[i_trax]

I just purchased Carl Zeiss Macro 2.8 28mm with PKA mount , that should be fun!

[afan137]

Yes, but will they need another naming of the true FF compatible lenses, i.e. releasing a FF?

Here we go; from Asahi man;



I think gold ring is used for FF ?

[Mistral75]

If we try to be positive about FF: The two longer lenses is not called "DA" while the wide is "DA wide zoom". A D-FA naming later on when the mighty FF camera comes?

Indeed, the '* Tele Zoom' appeared as such in February 2014 but the then 'DA Tele Zoom' has become 'Tele Zoom' in the latest roadmap, suggesting both lenses are actually DFAs.

Why so much mystery if it's not for the 24x36 Pentax camera to be announced simultaneously with them, or at least the first of them?

I am very much looking forward to CP+ 2015 .

[Ishpuini]

I think gold ring is used for FF ?

DA* lenses have a gold ring... Not necessarily FF.

Wim

[Mistral75]

(...)


I think gold ring is used for FF ?

No, DA*.

[starbase218]

Here we go; from Asahi man;

That does look nice!

edit: also, wasn't the silver ring used on D-FA lenses (e.g. fullframe-compatible digitally-optimized lenses)?

[Asahiflex]

Slightly larger photo:

[Sandy Hancock]

I am all over that * zoom. Seriously.
The long zoom looks like a beast. Any news as to the aperture range?

[cxdoo]

I can't believe we don't have anyone go to the actual cabinet and read the labels. Where is that press release?

[davidsladek]

Hi res images now available:

[cxdoo]

Those are some serious looking props lenses.

[starbase218]

I have to say, I was expecting this lens to have a distance scale. But the final product may still have one. At least the focus ring probably won't rotate while focusing (like the one on the 18-135).

I'm ok with this lens, or at least, what I think this lens will be: a zoom that places image quality first, convenience second, and maximum aperture last. In my perception, the 18-135 places convenience first and image quality second. I know some of you will disagree with that assessment, saying you shouldn't read reviews and MTF charts all the time. But firstly, that's my call. Secondly, may I remind you that in order for a windmill to turn, there has to be wind. Sample variation aside, if a lens fails at producing sharp images in a test, it cannot produce sharp images in real life. Makes sense, right? Of course this depends on how you use the lens as well. E.g. border sharpness may not be relevant to portrait shots. But then I think I know how I use my lenses.

Anyway, I'm diverging. Back to the lens. Some may be disappointed by the smallish aperture, but then there is no alternative out there with a wider aperture. Besides, 16mm on a zoom with such a range is excellent.

[davidsladek]

what you may have spotted is that, once again, the word PENTAX is on the lens next to the focal length... it was removed on the new HD limiteds, I believe

[Asahiflex]

The middle big lens (the ~450mm one) seems to be of the IF (Internal Focusing) type. So easy to make it fully weather resistant (the gold ring). The third one, the 70-200mm version, is not and that's why there's a zoom lock on it.

[cxdoo]

I don't really mind the aperture. If this thing has significantly better IQ than 18-55(135) I'd consider it for walkaround/silent/WR/touristy situations.