Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-01-2015, 02:54 PM   #1006
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Near Vienna, Austria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 759
Although such an argument has probably been made before, I would like to put the current lens prices (DFA 70-200, DFA 150-450) into historical perspective. The oldest list of MRPs for Germany that I have on board is from 2002. In Austria (where I live) the mean price increase since then has been approximately 30% (precisely 29,4%).
FA* 2.8/200mm: EUR 1599.00 + 30% = 2709.00
FA* 4.5/300mm: EUR 1199.00 + 30% = 1559.00
FA* 2.8/28-70mm: EUR 1499.00 + 30% = 1949.00
FA* 2.8/80-200mm: EUR 2299.00 + 30% = 2989.00
FA* 5.6/250-600mm: EUR 8999.00 + 30% = 11699.00

Thank god we don't have 2002 lens prices!

05-01-2015, 10:31 PM   #1007
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Slovenija
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 145
QuoteOriginally posted by totsmuyco Quote
They are about the same size at least that's how I see it. But I'm a little biased. I think Pentax will out perform canon. Just my thought.
You wish that will outperform Canon. From first test (ephotozine) it is not close to Canon. And that AF is really pain in the ass.
05-02-2015, 12:16 AM - 2 Likes   #1008
Veteran Member
robjmitchell's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne Aus
Posts: 1,148
QuoteOriginally posted by dfujevec Quote
You wish that will outperform Canon. From first test (ephotozine) it is not close to Canon. And that AF is really pain in the ass.
Sigh!
The ephotozine AF test was performed on pre-production lens with a camera lacking the firmware to drive the brand new type of motor found in the these DFA lenses. Why would it perform properly?
We also cant compare sharpness tests as they were sensor based. That means the cannon lens was evaluated using its full image circle on a low resolution sensor while the pentax was evaluated on a cropped high resolution sensor. They are not even close to comparable.
05-02-2015, 01:56 AM - 1 Like   #1009
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,834
QuoteOriginally posted by dfujevec Quote
You wish that will outperform Canon.
I believe that is the goal of the Ricoh engineers. Even the dimensions match.

As for their optical performance, someone will need to put both the Canon and the Pentax on an optical bench un-mounted on a camera to test them merely as lenses. So far no one has done that, and probably never will (unless LensRental takes an interest in the matter).

To measure their performance as working lenses (AF included), someone will need to mount them on comparable cameras - eg the Canon 70-200 on a 24MP Canon 760D vs the Pentax 70-200 mounted on 24MP K-3 II - and then perform a set of identical optical and lens performance tests.

Until someone does all those tests, I would hold back on saying 'Lens A is better than Lens B'. Suffice it to say, though, I believe the Pentax lens will perform at the same high standard as it's Nikon or Canon peers.

05-02-2015, 02:33 AM   #1010
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,240
QuoteOriginally posted by dfujevec Quote
You wish that will outperform Canon. From first test (ephotozine) it is not close to Canon. And that AF is really pain in the ass.
I really think Pentax screwed up when they sent the lens to ephotozine. As Rob says, the lens hasn't even been released to the public yet, there has been no auto focus update and from what we hear, there is a specific improvement in the K3 II to handle certain times of continuous auto focus situations. I would hesitate to read to much into their analysis of the auto focus performance. My guess is that on the K3 II and on the new full frame coming in the fall, it will have really similar performance to Canon, both optically and with regard to auto focus, but we'll have to wait and see.

If you want to test auto focus, there are ways to do it and ephotozine didn't.
05-02-2015, 03:13 AM   #1011
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,332
Perhaps there was some misunderstanding, and those preproduction lenses were sent for a preview, not a review? They should be more careful in the future, perhaps putting a big red "not for review!" label on pre-production lenses.
05-02-2015, 04:10 AM   #1012
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,072
When you take into account the fact that there are a handfull of pre-production copies that are bound NOT TO QUIT the few happy shops where they are displayed (nor the files of picts taken with them) : yes there must be at least 1 problem.
05-02-2015, 04:40 AM   #1013
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Iloilo City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,098
Well as I read somewhere that the dpreview guys were pleased with the focusing during the announcement of both 70-200 and the 150-450. How come ephotozine have different results? What could've gone wrong?

05-02-2015, 05:08 AM   #1014
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,834
QuoteOriginally posted by totsmuyco Quote
What could've gone wrong?
Lots of things. The reviewer had a bad nights sleep, and may have simply tried the lens before he had his first morning coffee.

Really, without any actual quantitative measurements and structured, repeatable tests, all these 'impression' based tests of things like AF performance are pretty worthless. Without a proper testing regime in place, one person's 'fast and accurate' judgement might be another person's 'slow and inaccurate'.
05-02-2015, 06:00 AM   #1015
Pentaxian
FantasticMrFox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Scotland
Posts: 2,119
I think a lot of people here are being a tad bit overly irritated because the review didn't deliver the exact same judgement they wanted to see. Calling for a quasi-scientific, replicable testing regimen for AF speed and accuracy isn't realistic - they used the AF, they thought it's hit-and-miss, deal with it. That's what a review is, an opinion.

And if anyone is to blame for the bad AF, it's Ricoh for sending them a pre-production copy for review and without reminding them to download the proper firmware.

The one point I didn't like about it and that I'm blaming the reviewers for is the total lack of a comparison with the Canon and Nikon 70-200 lenses. That's what everyone is interested about, knowing whether Pentax can build a premium zoom just as good as the competition. But maybe they're waiting for the FF to draw their conclusions.

Last edited by FantasticMrFox; 05-02-2015 at 07:15 AM.
05-02-2015, 06:46 AM   #1016
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,426
I wonder whether the question must be, "How much did that 'review' cost Canon?"

Nah.
05-02-2015, 08:47 AM   #1017
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,263
QuoteOriginally posted by FantasticMrFox Quote

And if anyone is to blame for the bad AF, it's Ricoh for sending them a pre-production copy for review and without reminding them to download the proper firmware.
We do not even know if Ricoh sent the lens.
05-02-2015, 08:54 AM   #1018
Site Supporter
RGlasel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Saskatoon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,343
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
"How much did that 'review' cost Canon?"
My question is why did ePhotozine get the lenses to preview without Ricoh ensuring that everything went without a hitch by throwing a few bones at the people behind ePhotozine. In my experience, independent reviews in print media are always arranged by the advertising agency. Even independent test labs would offer two prices for testing, if you wanted to keep the results private, you paid more. Before a decision was made to submit the products I sold for review or testing, a careful study of previously published articles was conducted to determine how the methodology used would influence results. Digital media have substantially less credibility than print or broadcast media, but that is no excuse for sloppiness on Ricoh's part.

---------- Post added 05-02-15 at 10:02 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
We do not even know if Ricoh sent the lens.
Well, Ricoh still needs to keep a close eye on any "evaluation" products it sends into the wild, to prevent a prejudiced review or report getting out. The easiest way to prevent prejudiced reviews and reports is to have a mutually beneficial relationship with the people who prepare them. The production costs of digital media are minimal, it doesn't take a lot to maintain that professional level of goodwill.
05-02-2015, 09:04 AM   #1019
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,426
QuoteOriginally posted by RGlasel Quote
My question is why did ePhotozine get the lenses to preview without Ricoh ensuring that everything went without a hitch by throwing a few bones at the people behind ePhotozine. In my experience, independent reviews in print media are always arranged by the advertising agency. Even independent test labs would offer two prices for testing, if you wanted to keep the results private, you paid more. Before a decision was made to submit the products I sold for review or testing, a careful study of previously published articles was conducted to determine how the methodology used would influence results. Digital media have substantially less credibility than print or broadcast media, but that is no excuse for sloppiness on Ricoh's part.

---------- Post added 05-02-15 at 10:02 AM ----------

Well, Ricoh still needs to keep a close eye on any "evaluation" products it sends into the wild, to prevent a prejudiced review or report getting out. The easiest way to prevent prejudiced reviews and reports is to have a mutually beneficial relationship with the people who prepare them. The production costs of digital media are minimal, it doesn't take a lot to maintain that professional level of goodwill.
Huh. Inexperience? Naiviete?

Do you suppose Japan arranged this or one of the Regional Distribution subsidiaries? If a Region, which one?
05-02-2015, 09:31 AM   #1020
Site Supporter
RGlasel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Saskatoon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,343
I'll make one more point about credible product reviews, and then I'll put my soapbox away (for a while). When it comes to trusted sources of opinion, we favour those who can do what we ourselves are incapable of. I look at photos by Kenneth Sporsheim or Murray O'Neill (two radically different types of wildlife photography) using Pentax equipment and I have no doubt that my brand choice isn't the limiting factor for my own photography. If I didn't find Thom Hogan's photographs pretentious and artless, I would be less inclined to discount his opinions on the state of the photographic industry.

When we put our trust in the opinions of those who can generate charts that we are incapable of doing ourselves, not the photographs they create, I wonder what we hope to get out of the photographic equipment we buy. That's a personal choice, and I don't have the right to deride anyone for choosing to buy equipment based on lab results, instead of photographic images; but I don't feel like I'm missing out by not making the same choice myself.

---------- Post added 05-02-15 at 10:38 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Do you suppose Japan arranged this or one of the Regional Distribution subsidiaries? If a Region, which one?
Even with my vast insider information I am clueless. The biggest impact of the ePhotozine review will be on Pentax users who read this thread, so on a scale of unnatural disasters, this barely registers. I couldn't pass up an opportunity to show off, though.
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!
100mm, 70-200mm, 70-200mm f2.8, couple, dfa, f/2.8, f2.8, fa, fa*80-200/2.8, front element, hd, hd pentax-d fa, holland, lens, lenses, macro, models, mounts, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, pentax-d, rings, shots, sigma, smc, sony, star, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax D-FA 100mm f2.8 Macro WR & DA* 200mm F2.8 ED [IF] SDM jurysi Sold Items 11 09-17-2012 05:27 PM
Sigma 70-200mm F2.8 EX DG OS HSM vs Pentax FA* 80-200mm F2.8? vectrln Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 07-27-2011 07:41 AM
★★NOW IN STOCK★★Pentax K-5 Limited Edition★★ Chuck-B&H Ask B&H Photo! 11 03-31-2011 05:29 AM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma APO EX 70-200mm/f2.8, Pentax FA 35mm/f2, Tamron 28-75mm/f2.8 chemxaj Sold Items 15 06-26-2008 06:58 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:27 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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