[IchabodCrane]

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?

One would think they should have or should soon update all of the lenses to have quiet focus motors. At least the ones they sell in any kind of volume. Screw drive needs to be relegated to backward compatibility purposes only, IMHO.

[JPT]

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?

So you're disregarding certain lenses because they use SDM or are not 3x. To be honest, you could play that game with any maker - "I don't like plastic mounts", "This one is soft in the corners wide open" and so on. But when it comes down to it, Pentax has the following normal zooms, all optimised for APS-C and all of which have many satisfied users.
- 18-55 (entry)
- 17-70 (mid-range)
- 16-50 (high-end)
- 20-40 (unique)

As for the tele zooms, they are both on the roadmap and the 100+ one is said to be coming soon (by the only poster who seems to have any real insight into Ricoh's plans). I guess it depends on whether you have any faith in Ricoh's ability to deliver or not. I do, but you obviously remain unconvinced.

When I look at the overall lens line up, I agree there are missing lenses when you try to match them to other brands, but for every one that is missing, there is another unique one that you can get for Pentax but not any other mount. And then if you want something more conventional, it's usually available from a third party.

[GlassJunkie]

I posted a crazy thread... "My Crazy predictions.." about the long tele in the pipeline. I predicted that it would be 135-380 and 67mm across the face due to APSc "benefits" and the size (roughly) of the 60-250 with a bit of added length for a magnifying element inside. It appears that I was wrong. Latest in that thread, several members "in the know" have said that inside Pentax it will look like a 150-450 and suitable for FF. With all of the 70-210 f2.8 glass out there, it would appear that the long tele is a better strategic move for "cementing" the brand and APSc as a serious platform contender. If I was inside Pentax, I would manage pipeline risk by "filling out the tree" with a long tele (and maybe a longer macro) before doing FF. IMVHO

[Aristophanes]

One would think they should have or should soon update all of the lenses to have quiet focus motors. At least the ones they sell in any kind of volume. Screw drive needs to be relegated to backward compatibility purposes only, IMHO.

But....screw drive makes pancake lenses possible like the entire DA Limited line of primes.

Otherwise you have substantially larger lenses.

The mount you do away with in-body screw drive is when transitioning to a shoe new new mount.

---------- Post added 05-23-14 at 11:29 AM ----------

I posted a crazy thread... "My Crazy predictions.." about the long tele in the pipeline. I predicted that it would be 135-380 and 67mm across the face due to APSc "benefits" and the size (roughly) of the 60-250 with a bit of added length for a magnifying element inside. It appears that I was wrong. Latest in that thread, several members "in the know" have said that inside Pentax it will look like a 150-450 and suitable for FF. With all of the 70-210 f2.8 glass out there, it would appear that the long tele is a better strategic move for "cementing" the brand and APSc as a serious platform contender. If I was inside Pentax, I would manage pipeline risk by "filling out the tree" with a long tele (and maybe a longer macro) before doing FF. IMVHO

Pentax needs something from 100-400 for APS-C. It needs to pick up from the 18-135 WR so people can go to a 2-lens zoom kit which has become very popular in the market, especially given high-ISO sensors. All the lens roadmaps from 2012 on have shown this lens. It is the one lens that makes market sense right now to round out the APS-C WR line.

The only other lens needing a rework is the 12-24 which should come in at a ~10-24 with WR. They you have a 3-lens kit from 10mm to just under 400mm, all WR, with budget room for the consumer to buy a few primes.

[JPT]

One would think they should have or should soon update all of the lenses to have quiet focus motors. At least the ones they sell in any kind of volume. Screw drive needs to be relegated to backward compatibility purposes only, IMHO.

I think this is especially true with the kit lenses for entry level DSLRs. Pentax DSLRs are the only ones that make any focusing noise and I'm certain that puts many customers off when they compare cameras side-by-side. In fact my brother-in-law chose a D5100 over a K-30 for exactly that reason.

[IchabodCrane]

But....screw drive makes pancake lenses possible like the entire DA Limited line of primes.

Otherwise you have substantially larger lenses.

The mount you do away with in-body screw drive is when transitioning to a shoe new new mount.

---------- Post added 05-23-14 at 11:29 AM ----------



Pentax needs something from 100-400 for APS-C. It needs to pick up from the 18-135 WR so people can go to a 2-lens zoom kit which has become very popular in the market, especially given high-ISO sensors. All the lens roadmaps from 2012 on have shown this lens. It is the one lens that makes market sense right now to round out the APS-C WR line.

The only other lens needing a rework is the 12-24 which should come in at a ~10-24 with WR. They you have a 3-lens kit from 10mm to just under 400mm, all WR, with budget room for the consumer to buy a few primes.

You don't need a screw drive mechanism to make a pancake lens.

FUJINON LENS XF27mmF2.8 | XF Lens | Digital Cameras | Fujifilm USA
http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/digital_cameras/x/fujinon_lens_xf18mmf2_r/

[cali92rs]

You don't need a screw drive mechanism to make a pancake lens.

FUJINON LENS XF27mmF2.8 | XF Lens | Digital Cameras | Fujifilm USA
FUJINON LENS XF18mmF2 R | XF Lens | Digital Cameras | Fujifilm USA

Or:
Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Lens 6310B002 B&H Photo Video

Seems like an excuse for using old technology....

[Aristophanes]

Or:
Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Lens 6310B002 B&H Photo Video

Seems like an excuse for using old technology....

Yes and no.

The Pentax DA Ltd primes all fit into roughly the same volumetric space from 15mm to 70mm, wight he DA 40 being the runt of the litter. They are tiny and lightweight because they put screw drive and IS into the body of the camera.

The one Canon pancake lens uses an FL withe shortest throw possible to make its tiny motor work, and the Fujis are not really all that small (the 27 and 18mm). In fact, the Fuji should be smaller being mirrorless, but we are seeing that mirrorless doesn't necessarily translate into smaller glass.

There are solid design reasons to stay with screw drive. One major reason is it probably makes the lens easier to warrant and service.

[IchabodCrane]

Yes and no.

The Pentax DA Ltd primes all fit into roughly the same volumetric space from 15mm to 70mm, wight he DA 40 being the runt of the litter. They are tiny and lightweight because they put screw drive and IS into the body of the camera.

The one Canon pancake lens uses an FL withe shortest throw possible to make its tiny motor work, and the Fujis are not really all that small (the 27 and 18mm). In fact, the Fuji should be smaller being mirrorless, but we are seeing that mirrorless doesn't necessarily translate into smaller glass.

There are solid design reasons to stay with screw drive. One major reason is it probably makes the lens easier to warrant and service.

No need to speculate. The HD DA 21/3.2 Ltd is larger dimensionally and weighs more than the Fuji 27/2.8. The Fuji 18/2.8 is slightly lighter than the 21/3.2 but about 15 mm deeper. Bottom line... it can be done.

[Kunzite]

But the 21mm f/3.2 is a retrofocus design.

[Winder]

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?

There are gaps in both focal length and speed.

85mm on APS-C gives you almost 135mm
135mm on APS-C gives you the FoV of the 200mm

Fast versions of both of these two lenses are popular for indoor sports and portrait photography.

The 14mm needs to be updated. Its not a very impressive lens for the money.
The 21mm is also an average performer. I would like to see a faster prime in a similar focal length.
Maybe Pentax can give us a stellar 10-24mm zoom, but it will be hard to beat the 18-35 F/1.8 for the money.

[Aristophanes]

No need to speculate. The HD DA 21/3.2 Ltd is larger dimensionally and weighs more than the Fuji 27/2.8. The Fuji 18/2.8 is slightly lighter than the 21/3.2 but about 15 mm deeper. Bottom line... it can be done.

The DA 21 and 15 are retrofocus for DSLR mirror boxes.

The Fujis are not because they are short flange mirrorless (and all that implies).

To do the same WA + pancake(isn) on a DSLR lens is not possible. To shed volume you shed lens IS and focussing motor. That is why the DA Limiteds are the way they are.

[IchabodCrane]

The DA 21 and 15 are retrofocus for DSLR mirror boxes.

The Fujis are not because they are short flange mirrorless (and all that implies).

To do the same WA + pancake(isn) on a DSLR lens is not possible. To shed volume you shed lens IS and focussing motor. That is why the DA Limiteds are the way they are.

I'm not the one who claimed they are pancake lenses. The only Ltd lens thinner than the DA 21 is the DA 40 which few have much love for anyway due to its awkward focal length. The DA 70 is not smaller than the DA 21 nor is it retrofocus. They are all generally fine lenses but I just don't see the overwhelming argument that the only reason they are small is lack of focus motors.

[cali92rs]

Weird that people attribute their small size to the lack of a focus motor and not to the fact that they are slow.

[lytrytyr]

the DA 40 which few have much love for anyway due to its awkward focal length.

It's a "standard" lens, like 58mm on FF.

In fact, the new Nikon 58mm just won the "lens of the year" prize:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/262833-ricoh-theta-...ml#post2821258