D FA 24-70mm F2.8 ED SDM WR Officially Announced

zan · 09-28-2015, 08:23 AM

One year is too short.
I have bought a brand new Pentax flash AF540FGZ II and not been using much, only 200-300 shots. Hmmm, maybe this was the reason

???
Anyway, after a year and two months the flash has started firing at full power at every shot and making images not just overexposed but burned.
The problem was in transistor (IGBT fault).

Their warranty should be at least two years.

**jpzk** · 09-28-2015, 08:54 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

Pentax has a year warranty because that's what they can get away with. People still are inclined to buy Pentax (if they own a pentax camera) over Sigma and Tamron, even if the lenses are similar and the off brand lenses have longer warranties.

On the list of things people consider when buying gear, warranty length is near the bottom.

Originally posted by Na Horuk

Still, just one year warranty doesn't really give much confidence, especially if you look at things like SDM failure in the past.

This is basically it. If they could lower it further without it looking suspicious, they would. The other brands try to build reputation with longer warranties, saying "hey, yes its third party, yes its cheaper, but we guarantee it will work."
And call me a sucker, but I do like to see products with long warranty, because modern business practices are often rather.. poor. Not necessarily with Pentax, but with too many things

And then, Canada has a 2 years warranty for those same products ... what goes?

Franc · 09-28-2015, 09:21 AM

Originally posted by zan

One year is too short.
I have bought a brand new Pentax flash AF540FGZ II and not been using much, only 200-300 shots. Hmmm, maybe this was the reason

???
Anyway, after a year and two months the flash has started firing at full power at every shot and making images not just overexposed but burned.
The problem was in transistor (IGBT fault).

Their warranty should be at least two years.

it is, mandatory 2 years in EU, go back to your dealer and let him fix it.

shakereduced · 09-28-2015, 09:44 AM

Originally posted by IchabodCrane

Agree. If you change the type of glass on those elements, you'd also have to change the optical design along with it and there's no evidence that's been done.

Here is a product catalog from Tamron showing designs of all their lenses and descriptions of each element type. Notice that each lens has a listing of symbols showing which features the lens contains. Lenses such as the 28-300 and 18-270 (on page 11) have AD glass. The 24-70, on page 12, does not. Someone mentioned that XR and AD glass could be newer marketing speak for the same element, but the XR elements in the 24-70 Tamron are shown in the front of the lens (and their description makes it sound like they produce different results). The AD element in the Pentax schematic is shown in the middle of the lens. Unless the Pentax schematic is flat out wrong, that's the only credible information we actually have, and that evidence points to the two lenses being different. I would say that right now we have no evidence that it is an exact copy.

Newtophotos · 09-28-2015, 11:02 AM

Can I ask for clarification on two points:

1. Which ever sensor size a lens is designed for is what the focal length is stated as. The kit len is 18-55mm on APS-C, this 24-70mm is that on full frame.
2. This lens is 24-70mm on a full frame sensor. On the announcement page on the pentaxforums homepage I asked if this lens is equivalent to 16-46.67 on APS-C. Dpreview lists it as 37-107mm on APS-C. Is dpreview correct? Making a diagram it seems dpreview is correct.

Ricoh announces 24-70mm F2.8 for upcoming full-frame Pentax DSLR: Digital Photography Review

**filoxophy** · 09-28-2015, 11:09 AM

...

Anyone care to go down this road?

All interchangeable lenses are labeled with their true focal lengths, period. (Some superzooms I've seen with "35mm Equivalent" FLs on the barrel.)

The field of view will change, however, depending on which lens is matched with which camera. That's all there is to it.

So yes, a 16-50ish lens on an APSC camera will look similarly to this 24-70 on FF.

Also yes, this 24-70 on APSC will look similar to 35-105 on FF.

Claudiu · 09-28-2015, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by Newtophotos

Can I ask for clarification on two points:

1. Which ever sensor size a lens is designed for is what the focal length is stated as. The kit len is 18-55mm on APS-C, this 24-70mm is that on full frame.
2. This lens is 24-70mm on a full frame sensor. On the announcement page on the pentaxforums homepage I asked if this lens is equivalent to 16-46.67 on APS-C. Dpreview lists it as 37-107mm on APS-C. Is dpreview correct? Making a diagram it seems dpreview is correct.

Ricoh announces 24-70mm F2.8 for upcoming full-frame Pentax DSLR: Digital Photography Review

24-70 on FX = 24/1,5 - 70/1,5 = 16-46,67 on DX; so Dprewiew are wrong.

BrianR · 09-28-2015, 11:22 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Claudiu

24-70 on FX = 24/1,5 - 70/1,5 = 16-46,67 on DX; so Dprewiew are wrong.

Nope, they're just taking a different point of view.

Mount this 24-70mm on an APS-C camera and it will have the same field of view as a 37-107mm mounted on a FF camera. (<-dpreview says this, though their wording is sloppy)

Mount this 24-70mm on a FF camera and it will have the same field of view as a 16-47mm mounted on an APS-C camera. (<-you're saying this, I guess)

Chose whichever format you like as a reference.

Parallax · 09-28-2015, 11:26 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Newtophotos

1. Which ever sensor size a lens is designed for is what the focal length is stated as.

No. The focal length is the focal length. It is the physical properties of the lens and has nothing to do with the camera it will be used on.

Claudiu · 09-28-2015, 11:30 AM

Originally posted by BrianR

Nope, they're just taking a different point of view.

Mount this 24-70mm on an APS-C camera and it will have the same field of view as a 37-107mm mounted on a FF camera. (<-dpreview says this, though their wording is sloppy)

Mount this 24-70mm on a FF camera and it will have the same field of view as a 16-47mm mounted on an APS-C camera. (<-you're saying this, I guess)

Chose whichever format you like as a reference.

Yes, you're right; both are valid ... I read after the announce at dpreview.

Nicolas06 · 09-28-2015, 12:17 PM

Originally posted by Parallax

No. The focal length is the focal length. It is the physical properties of the lens and has nothing to do with the camera it will be used on.

Except if there already a booster or a TC... Or except if the lense is not focussed to infinite... Also the focal length is very conventionnal thing as many lenses don't have the actual physical length that match the actual focal length.

While I agree with you, all this thing is confusing because we should speak in the end of angle of view, that make much more sense in term of photography... but for some reason the focal length in particular the one that give the equivalent angle of view on a 24x36 camera is used to describe the actual framing a lense give.

Parallax · 09-28-2015, 12:40 PM

Originally posted by Nicolas06

Except if there already a booster or a TC... Or except if the lense is not focussed to infinite...

Putting a TC on a lens does not change the lens itself any more than putting a different camera behind it changes the physical properties of the lens.
Yes, the FL changes with focus. Again, a physical property of the lens. Nothing to do with the size receptor that the image is projected onto.
You are right that the actual FL of a lens is rarely exactly what is marked on the barrel. A 50mm may only be an actual 47mm; but guess what? If it's an actual 47mm when you put it on an ME Super, it's still 47mm when you take it off of that and put it on a K-3.
The simple, incontrovertible fact is that a Xmm lens is a Xmm lens whether you put it on 24x36, APS-c, medium format, or use it for a paperweight.

Edgar_in_Indy · 09-28-2015, 01:09 PM

Originally posted by monochrome

Dude. Warranties cost money.

And short warranties can cost sales. Especially when coupled with the perception that the brand in question has reliability problems.

I don't know if it's possible to measure sales that were lost and never happened, but Pentax lost a few thousand dollars in potential from this Pentax user. Pentax's short warranty and poor reputation for reliability and service are why all of my lenses are Sigma and Tamron. I bought a few of the less expensive Pentax lenses in the beginning, but it didn't take long to hear about the SDM problems and the crappy customer service, so once I started spending serious money on lenses I took my money elsewhere.

Originally posted by monochrome

Per Consumer Reports, 4% - 8% of cameras and lenses have a failure during their expected lifetimes. Should every single buyer of this lens, which has a hypersonic ring motor (read: 'USD') rather than a geared micromotor (read: 'SDM'), pay insurance for something they're 92% - 96% unlikely to use?

If that's the industry average, then I would have to believe the instance of failure was much higher for certain SDM lenses.

Originally posted by monochrome

If you're that worried about it buy the Tamron version.

That's excellent advise and I completely agree with you, but will Tamron be selling a K-mount version? That would be good news, but I thought that they usually didn't do that when there is an OEM version of the same lens.

Kunzite · 09-28-2015, 01:17 PM

Strange. Tamron and Sigma have the same 2 years warranty as Pentax

Nicolas06 · 09-28-2015, 01:31 PM

Originally posted by IchabodCrane

Of course warranties cost money so why not have a 30 day warranty? They could charge less and/or put the savings into more developments.

Warranties are competitive features of an offering. The automotive industry in the USA didn't go from 12 month to 36 month (or more) warranties because they are just a bunch on nice guys doing nice things. They did it because someone else did and they wanted to remain competitive. There's no reason the camera industry is different.

I think that's because it would be ilegal in most countries.

09-28-2015, 12:40 PM	#267
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by Nicolas06 Except if there already a booster or a TC... Or except if the lense is not focussed to infinite... Putting a TC on a lens does not change the lens itself any more than putting a different camera behind it changes the physical properties of the lens. Yes, the FL changes with focus. Again, a physical property of the lens. Nothing to do with the size receptor that the image is projected onto. You are right that the actual FL of a lens is rarely exactly what is marked on the barrel. A 50mm may only be an actual 47mm; but guess what? If it's an actual 47mm when you put it on an ME Super, it's still 47mm when you take it off of that and put it on a K-3. The simple, incontrovertible fact is that a Xmm lens is a Xmm lens whether you put it on 24x36, APS-c, medium format, or use it for a paperweight. Last edited by Parallax; 09-28-2015 at 12:47 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
HD Pentax-D FA 24-70mm F2.8 ED SDM WR Announced	PF Staff	Homepage & Official Pentax News	0	09-24-2015 03:00 PM
Lens Tournament: FA 77mm F1.8 Limited vs D FA 100mm F2.8 WR Macro	Adam	Pentax Forums Giveaways	17	10-27-2014 07:19 AM
For Sale - Sold: D-FA 100mm f2.8 Macro WR	Eagle_Friends	Sold Items	6	09-09-2014 10:00 AM
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
New Pentax D FA 100mm F2.8 Macro WR Announced	Zebooka	Pentax News and Rumors	222	01-09-2010 03:51 PM

09-28-2015, 08:23 AM	#256
zan Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2015 Location: Ljubljana-Slovenia Posts: 48	One year is too short. I have bought a brand new Pentax flash AF540FGZ II and not been using much, only 200-300 shots. Hmmm, maybe this was the reason ??? Anyway, after a year and two months the flash has started firing at full power at every shot and making images not just overexposed but burned. The problem was in transistor (IGBT fault). Their warranty should be at least two years.

09-28-2015, 08:54 AM	#257
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251	Originally posted by Rondec Pentax has a year warranty because that's what they can get away with. People still are inclined to buy Pentax (if they own a pentax camera) over Sigma and Tamron, even if the lenses are similar and the off brand lenses have longer warranties. On the list of things people consider when buying gear, warranty length is near the bottom. Originally posted by Na Horuk Still, just one year warranty doesn't really give much confidence, especially if you look at things like SDM failure in the past. This is basically it. If they could lower it further without it looking suspicious, they would. The other brands try to build reputation with longer warranties, saying "hey, yes its third party, yes its cheaper, but we guarantee it will work." And call me a sucker, but I do like to see products with long warranty, because modern business practices are often rather.. poor. Not necessarily with Pentax, but with too many things And then, Canada has a 2 years warranty for those same products ... what goes?

09-28-2015, 09:21 AM	#258
Franc Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Hoevelaken Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,212	Originally posted by zan One year is too short. I have bought a brand new Pentax flash AF540FGZ II and not been using much, only 200-300 shots. Hmmm, maybe this was the reason ??? Anyway, after a year and two months the flash has started firing at full power at every shot and making images not just overexposed but burned. The problem was in transistor (IGBT fault). Their warranty should be at least two years. it is, mandatory 2 years in EU, go back to your dealer and let him fix it.

09-28-2015, 09:44 AM	#259
shakereduced Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2015 Posts: 40	Originally posted by IchabodCrane Agree. If you change the type of glass on those elements, you'd also have to change the optical design along with it and there's no evidence that's been done. Here is a product catalog from Tamron showing designs of all their lenses and descriptions of each element type. Notice that each lens has a listing of symbols showing which features the lens contains. Lenses such as the 28-300 and 18-270 (on page 11) have AD glass. The 24-70, on page 12, does not. Someone mentioned that XR and AD glass could be newer marketing speak for the same element, but the XR elements in the 24-70 Tamron are shown in the front of the lens (and their description makes it sound like they produce different results). The AD element in the Pentax schematic is shown in the middle of the lens. Unless the Pentax schematic is flat out wrong, that's the only credible information we actually have, and that evidence points to the two lenses being different. I would say that right now we have no evidence that it is an exact copy.

09-28-2015, 11:02 AM	#260
Newtophotos Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 439	Can I ask for clarification on two points: 1. Which ever sensor size a lens is designed for is what the focal length is stated as. The kit len is 18-55mm on APS-C, this 24-70mm is that on full frame. 2. This lens is 24-70mm on a full frame sensor. On the announcement page on the pentaxforums homepage I asked if this lens is equivalent to 16-46.67 on APS-C. Dpreview lists it as 37-107mm on APS-C. Is dpreview correct? Making a diagram it seems dpreview is correct. Ricoh announces 24-70mm F2.8 for upcoming full-frame Pentax DSLR: Digital Photography Review

09-28-2015, 11:09 AM	#261
filoxophy Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Albuquerque Posts: 1,132	... Anyone care to go down this road? All interchangeable lenses are labeled with their true focal lengths, period. (Some superzooms I've seen with "35mm Equivalent" FLs on the barrel.) The field of view will change, however, depending on which lens is matched with which camera. That's all there is to it. So yes, a 16-50ish lens on an APSC camera will look similarly to this 24-70 on FF. Also yes, this 24-70 on APSC will look similar to 35-105 on FF.

09-28-2015, 11:13 AM	#262
Claudiu Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Normandy Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59	Originally posted by Newtophotos Can I ask for clarification on two points: 1. Which ever sensor size a lens is designed for is what the focal length is stated as. The kit len is 18-55mm on APS-C, this 24-70mm is that on full frame. 2. This lens is 24-70mm on a full frame sensor. On the announcement page on the pentaxforums homepage I asked if this lens is equivalent to 16-46.67 on APS-C. Dpreview lists it as 37-107mm on APS-C. Is dpreview correct? Making a diagram it seems dpreview is correct. Ricoh announces 24-70mm F2.8 for upcoming full-frame Pentax DSLR: Digital Photography Review 24-70 on FX = 24/1,5 - 70/1,5 = 16-46,67 on DX; so Dprewiew are wrong.

09-28-2015, 11:22 AM - 1 Like	#263
BrianR Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,332	Originally posted by Claudiu 24-70 on FX = 24/1,5 - 70/1,5 = 16-46,67 on DX; so Dprewiew are wrong. Nope, they're just taking a different point of view. Mount this 24-70mm on an APS-C camera and it will have the same field of view as a 37-107mm mounted on a FF camera. (<-dpreview says this, though their wording is sloppy) Mount this 24-70mm on a FF camera and it will have the same field of view as a 16-47mm mounted on an APS-C camera. (<-you're saying this, I guess) Chose whichever format you like as a reference.

09-28-2015, 11:26 AM - 1 Like	#264
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by Newtophotos 1. Which ever sensor size a lens is designed for is what the focal length is stated as. No. The focal length is the focal length. It is the physical properties of the lens and has nothing to do with the camera it will be used on.

09-28-2015, 11:30 AM	#265
Claudiu Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2015 Location: Normandy Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59	Originally posted by BrianR Nope, they're just taking a different point of view. Mount this 24-70mm on an APS-C camera and it will have the same field of view as a 37-107mm mounted on a FF camera. (<-dpreview says this, though their wording is sloppy) Mount this 24-70mm on a FF camera and it will have the same field of view as a 16-47mm mounted on an APS-C camera. (<-you're saying this, I guess) Chose whichever format you like as a reference. Yes, you're right; both are valid ... I read after the announce at dpreview.

09-28-2015, 12:17 PM	#266
Nicolas06 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 4,854	Originally posted by Parallax No. The focal length is the focal length. It is the physical properties of the lens and has nothing to do with the camera it will be used on. Except if there already a booster or a TC... Or except if the lense is not focussed to infinite... Also the focal length is very conventionnal thing as many lenses don't have the actual physical length that match the actual focal length. While I agree with you, all this thing is confusing because we should speak in the end of angle of view, that make much more sense in term of photography... but for some reason the focal length in particular the one that give the equivalent angle of view on a 24x36 camera is used to describe the actual framing a lense give.

09-28-2015, 01:09 PM	#268
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685	Originally posted by monochrome Dude. Warranties cost money. And short warranties can cost sales. Especially when coupled with the perception that the brand in question has reliability problems. I don't know if it's possible to measure sales that were lost and never happened, but Pentax lost a few thousand dollars in potential from this Pentax user. Pentax's short warranty and poor reputation for reliability and service are why all of my lenses are Sigma and Tamron. I bought a few of the less expensive Pentax lenses in the beginning, but it didn't take long to hear about the SDM problems and the crappy customer service, so once I started spending serious money on lenses I took my money elsewhere. Originally posted by monochrome Per Consumer Reports, 4% - 8% of cameras and lenses have a failure during their expected lifetimes. Should every single buyer of this lens, which has a hypersonic ring motor (read: 'USD') rather than a geared micromotor (read: 'SDM'), pay insurance for something they're 92% - 96% unlikely to use? If that's the industry average, then I would have to believe the instance of failure was much higher for certain SDM lenses. Originally posted by monochrome If you're that worried about it buy the Tamron version. That's excellent advise and I completely agree with you, but will Tamron be selling a K-mount version? That would be good news, but I thought that they usually didn't do that when there is an OEM version of the same lens.

09-28-2015, 01:17 PM	#269
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Strange. Tamron and Sigma have the same 2 years warranty as Pentax

09-28-2015, 01:31 PM	#270
Nicolas06 Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 4,854	Originally posted by IchabodCrane Of course warranties cost money so why not have a 30 day warranty? They could charge less and/or put the savings into more developments. Warranties are competitive features of an offering. The automotive industry in the USA didn't go from 12 month to 36 month (or more) warranties because they are just a bunch on nice guys doing nice things. They did it because someone else did and they wanted to remain competitive. There's no reason the camera industry is different. I think that's because it would be ilegal in most countries.