Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-05-2014, 03:22 AM - 1 Like   #451
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,406
In 2008 and 2009, Pentax announced 12 lenses; Fuji actually did 11 in 2012 and 2013, so it's a win for Pentax

But indeed, this is a Pentax forum, and despite having an entire section dedicated to other brands cameras, it's filled with Fuji/Sony/whatever propaganda. "Hey, look, I have a brand X camera and I like it so much better than a Pentax!" over and over again.
Try that on a Canon or Nikon (or Sony, Olympus...) forum. Here it's an accepted practice

10-05-2014, 05:05 AM   #452
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,529
QuoteOriginally posted by LensBeginner Quote
Well, that doesn't always pan out as a good thing...
Imagine you're bringing a small and a large lens: you'll still need a backpack that can accomodate the large lens even if you start with the large lens on the camera.
Now think of "normal" filter sizes and "XS" filter sizes...
If you don't want to buy another set of filters your only option is 27mm->37mm step-up ring + 37mm->49mm step-up ring (+49mm->52mm step-up ring), definitely NOT an advantage...
You don't really get the small lens argument! The goal of the game is to have not even one big lens. Otherwise it defeat the concept of being small. And that the limit of Fuji: by keeping APSC, their tele lenses are just bound to be 2cm longer than Pentax equivalent. And that why they have many wide and almost nothing in tele department.

This can be achieved for example with DA21 + DA40 +DA70. Or if you prefer DA21 + FA43 + FA77. Me for now I use a slightly heavier set: DA15, DA21, DA35, FA77.

Many also think that FA31 + FA43 + FA77 would be a total joy on a compact FF body, even through the 31 is a little big. And that one of the reason to ask Pentax for an FF!

Last edited by Nicolas06; 10-05-2014 at 05:14 AM.
10-05-2014, 05:06 AM   #453
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,103
QuoteOriginally posted by Kuzite:
Here it's an accepted practice
Not entirely. There are few personae non gratae former members who, if they still had posting privileges, would attest to us having a tolerance threshold.
10-05-2014, 05:26 AM   #454
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by Jan67 Quote
So you have the freedom to choise your quality/compactness/price.
I find the Fuji lens line to be expensive and heavy:

The XF50-140mmF2.8 R LM OIS WR is 230g heavier than Pentax's 50-135.

It uses a 72mm filter compared to 67mm, and is at least US$220 more expensive.

Most of their lenses are quote a bit heavier than equivalent DSLR packages, so what is lost in body size and mass is regained and then some in lens design and construction.

10-05-2014, 06:03 AM   #455
Forum Member
Jan67's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Prague
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 84
Yes, XF50-140mmF2.8 is surprisingly large and heavy, even compared to equivalent Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS.
Nothing is perfect...

Reason is clear:
DA50-135: 18 elements in 14 groups inc. 3 ED elements
XF50-140: 23 elements in 16 groups, inc. 6 ED lens elements

I was very happy with my DA50-135, just a bit unsure AF on 135mm, but if it gets quicker SDM once, it would be excellent lens.

I will buy XF50-140mmF2.8 and I am curious on AF speed and quality.
10-05-2014, 06:31 AM   #456
Marketplace Reseller
dcshooter's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Washington DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,110
Only when you say your preferred camera is a squirrel.

QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
Not entirely. There are few personae non gratae former members who, if they still had posting privileges, would attest to us having a tolerance threshold.
10-05-2014, 06:38 AM   #457
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,406
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
Not entirely. There are few personae non gratae former members who, if they still had posting privileges, would attest to us having a tolerance threshold.
Not saying it's an officially condoned practice, apologies if I unwillingly implied this. After all, the dedicated other brands section should be a good indication of the official policy, right?
It's just those posts starting from the premise that Fuji/Sony/anyone and their dog is better than Pentax. In the good old days, it was only Canon and Nikon...
10-05-2014, 06:58 AM   #458
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,534
QuoteOriginally posted by Jan67 Quote
XF50-140: 23 elements in 16 groups, inc. 6 ED lens elements
I recall the Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II using about the same total number of elements in it...so much for the advantage of mirrorless.

10-05-2014, 07:39 AM   #459
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,529
QuoteOriginally posted by Jan67 Quote
Yes, XF50-140mmF2.8 is surprisingly large and heavy, even compared to equivalent Sony FE 70-200mm f/4 G OSS.
Nothing is perfect...

Reason is clear:
DA50-135: 18 elements in 14 groups inc. 3 ED elements
XF50-140: 23 elements in 16 groups, inc. 6 ED lens elements

I was very happy with my DA50-135, just a bit unsure AF on 135mm, but if it gets quicker SDM once, it would be excellent lens.

I will buy XF50-140mmF2.8 and I am curious on AF speed and quality.
The lens is 17.5mm long instead of 13.6mm. This is 4.1cm. but 2.7cm comes from the difference is registration distance from the mounts, and 0.5cm comes from the difference in max focal lenses.

Add to that that Pentax really try to make lightweight design (the tokina equiv of the pentax 50-135 is heavier) and you have the whole difference in weight: on one side one need to have some material for the additional weight and on the other side, there is not the same philosophy of lightweight pentax has in mind.

Still this is a huge drawback for fujifilm to have so much evier tele with roughly 50% more weight !

For the same weight and size you could get a Pentax 60-250 f/4 a DA300 f/4 and if we count weight only a 70-200 tamron.

This is not at all appealing. If you have just this tele new Fuji tele in your backpack, it alone negated all the gain you could have from the smaller body and shorter registration distance. For me, this is huge reason to not get Fuji.
10-05-2014, 07:49 AM   #460
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
The lens is 17.5mm long instead of 13.6mm. This is 4.1cm. but 2.7cm comes from the difference is registration distance from the mounts, and 0.5cm comes from the difference in max focal lenses.

Add to that that Pentax really try to make lightweight design (the tokina equiv of the pentax 50-135 is heavier) and you have the whole difference in weight: on one side one need to have some material for the additional weight and on the other side, there is not the same philosophy of lightweight pentax has in mind.

Still this is a huge drawback for fujifilm to have so much evier tele with roughly 50% more weight !

For the same weight and size you could get a Pentax 60-250 f/4 a DA300 f/4 and if we count weight only a 70-200 tamron.

This is not at all appealing. If you have just this tele new Fuji tele in your backpack, it alone negated all the gain you could have from the smaller body and shorter registration distance. For me, this is huge reason to not get Fuji.
So in the end it's the lens-camera combination that makes things look small.
10-05-2014, 09:35 AM   #461
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
The Pentax, Nikon, and Canon strategies are to emphasize:

- OVF acuity and response. EVF is still not there yet though the HUD and overall larger viewing area make up for it to some.

- Long glass and PDAF focussing speed.

- More compact lenses, an area where even Olympus is struggling. Fuji and m43 are not exactly able to deliver on the promise of mirrorless and the whole package smaller form factor.

- Sensor size and ISO capacity. m43 is OK but lags, and Fuji's a ten behind the 20-24MP consumer grade sensors.

- Price. This is the big one. DSLR's are hammering on price. Fuji's been all over the map. When the X-Pro came out they exclaimed they;'d left the DSLR form factor behind. Then they put out the cheaper X-series bodies because they needed to hit all price points. Now the XT-1 is a classic SLR structure, but price very high. The value is not with mirrorless right now and I think that's why their sales are struggling.

In a few years the tech in the XT-1 will have to sell in a $600 body, but what about less costly lenses? No manufacturer can survive at these price points for a system. They are far too high.
10-05-2014, 10:10 AM   #462
Pentaxian
LensBeginner's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,489
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
You don't really get the small lens argument! The goal of the game is to have not even one big lens. Otherwise it defeat the concept of being small. And that the limit of Fuji: by keeping APSC, their tele lenses are just bound to be 2cm longer than Pentax equivalent. And that why they have many wide and almost nothing in tele department.

This can be achieved for example with DA21 + DA40 +DA70. Or if you prefer DA21 + FA43 + FA77. Me for now I use a slightly heavier set: DA15, DA21, DA35, FA77.

Many also think that FA31 + FA43 + FA77 would be a total joy on a compact FF body, even through the 31 is a little big. And that one of the reason to ask Pentax for an FF!
I get it, but there's a limit on how small a telephoto, let alone a good one, can be...
Seems to me that you're really not into that, which is fine, but it does get into the equation for people who do.
I'd like at least a 200mm f/4, and it is doable, since the SMC-M one is not that big.
It's just not pancake-sized...
10-05-2014, 10:20 AM   #463
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,720
QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
I've written to Ricoh HQ, Japan, and have received an affirmative reply, very recently. So, sorry, my comments are not just wishful thinking.
And you are expecting such information to impress the nay sayers? You just have to look back to just before the K-3 was released. Specs released by asahiman I believe, and all the negative comments to realize what you're dealing with. Personally I suspect that there is no way Pentax reps would be saying these things if 6 months from now their sayings could be a suggestion that they failed, because it has yet to be released.

It does make you wonder though.. what is the motivation of the nay sayers... nay sayers, what say you?

What was the value of denying the imminent release of the K-3 a few weeks before it's release?

Thanks for the effort though. Writing to Ricoh and asking as opposed to just shooting your mouth off. What a novel approach. One that should perhaps be practiced more often, by those who claim to know what Ricoh is doing. Do you need more evidence that the nay sayers are, willfully ignorant, have an agenda of trying to push people to other brands, deliberate liars, and people who have a vested interest in seeing Pentax not do well?

At this point they are not just offering an opinion, they are actually claiming that Pentax Reps are lying to us and that we should listen to them, the nay sayers, and not the official announcements. They are drama queens and attention seekers, every one of them.

At this point there is absolutely nothing legitimate about them, except for their desire to hurt the Pentax brand. That may or may not be legitimate, but it's definitely real.

Last edited by normhead; 10-05-2014 at 10:25 AM.
10-05-2014, 10:24 AM   #464
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,435
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Do you need more evidence that the any sayers are, willfully ignorant, have an agenda of trying to push people to other brands, deliberate liars, and people who have a vested interest in seeing Pentax not do well?
People who can't abide a calm pot?
10-05-2014, 10:52 AM   #465
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,529
QuoteOriginally posted by LensBeginner Quote
I get it, but there's a limit on how small a telephoto, let alone a good one, can be...
Seems to me that you're really not into that, which is fine, but it does get into the equation for people who do.
I'd like at least a 200mm f/4, and it is doable, since the SMC-M one is not that big.
It's just not pancake-sized...
If it is to ask I have a DA* 50-135. It get me wonderfull images and many here praise the quality out of it. Still it is 685g, not 1kg. Still it is 13.5cm long with 67mm filters, not 17.5cm long with 77mm filters. Still it has been there for quite some time now and can be used on a 24MP body to get even more sharpness out of it and also to help on the reach on the occasionnal shoot!

So what I do, is that each time I go out for taking photos I wonder if I need a tele zoom, then I get this heavy 50-135. The good occasions are typically events, sports and every occasion when I need a long tele with flexibility of a zoom. For the other occasion I do take the FA77...

I may even end up with a 1.4TC one day or a DA300 or DA60-250 when I decide to go to Kenya for a safari. But for all theses things, I know theses design are interresting compromize to giving me the max out of the weight and bulkiness I carry.

Funily for now there isn't even planned any prime between 60 & 90mm on Fuji side while the 60mm isn't that fast and the 90mm not even available. There isn't prime of 200 & 300mm, there no 1.4 TC. The macro lens is 60mm only while each time I look at a macro thread, it is explained to me that for insects and so on you'd better with a 90-100mm lens and people complaning there no 180mm macro anymore!

Really I have nothing against fuji. I'am sure it is a pleasure to use and many can be happy with it.

But there biased universal mantra that everybody and their dog do better and have better echosystem than Pentax. This really get old in particular because it is just plain wrong. Pentax has better echosystem than all challengers expect Nikon & Canon and they still offer interresting compromise of WR, compactness and build quality against Nikon and Canon. Fuji is just not here yet to challenge any of the 3, be it Canon, Nikon or Pentax.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 10-05-2014 at 10:57 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, development, dslr, engineers, ff, full-frame, gallery, hands-on, idea, information, lens, lenses, market, mirrorless, model, nikon, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, photographyblog, photos, price, sensor, tc, tcs, telephoto, thread, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
One more time, but in a funny way: Crop Sensors vs Full Frame carlosodze Pentax Full Frame 32 10-16-2014 01:15 PM
From Full-Frame Sony... to Pentax... to Full-Frame Canon Mr_Canuck Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 42 01-21-2014 12:50 AM
Full frame or no full frame.... Deedee Pentax K-3 14 10-08-2013 05:39 AM
Vivitar flash no fire, no smoke either! telfish Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 10 04-15-2011 08:48 PM
Need more megapix? Future possibilities and no need for full frame! rburgoss Pentax DSLR Discussion 57 10-16-2008 03:16 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:00 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top