[Ishpuini]

Hy Wim, thanks for the feedback ; but do you mean DA560 + K-3 handheld is less a burden than DA28-45 + 645Z ??

Indeed, but to be honest it could be related to when I tried both. The DA560 was first on my mind after asking about the new lenses, and by the time I had finished with it, all 645Z's were being tried by other visitors, with a great many waiting. I returned to the Ricoh stand only in the afternoon when there was a better chance. I still had to wait, but not as long. I can imagine that I was more tired in the afternoon (the 645Z) and still relatively fresh in the morning (the DA560).

Wim

[Wired]

I always believed a Pentax 70-200 f2.8 35mm format lens would be similar in size to a 60-250. Granted my Nikon 80-200 I'm pretty sure is similar in size as well. Hard to say as I don't yet own a 60-250.... even though it's a FL that I think would be very useful for my APSC kit.

The question I will be forced to deal with if/when these 35mm Pentax DSLR rumors come full circle and become truth is... what will the camera cost. Will it be worth it to buy the body to only use the FA Limiteds? I already got a complete Nikon D800 kit ranging from 16-200mm with four primes, two of which are beyond amazing. It would be incredibly difficult to give up my Nikon 135mm f2.0 DC. Almost as difficult as it would be to give up my FA 77 f1.9 Limited.

[Mistral75]

I am expecting the performance/price ratio of the 24x36 Pentax camera to be higher to that of competition and the HD Pentax-D FA lenses and more so the HD Pentax-D FA* to be damn expensive.

[Pål Jensen]

Back from Photokina and back to my "promise" (FWIW).

I measured both new tele lenses and got 20cm for the "70-200" (full length excl the rear cap) which from the size is indeed definitely a f/2.8, and 25cm for the long one. Both are massive, and what struck me most was their wide base (the diameter of the barrel near the mount). I don't know whether that means anything in terms of image circle?

I think it is due to the optical SR mechanism....

---------- Post added 09-22-14 at 10:53 PM ----------

I am expecting the performance/price ratio of the 24x36 Pentax camera to be higher to that of competition and the HD Pentax-D FA lenses and more so the HD Pentax-D FA* to be damn expensive.

I expect the camera to be damned expensive too. I hope it is at least 36mp.

[ElJamoquio]

The current 18-55 is based on a design that's been used for so long. Other manufacturers have produced different iterations of their kit lenses too; Pentax has just upgraded the housing (added WR). This one uses an entirely new optical design of course, with better coatings, and an in-lens AF engine too. So yes, it is an improvement. Not everything can be based on maximum aperture to define "improvement"

When I first read it I figured it was a "replacement" (rather, a concurrently sold improvement) for the 18-135. But I could be wrong.

[Mistral75]

(...)

I expect the camera to be damned expensive too. I hope it is at least 36mp.

I also think the camera will have high specifications. Ricoh would otherwise have planned to launch a 24-105/120mm f/4 or a 28-75 f/3.5-5.6 together with it, not a 70-200ish f/2.8 lens.

[Pål Jensen]

I also think the camera will have high specifications. Ricoh would otherwise have planned to launch a 24-105/120mm f/4 or a 28-75 f/3.5-5.6 together with it, not a 70-200ish f/2.8 lens.

I think it needs to fit betwenn the K-3 and the 645z. Not too close to any of them to make sense and to avoid cannibalization. I expect the lenses to be large as well. Optimized for digital. Just look at the new 50mm from Sigma or the new wide angle zoom for the 645 to see where we are heading. Small size is for APS; this context makes the Pentax APS lenses selection seem very smart. Of course, the coming FF lenses can be used on the APS bodies as well making the APS system even more versatile...

[Mistral75]

Indeed, Sony have the same segmentation strategy between their E (APS-C mirrorless) and FE (24x36 mirrorless) lenses.

[Wired]

I also think the camera will have high specifications. Ricoh would otherwise have planned to launch a 24-105/120mm f/4 or a 28-75 f/3.5-5.6 together with it, not a 70-200ish f/2.8 lens.

I think it will be what the Nikon D750 should have been....and priced the same. I don't think Ricoh/Pentax could get away with a $3000+ camera of 36mp. but I do think they could get away with a 24mp camera with D810 like features. Take the D750, up the flash sync, up the buffer, and up the shutter speed, then shove it into a body with the K3 egronomics, and hopefuly not much bigger if any. Slap a Pentax/Ricoh logo on it, and charge $2450. Winner Winner chicken dinner!

[Class A]

I am expecting the performance/price ratio of the 24x36 Pentax camera to be higher to that of competition and the HD Pentax-D FA lenses and more so the HD Pentax-D FA* to be damn expensive.

The usual pattern, unfortunately.

Works for me (and typically Sigma), though.

Pentax cameras are still very good value for money.

Pentax lenses ... too expensive, AFAIC.

I have all three amigos because while they are not cheap, they are truly unique. However, more recent Pentax lens developments have not been very interesting for me personally, first optically and when the price is considered, they are completely out of the question.

[Class A]

I think it needs to fit betwenn the K-3 and the 645z.

I believe other full-frame offerings by other manufacturers are much more relevant for where the Pentax FF needs to fit in.

The 645Z is a much bigger and more expensive system. Due to the different mount, it really does not matter whether the 645Z is offered by Pentax or by Xerox, Fuji, or any other company. Contrary to many postings, the 645 system does not represent an "upgrade path" and it is not an FF replacement either.

[Pål Jensen]

I believe other full-frame offerings by other manufacturers are much more relevant for where the Pentax FF needs to fit in.

The 645Z is a much bigger and more expensive system. Due to the different mount, it really does not matter whether the 645Z is offered by Pentax or by Xerox, Fuji, or any other company. Contrary to many postings, the 645 system does not represent an "upgrade path" and it is not an FF replacement either.

Everything could be an upgrade path and if you sit on a bunch of APS lenses the 645 is just as much an ugrade path as FF.
The problem with FF from other manufacturers is that they spread in price between $1500 to $8000. A Pentax FF needs to make sense in the Pentax line-up primarily...
And in case some haven't noticed; Pentax IS moving upmarked. This process has been going on for about 15 years. Pentax products aren't meant to be cheap. Value maybe, but not cheap. I do not expect a priceleading FF DSLR from Pentax. Whats the question though, is whether Pentax will put their FF offering in the traditional series (K) or the new progressive line (K-s)

[IchabodCrane]

Everything could be an upgrade path and if you sit on a bunch of APS lenses the 645 is just as much an ugrade path as FF.
The problem with FF from other manufacturers is that they spread in price between $1500 to $8000. A Pentax FF needs to make sense in the Pentax line-up primarily...
And in case some haven't noticed; Pentax IS moving upmarked. This process has been going on for about 15 years. Pentax products aren't meant to be cheap. Value maybe, but not cheap. I do not expect a priceleading FF DSLR from Pentax. Whats the question though, is whether Pentax will put their FF offering in the traditional series (K) or the new progressive line (K-s)

Some APS-C lenses will work fine on FF and others will work reasonably well. Is it a big deal to crop just a little off of the borders in PP if the FF camera isn't designed to do it for you (like Nikon)? So yes, it is a legitimate upgrade path.

No similar possibility exists going from APS-C to MF, though.

[Pål Jensen]

I'm of the general opinion that changing format is not an upgrade path but a sidestep.....
You don't upgrade formats, you change them....

[monochrome]

Whats the question though, is whether Pentax will put their FF offering in the traditional series (K) or the new progressive line (K-s)

Or both.