[NickC]

Don't know about it's optical properties yet, hopefully good.
However as a WR backup to a prime lens kit it's a lot smaller than the current offerings so can just sit unnoticed in the bag until the weather turns inclement.
Silent DC is a bonus.

[normhead]

Regarding it's optical qualities.....

Exceptional Image Rendition
Incorporating super-low dispersion glass elements and aspherical elements in its 11-element/eight-group optics, this lens effectively compensates various aberrations for high-contrast, high-resolution, fine-detailed images with minimal colour bleeding.

Quick Shift focus System
The PENTAX-original Quick-Shift Focus System allows instant switching from autofocus to manual focus operation.

smc PENTAX DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL WR lens
This standard zoom lens covers focal lengths from 27.5mm wide angle to 84.5mm moderate telephoto (in the 35mm format). Incorporating a high-performance aspherical (AL) optical element and a super-low-dispersion glass optical element in its optics, it assures outstanding image resolution and remarkable brightness, even at the edges, while effectively compensating various aberrations. Its weather-resistant construction offers excellent reliability in damp, inclement conditions.

Both are 11 elements in 8 groups, sounds like it should be about the same, only smaller, although the 18-50 does have that thing about "fine detailed" whatever that might mean.

[thibs]

I have not calculated sameness by crop factor, but optically, real world results on Olympus 620 with that "kit" are much, i mean a lot better than kit 18-55 whatever version.

The results of Oly lens or the results of Oly lens after in-camera software boost vs the results of Pentax lens or Pentax lens after same boost?

[JinDesu]

I have not calculated sameness by crop factor, but optically, real world results on Olympus 620 with that "kit" are much, i mean a lot better than kit 18-55 whatever version.

still, you both don't tell anything i didn't know already. So, what about the fuzz around 18-50? Is it sharper than kit or what does it add we do not have yet? What is improved, but coating?

DC in lens motor for a kit lens, and the retractable design over the normal kit lens is not something to be happy about? I'm confused - you don't want advances to the normal 18-55?

[Vihmameister]

The results of Oly lens or the results of Oly lens after in-camera software boost vs the results of Pentax lens or Pentax lens after same boost?

Both.

DC in lens motor for a kit lens, and the retractable design over the normal kit lens is not something to be happy about? I'm confused - you don't want advances to the normal 18-55?

Retractable is good to have, but not absolute must, that depends more from range of zoom. But about DC - i shoot most of time manual, with all lenses i use. So - whatever motor it has, i value only quick-shift and manual AF override possibility pentax provides. All these comfort things, but picture qualities, sharpness and optical properties are what matters.

[JinDesu]

Both.



Retractable is good to have, but not absolute must, that depends more from range of zoom. But about DC - i shoot most of time manual, with all lenses i use. So - whatever motor it has, i value only quick-shift and manual AF override possibility pentax provides. All these comfort things, but picture qualities, sharpness and optical properties are what matters.

So because you don't find those features impressive means that no one else can?

[filoxophy]

But about DC - i shoot most of time manual, with all lenses i use. So - whatever motor it has, i value only quick-shift and manual AF override possibility pentax provides. All these comfort things, but picture qualities, sharpness and optical properties are what matters.

If manual focus is what matters, I would be looking at K, M, and A glass, plus Zeiss/VL primes, not DA kit lenses.

[Vihmameister]

So because you don't find those features impressive means that no one else can?

This can be taken opposite too - if you find something impressive, you think everybody else must?
But more seriously I think you are lacking functional reading skill in this case. I didn't say, that new lens is bad or what somebody else but me must like in it or any lens at all. I asked, what does it add, to existing lens choice pentaxians already have. Current step is too tiny forward from standard kit 18-55, so i would not make such noise around it. I expect a lot more noise around new full frame 70-200@2,8. also if kit lens would be some 16-50 and still quite small size
As you see some value comfort, some size (must fit the pocket), and some value optical improvement.

If manual focus is what matters, I would be looking at K, M, and A glass, plus Zeiss/VL primes, not DA kit lenses.

Otherwise you would be correct, but here newer DA and FA lenses have better class (low dispersion elements) and coating. These are important, as they trasnform to optical quality too (flares, comas, reflections and, light transmission). Try to shoot with M glass near to strong light source and you see what i mean.

[starbase218]

This can be taken opposite too - if you find something impressive, you think everybody else must?

How many times I have made remarks on a lens, only to be accused, almost, of not taking into account how others may view it. I was waiting for someone to say this, and didn't even know it.

[simon_199]

Regarding its optical qualities, for what it's worth there are some sample shots on the Pentax website (probably already posted before)

One is at 20mm f/11, so it tells close to nothing. The next sample at 18mm f/5.6 maybe gives us something to talk about, even if it's just a single photo


Sample Images?K-S2 | RICOH IMAGING

[kh1234567890]

The next sample at 18mm f/5.6 maybe gives us something to talk about, even if it's just a single photo

Shame about the bokeh (bottom right corner) Can't win them all, I suppose ...

[JinDesu]

This can be taken opposite too - if you find something impressive, you think everybody else must?
But more seriously I think you are lacking functional reading skill in this case. I didn't say, that new lens is bad or what somebody else but me must like in it or any lens at all. I asked, what does it add, to existing lens choice pentaxians already have. Current step is too tiny forward from standard kit 18-55, so i would not make such noise around it. I expect a lot more noise around new full frame 70-200@2,8. also if kit lens would be some 16-50 and still quite small size
As you see some value comfort, some size (must fit the pocket), and some value optical improvement.

First you ask "what is all the fuzz about this lens" and why is it special if the focal length of the Olympus 14-42 is more useful to you, to which people responded that the 14-42 is not a 14mm lens on APSC because it is sized for a smaller sensor. You then make a dismissive statement to that response and ask again "what the fuzz about this lens is" so some people (including me) have responded that it is smaller (fitting with Pentax's concept of compact) and it has a DC lens which makes it finally a proper kit lens competitor to equivalent CaNikon kit lenses. You then also dismiss those features by saying that they are not necessary features.

Why can't we make a fuzz about this lens? The people in this thread are valuing the compactness, the DC motor, and the fact that this is a sign that Ricoh is interested in keeping up with CaNikon not just in the expensive areas (where the 70-200 and 150-450 cover), but also in the kit offerings to the people who bought into Pentax for compactness and WR. We hope the optical features as as good as the 18-55 WR and we also hope that it is better - but without more information we don't know. However, we have no reason to bash the lens because there is no information yet. The 70-200 has it's own thread, why don't you go inspire more fuzz in that thread than to make dismissive comments about this lens in this thread?

Regarding its optical qualities, for what it's worth there are some sample shots on the Pentax website (probably already posted before)

One is at 20mm f/11, so it tells close to nothing. The next sample at 18mm f/5.6 maybe gives us something to talk about, even if it's just a single photo


Sample Images?K-S2 | RICOH IMAGING

The second image is pretty sharp in the center and shows very little chromatic aberrations (even for the not so harsh conditions). Bossa is right about the bokeh not looking great, but I wouldn't have that much expectations for bokeh at 18mm on a kit lens at F5.6 lol

[derekkite]

its hard to get more stupid statement like yours. another user with functional reading handicap perhaps? or must i write it with bold and capitals to get you attention like: WHAT THIS NEW LENS ADDS FOR EXISTING LENS-BASE WHAT WE PENTAXIANS DO NOT HAVE ALREADY ? If pointing out, there are no new significant new features or improvement makes it for you as "accusing", then keep your religion and go pray for it on nearby chapel.

Something similar i may ask on KS1 too, what for was it released at all? What was excuse to release it if there we had already K-30 or K-50. Spend more than year just to announce something we had and even that made with limitations Who cares about dynamic range of 52100 ISO? How many of you use it in real world? I call this waste of time on manufacturing and loosing market and money. It would be nice if ricoh will focus in adding something new, like FF at last.

It is a new kit lens. It is small and retractable. It is WR.

I met someone who used their K-5 and WR lens for biological surveys. They loved it. This would be the perfect kit for someone like that, a small compact weather resistant package.

The KS1 was small. Reviewers saw lights, engineers saw compact. The KS2 is small as well, everything that went into the KS1 makes the KS2 better. A KS1 with this lens or one of the pancakes would slide into a jacket pocket very nicely.

Why the D3200? Why the silly questions?

[simon_199]

WHAT THIS NEW LENS ADDS FOR EXISTING LENS-BASE WHAT WE PENTAXIANS DO NOT HAVE ALREADY ?

DC motor, approximately the same focal range of the old 18-55 WR with (we have to suppose) superior or at least equal image quality in a more compact package, without loosing WR capabilities.

This is the development of a kit lens, so its purpose is to improve on the existing design, nothing else.

In my opinion these are interesting improvements: new cameras will ship with an overall better kit lens, much more appealing for the market, perfectly comparable to the competition. Of course die-hard pentaxians with a bag full of star lenses might not find anything exciting about that. Even if the added compactness and convenience might also appeal to them as well, and this only makes this lens even more interesting on paper.


What's not to like here (provided IQ is indeed at least as good as the 18-55) ?

[StephenHampshire]

As a fairly long standing Pentaxian, I currently have two versions of the 18-55, the original one (purchased with m K100D) and the WR version (which I got wth my K20D) One suts in a cupboard untouched, the WR version is in my Son's kit bag with his K30, although he uses a 28-105 as his walkabout lens. However, I am tempted to buy the new lens to keep in my bag as my WR option - currently I use the 18-135 on my K3, but the new lens would be a good spare, or indeed sit permanently on my rather bashed K5. So what, as an existing Pentaxian, does this new lens give me that I do not already have????
1) COMPACTNESS - far smaller than existing lenses that I have, will fit easily in my bag whilst leaving space for my Tamron 70-200 for instance.
2) NEAR SILENT FOCUSSING - DC motor as in the 18-135 is a more pleasant experience!
3) HD COATINGS - should improve microcontrast and flare resistance, I certainly noticed an improvement when going from the 55-300 original to the HD WR version.
Any increase in IQ (above that expected from the coatings) is a bonus
Further, although not a direct benefit at the moment, the release of this lens along shows that Ricoh are still investing in the "starter" end of their market.