having an 18-35 "equivalent" in the 12-24, they still "re-released" the FA 20-35 (as the DA 20-40).

[thibs]

Nevertheless, having an 18-35 "equivalent" in the 12-24, they still "re-released" the FA 20-35 (as the DA 20-40).

I thought 20-40 had nothing to do with 20-35 ?

---------- Post added 13-02-14 at 06:40 ----------

Not sure about the price of, say the Nikkor 35 1.8G (FX) but if the DA35 2.4 really works fine on FF then it's probably one of the cheapest options out there. Lucky buyers!

...well, IF Pentax releases an FF that is.

Pretty sure the 35/2.4 will work fine (vigneting-wise), it is nothing but an FA35/2.

[mee]

I thought 20-40 had nothing to do with 20-35 ?

---------- Post added 13-02-14 at 06:40 ----------



Pretty sure the 35/2.4 will work fine (vigneting-wise), it is nothing but an FA35/2.

Is there any way to get it to perform as an f/2 lens then?

[thibs]

Is there any way to get it to perform as an f/2 lens then?

Probably not. The may have done the same as the K55/2 and K55/1.8 Strictly identical but the /2 didn't open the aperture as much as the /1.8.
Something along those lines I guess but even if you did manage to do so, the electronics wouldn't follow.
IMO it really is too much, specially on a cheapo lens.

[steve1307]

Pretty sure the 35/2.4 will work fine (vigneting-wise), it is nothing but an FA35/2.

Is there any way to get it to perform as an f/2 lens then?

.
.


Well it's supposed to be the same optical formula as the FA 35/2.

In theory you could shave off a tiny bit of the inner edge of each the apeture blades (not with a dremel )
and then it might go out to f2 possibly with some vignetting if the new lens barrel design "shades it".

Now, ..If you didn't completey destroy it during the surgery the apeture might only stop down to something like f6.3 instead of f22 and the lens contacts would report the same apeture as before.

Maybe better to just stick with the f2.4 and be happy with that.

The owners of FA35/2 are happy because their lens is f2 and still worth more money on the used market.

[asahi man]

Unfortunately, no. Bad news for us DA 60-250 owners.

The DA 60-250 has unacceptably heavy vignetting from 85mm to 250mm when used with a full frame camera.

Sample images.

That´s right,No real fullframe quality.Cause it is no ff patent,only the old prototype was a fullframe patent.
The second,current version is no ff patent,you can see thin in the corner picture quality.
The DA*200 is the old FA* patent with new coating,new ED element and mechanical changes.
The DA*300 is complete new and optical a fullframe lens.
Converter is also a fullframe lenssystem.

Best regards

[lytrytyr]

I thought 20-40 had nothing to do with 20-35?

Here are the respective diagrams, from Ricoh-Pentax and Boz Dimitrov:






The arrangement of the first three elements, with the second being aspherical, is very similar.
In the DA 20-40, the final extraordinarily-low dispersion element replaces the final aspheric element of the FA 20-35.