[JGoodard]

Hi all. As I said I would write what I can, mainly about Pentax (of course).
I will edit the post if I recall anything later.

I did not have any meeting or else, I don't think I would be granted on either but:

I didn't see any K-S1 (not that I looked for it). K-S2 was all over the place ans so was the K-3. K50 was shown too.
FF 3D model was there (under glass). I did not see any "serious lens" or DFAs so kindly asked. The (very nice) guy didn't expect that, it seems but asked me to get back about an hour later 'cos the lenses were used/shown by a colleague in a meeting behind closed doors. I thought that was it but.. when I came back later he apologized, told me to wait and gave me both DFAs to try ("quickly, 5 minutes, my colleague still need them").

So about the DFAs: (keep in mind I could only play for 5 minutes)

* those were working samples (but definitely looked finalized)
* I'm not used to big lenses but... those are HUGE piece of glass. And heavy of course. Guys with little hands, you will suffer
* as for mechanical feeling/construction, my 50-135 really feels almost cheap. No way comparable.
* balance is alright on a K-3 without grip (expected). With grip, it should be perfect.
* the tripod attachment looked VERY sturdy to me. I handled the combo just with the attachment moving it a bit and I could not create some play.
* AF is... well, if you're used to Pentax AF, you can say hello to Star Trek era. It almost feels science fiction lol. Faaaaast. Really.
I also tried Sigma 150-600 (I think it was a Nikon D800) @ 600 (not fair I know) and it felt pedestrian in comparison.
* Manual focus seemed to me demultiplied so it was a bit difficult to focus (couldn't do it very fast because demultiplied) but precise it certainly was. Of course this is without the limiter.
* 150-450 buttons were not usable.
* Did I say those things were fast?

As a comparison of feeling/size/weight, the only comparison within Pentax/Ricoh is the DA645 28-45. Very close. And yes, the 645Z was available for trying with multiple lenses (all stupidly small compared to the 28-45).

FF expected oct/nov 2015.
Tried the GR which is way smaller and lighter than expected. If only it had a 35mm...

Didn't take pictures of DFAs but 645Z and 28-45 for size comparison purposes. Will update the post later.

Hope it helps.

PS: Guys, Ricoh is serious. Really. My left arm still feels it

EDIT: on the EVF subject, I tried Olys cams and XT1. XT1 was annoying but usable. Olys felt to me like old screens from VHS camcorders from 30 years ago: flickering and half a second late. XT1 is very usable for 2 minutes. After it gets annoying. Slowly... maybe in 2-3 years time EVF will become really usable. Maybe.

Any thoughts on the K-s2? Looks to be a solid entry.

[thibs]

Any thoughts on the K-s2? Looks to be a solid entry.

Really could not try it long enough. Seems nice enough but K-3 is more my type of cam.
A K-S2 with lightweight or versatile lens though would be nice.

If it was possible (my wife would kill me) I'd shoot analog 4x5 on hollidays

[philbaum]

Given that most of the mass of a good lens resides in the glass, rather than the structure (even if it is made largely of metal) or the drive infrastructure, it surely means only that there are more and larger glass elements in the digital lenses. Again, given that the reason for engineering lens design (as with any design) is principally to produce something that can meet pre-determined specifications at a reasonable cost (ie what the maker judges the market will bear) the optimisation will be complete when those specifications are reached. To further refine the design may result in something lighter and smaller (or not) but it will be more expensive.

These days, more of the mass resides in the glass and plastic lenses. This quote from wikipedia:

Plastics allow the manufacturing of strongly aspherical lens elements which are difficult or impossible to manufacture in glass, and which simplify or improve lens manufacturing and performance.[citation needed] Plastics are not used for the outermost elements of all but the cheapest lenses as they scratch easily.

This quote from the Nikon site, 3rd hand :-)

Hybrid lenses are made of a special plastic molded onto optical glass.

There's another reason to use plastic internal to the lens - other than reduce overall weight. As the latest interview with Pentax pointed out - the focusing element in contrast detection AF needs to be lightweight so it can be moved quickly. More weight means slower focusing and tracking, probably even for phase detection AF.

So plastic is your friend for lightweight lenses and fast AF lenses and for mirrorless system lenses especially. come to think of it - liveview function would benefit as well. Just don't use it on the outward lenses to avoid scratching. But hey, my prescription lenses are all plastic and i wouldn't have it any other way.

My opinion only, is that these lens OIS systems add a lot of volume (and therefore weight) to lenses.