[Zygonyx]

what about in-camera focus stacking, or can the K-3 already do that?

That would be a very smart inovation indeed

[beachgardener]

Originally posted by beachgardener Quote what about in-camera focus stacking, or can the K-3 already do that?

That would be a very smart inovation indeed

Yeah i reckon so, i heard that Olympus have done this, but not sure about that.

[Aristophanes]

That may well be, though it didn't look as big as my old Bronica viewfinder when I tried out the XT-1. The Fuji is a lovely camera, but it really doesn't give me anything that my K-3 can't, and is not as versatile in some respects. And, I hated the electronic viewfinder: it was like trying to take photographs looking at a TV screen (but that's just me). I like Fuji, but they have nothing yet that would make me want to swap systems.

OVF:
– Focus peaking impossible without a direct sensor readout (when mirror is down).
– But exposure blinkies would be possible, if the data comes from a metering sensor and is overlaid on top of OVF image.

Still, this does not exclude some additional tech / solution to enable very precise OVF manual focusing (which is basically same thing as focus peaking with mirrorless cameras).

EVF:
– Focus peaking possible
– Exposure blinkies possible too.

And it is possible to have all of these — OVF + EVF as above — in one camera, yes.

It's called a Sony SLT.

---------- Post added 05-22-14 at 10:16 AM ----------

sure. agree. But I already have the 18-135,
so if I was going to get an indoor low light lens I'd prefer constant fast aperature over a shorter range to variable apertaure over a longer range. especially as most of my shots will be between 35-70 MM so would prefer to have the 2.8 on that range.

For indoor photos of the kids I use my Tamron 17-50/2.8. Excellent glass.

Outdoors in any weather, the 18-135 WR.

[northcoastgreg]

Why would they do a 2.8-4 instead of doing something like 24-70/2.8?

Because they need a WR replacement of the DA 17-70 that's free of the SDM woes.

If they put out a WR lens that matched up to the Tamron spec in that range I would buy it in a second. Especially if it was reasonably priced

What is "reasonably priced"? The new Canon 24-70 f2.8 is selling at B & H for $2,300. High end Pentax glass rarely costs less, and usually costs a little more, than the Canikon alternatives. It costs more for Pentax to produce a 24-70 f2.8 lens than it does for Canon or Nikon because Pentax has a much smaller user base and can't reduce costs as much through economies of scale.

[ChristianRock]

That's why tamron - and sigma - do the 18-35/2.8.

If you are shooting snapshots, kids, action whatever and want a general use low light lens with fixed aperture all the way though the 24-70 range makes more sense to me. The 18-35 will satisfy wide angle users. Personally i would rather have the 2.8 all the way through then getting more reach on the wide end.

On APS-C, all "general purpose" lens are 18-55, or 17-50, or 20-50 (Samsung). Then there's the next level of lenses that are like 17-70 (Pentax, Sigma), or 18-70 (Nikon), then come the 18-105 (Nikon) and 18-135 (Canon, Pentax). Canon has a 17-85 and even a 15-85. So, never less than 20 for APS-C. So while 24-70 might work for you, it will probably not work as a kit lens for most people - as you pointed out, they'd have to get a separate wide angle lens to compliment it. That's all I was saying...

I wouldn't mind a 24-70, honestly, but that's really a FF range.

[Winder]

I wouldn't mind a 24-70, honestly, but that's really a FF range.

It's basically a 35-105mm on an APS-C. Seems like a good range to work with for what I do. I would love a 35-100 F/2 zoom for K-mount. Yeah, its, yeah its heavy and expensive. I'll take one.

[ChristianRock]

I agree it's a good range, and everybody used to offer it, and now they don't... if anybody would think about offering it again, it would probably be Pentax Or, being Pentax they'd create something like a 30-85 (remember the 45-125 K series on film? lol)

[IchabodCrane]

And Fuji is bleeding money from their Imaging Division according to their latest stats.

One of their talking points was that their P&S offerings (second only to Canon in gross unit sales) has withered and not as many high end sales have materialized.

It is extremely difficult to create a mount that is sustainable without budget offerings. Fuji's glass is not only expensive relative in the whole cost of system ownership, it is large and heavy in many cases, especially compared to Pentax primes. This wipes out some of the body volume size advantages.

For example:

Pentax K-x = 581g
Fuji XT-1 = 440g
Canon SL1 = 407g

Pentax has IBIS. Many would argue the Fuji requires the added grip.

Fuji 56/1.2 = 405g
Pentax DA*55/1.4 = 375g

Fuji 18-55 OIS = 330g
Pentax DA 20-40 WR = 283g

Pentax has a line of slightly slower primes and zooms, some with WR, and all very well-built and lightweight. Pentax has a more portable lens array than any APS-C manufacturer.

A small body DSLR like the K-x is very close to the mass of a the XT-1...and is 50% cheaper. The volume difference is not so large.

Lets' say Pentax decided to EVF the K-mount as is. They could knock even more weight off so all that is left in volume difference is the flange distance, which is about 170mm. A longer flange has some attributes in that it strengthens the body for longer, heavier glass, giving a cradle to the bottom of the camera body.

Moving to an on-sensor PDAF system will also save weight/volume whether it is OVF or EVF. At this point the DSLR weight disadvantage is the prism and mirror assembly.

And did I mention that K-mount is native FF? The Fuji X-mount is not.

The Sony A7 is about the same size as the Fuji XT-1:

Compare camera dimensions side by side

Don't get me wrong. I like Fuji and their effort. It's very well done (except their lousy, awful video).

But their approach demonstrates the perils of all high-end (lots of excitement but scary pricing and less paying customers than buzz) and the pursuit of fast glass makes for very heavy and largish lenses, obviating some of the mirrorless advanatges outright. The Sony A7 is only $100 body-only right now more expensive.

When I see all this play out the DA 20-40 and the revamped DA Ltds makes sense.

Fujifilm also came out with two very affordable zoom lenses that they often pair with their lower end APS-C cameras. They are slower than the 18-55 and 55-200 but supposedly are quite good optically.

[rawr]

I would love a 35-100 F/2 zoom for K-mount. Yeah, its, yeah its heavy and expensive. I'll take one.

Sign me up too. I've long been wanting a modern, perhaps faster, AF version of the SMC A 35-105 f3.5.

Sony are currently offering a 18-105 f4 'G' series lens on APS-C (NEX) and are planning a 28-135 f4 for full-frame. Canon of course has it's FF 24-105 f/4 and Nikon it's 24-120mm f/4G. Then there is the Sigma 24-105mm f/4, that doesn't seem it will ever be in K-mount. It's a popular and useful focal length.

[DSims]

I'm having trouble staying with this thread any longer, because it's gone in so many different directions.

The only thing I'm sure of is it's about camera lenses and the cameras they fit on.


I think we should rename it to: Discuss any lens and its camera - any brand, any era!.

[Lokusart]

Because they need a WR replacement of the DA 17-70 that's free of the SDM woes.

A 17-70WR, that would be great. hope they release it soon

[Uluru]

A 17-70WR, that would be great. hope they release it soon

How soon? Is 12 months from now soon enough?

Most likely this year's offer will be very slim in terms of new lens designs, and before Photokina perhaps only one lens is to be announced: a long zoom. But if the 35mm Pentax is announced this Photokina, then perhaps we'll see HD FA limiteds with it, and perhaps 70-200 which is vaguely charted on the roadmap now.

Which is nice, of course, but in terms of new lenses, still slim. HD coating on top of well-known limiteds (possible slight optical corrections), and one new lens. And all will be expensive, especially 70-200 if it's f2.8.

If the 35mm cam is released, all will sound like a reprise of 2013, and will sounds like Ricoh, yes. But if the 35mm is not released, then we may have some hope that more new lenses for current Pentax cameras will be released. Because that is what current Pentax users are hoping for — maximise potential of current cameras. Maybe even few DA* will be made into something new — if the 35mm is not announced. I would personally love this option, rather than a 35mm camera that further delays things and complicates matters.

But I sincerely doubt that both 35mm Pentax and 35mm lenses, and a bunch of missing lenses for the crop sensor will come out at the same time.

[JPT]

Can you explain what the gaps in the APS-C line up are? I'm guessing you mean a prime between 21 and 31. And maybe a prime at around 400. But are there any other gaps?

[Uluru]

Can you explain what the gaps in the APS-C line up are? I'm guessing you mean a prime between 21 and 31. And maybe a prime at around 400. But are there any other gaps?

At f2.8 zoom, there is a gap between 16mm and 135mm. Or, when on Earth SDM lens issue will addressed?
There are no normal 3x zooms of good quality apart from kit lens and problematic DA*16-50. Is that inviting? Is that amazing?
There is no long zoom starting above 100mm, and there is no fast 70-200 that other brands have for ages (I'm not counting Samsung there).
But then again, other brands had a TC for ages, Pentax for 2 months only. I suppose that is normal?

Or maybe because Ricoh believes it is what you really deserve?

[Aristophanes]

At f2.8 zoom, there is a gap between 16mm and 135mm. Or, when on Earth SDM lens issue will addressed?
There are no normal 3x zooms of good quality apart from kit lens and problematic DA*16-50. Is that inviting? Is that amazing?
There is no long zoom starting above 100mm, and there is no fast 70-200 that other brands have for ages (I'm not counting Samsung there).
But then again, other brands had a TC for ages, Pentax for 2 months only. I suppose that is normal?

Or maybe because Ricoh believes it is what you really deserve?

We have not heard about SDM on new product for quite some time. I think they corrected that premature issue.The 16-50 is about on par with the competition. Not sure what else to improve upon.

The lens roadmap has the 100-400ish, so at least that is communicated. As is 70-200, but Pentax also hd (and has) easily the best 50-135, which is the functional APS-C equivalent of the FF 70-200. The 60-250 is Pentax's 70-200 for APS-C.

You are nibbling at the margins here.