Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-28-2015, 08:11 AM   #31
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,620
I guess I'll be more than happy with my primes on the FF. For zoom I have a FA 28-70 F4 and a 28-105 F4-5.6 and a manual A 35-105 F3.5. and a Tamron 70-300. Not worrying about zooms here.

09-28-2015, 08:11 AM   #32
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 2,951
Hum, i don't really get your last excuse speculation Greg
09-28-2015, 08:54 AM   #33
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,772
QuoteQuote:
Some of us would like to see a Pentax equivalent to that 24-120 Nikkor or the Canon 24-105 L.
This line of thinking is fraught with danger. Even if Pentax produced a 24-120 ƒ4, there's no guarantee you'd like it. If you're hoping Pentax is going to do everything Nikkor and canon did, it's simply not going to happen.

If you really like those lenses, why not just buy it and use it? That would b my advice. Thinking "I want Pentax to produce the lens i want." That's simply not a productive use of time.

But you do raise an interesting point, my DA*60-250, (why don't canon and Nikkor make one of those, I wish they would, it's one of my favourite lenses) the front element is 67mm, on my Vivitar M 135 is ƒ2.8 and 55 mm. I could probably have a 2.4 70 with that size of from element. What is this thing with constant aperture, and why is it a good thing. If I'm carrying enough glass to give me 60mm ƒ2.4, why shouldn't I have that? These lenses are a rip-off. Essentially they've given you the smallest possible aperture available to the longest focal length. How would giving me 60 ƒ2.4 to 250 ƒ4, not be better than that, I don't get it personally. Why is that a good thing? At least with my 18-135 I get ƒ3.5 at the wide end and 5.6 at the long end, I'm using the full capacity of the glass I paid for.

Last edited by normhead; 09-28-2015 at 09:07 AM.
09-28-2015, 09:03 AM   #34
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: bev
Posts: 175
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
The whole 17-70 APS-C/24-105 FF range is very useful for events and walkabout shooting. I particularly look forward to shooting my A 35-105 f3.5 on Pentax FF.
That's the same as the 24-90 on crop sensor, which exists. Just, fyi.

Edit - in terms of FOV, not aperature or format, of course. Colors are really nice on it though, too!

09-28-2015, 09:06 AM   #35
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,416
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
This line of thinking is fraught with danger. Even if Pentax produced a 24-120 4, there's no guarantee you'd like it. If you're hoping Pentax is going to do everything Nikkor and canon did, it's simply not going to happen.

If you really like those lenses, why not just buy it and use it? That would b my advice. Thinking "I want Pentax to produce the lens i want." That's simply not a productive use of time.
Norm, if you would check the Pentax road map you would see that the 24-104mm is there.

Pentax is going to do most of the things that Canon and Nikon are doing. Canon and Nikon are trying to make cameras and lenses that people want to buy, and Ricoh happens to be trying to do the same thing. So, yes. it is going to happen. Ricoh is just copying what Canon and Nikon are doing. They will make the lens for the same reason Sigma makes a 24-104mm. They will make the lens because it will sell well and make them money.
09-28-2015, 09:13 AM   #36
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,426
You mean the 28-105-ish?
09-28-2015, 09:14 AM   #37
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,843
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Norm, if you would check the Pentax road map you would see that the 24-104mm is there.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite:
You mean the 28-105-ish?
The "mid twenties to somewhere just north of a hundred" is there - at least outside of Ricoh's development labs, the exact focal lengths are for the time being the province of the pixel-peepers and debates about margins of error.
09-29-2015, 12:12 AM - 2 Likes   #38
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
28-135/3.5-5.6
Great, a consumer level slow as hell zoom..

09-29-2015, 03:41 AM   #39
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 291
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Great, a consumer level slow as hell zoom..
Actually it is 24-135 or 28-105 depending on which plugin are you using
If Firefox it is 24-135, in Chrome it is 28-105.
Anyway 28-135 is not an option.
Regarding aperture I am not expecting to be that slow, but even in that case it is not so terrible. Pros will have 24-70 f/2.8.
My expectations for appertures are in case of 24-135 to be in 3.5-4.5 range and in case of 28-105 could be constant aperture of f/4.
That is reasonable compromise and also excellent kit lens for next cheaper ff body.
28-105 f/2.8 could be possible but I think that Ricoh while planning that lens had consumer population in their mind.
24-135 f/2.8 is just a theory because it will be a huge and heavy monster. Probably bigger and heavier than D-FA 70-200 f/2.8.
09-29-2015, 03:57 AM   #40
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,620
QuoteOriginally posted by banep Quote
Actually it is 24-135 or 28-105 depending on which plugin are you using
If Firefox it is 24-135, in Chrome it is 28-105.
Anyway 28-135 is not an option.
Regarding aperture I am not expecting to be that slow, but even in that case it is not so terrible. Pros will have 24-70 f/2.8.
My expectations for appertures are in case of 24-135 to be in 3.5-4.5 range and in case of 28-105 could be constant aperture of f/4.
That is reasonable compromise and also excellent kit lens for next cheaper ff body.
28-105 f/2.8 could be possible but I think that Ricoh while planning that lens had consumer population in their mind.
24-135 f/2.8 is just a theory because it will be a huge and heavy monster. Probably bigger and heavier than D-FA 70-200 f/2.8.
only firefox shows a longer range. Chrome doesn't but acrobat or photoshop also don't. Something about the rendering of the gradient I think.

top acrobat, bottom firefox:

Last edited by D1N0; 09-29-2015 at 04:03 AM.
09-29-2015, 04:05 AM   #41
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
QuoteOriginally posted by banep Quote
24-135 f/2.8
A lens like that would be the same diameter and roughly half the length of the 150-450mm f/4.5-5.6

Ideally it will be a constant 24~120mm F/4

Last edited by Digitalis; 09-29-2015 at 04:18 AM.
09-29-2015, 04:08 AM   #42
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 178
QuoteOriginally posted by D1N0 Quote
only firefox shows a longer range. Chrome doesn't but acrobat or photoshop also don't. Something about the rendering of the gradient I think.
Oh my ... now you have to establish what software they use over in Japan! Sorry guys, don't want to offend or anything - I suppose we all have our quirks - but can't you see this is getting out of control when you are down to pixel peeping charts in different browsers to determine if a future lens might be 5 mm longer or not :-)
09-29-2015, 04:09 AM   #43
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,620
When Pentax persists in emulating Canonikon it will be a 24-105/120/135) Wide angle is more important than tele range. maybe 3.5 4.5 maybe F4 constant. @H. Sapiens. 24 or 28 and whether it has a constant aperture or not will determine whether it is a Canonikon competitor or a budget friendlier consumer lens. I
09-29-2015, 04:42 AM   #44
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,416
QuoteOriginally posted by D1N0 Quote
When Pentax persists in emulating Canonikon it will be a 24-105/120/135) Wide angle is more important than tele range. maybe 3.5 4.5 maybe F4 constant. @H. Sapiens. 24 or 28 and whether it has a constant aperture or not will determine whether it is a Canonikon competitor or a budget friendlier consumer lens. I
What if they simply have Sigma rebadge the 24-105 F/4 ART lens. The Sigma 24-105mm ART was out of stock for all mounts earlier this year and rumor was Sigma had discontinued it, but what if it was out of stock because Sigma was making a run of rebadged K-mount lenses.
09-29-2015, 04:42 AM   #45
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,781
Make it a 24-90mm f/2.8-4, call it Vario-Elmarit-SL 1:2.8-4/24-90 Asph. and announce it on October 20th!
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!
addition, lens, lens roadmap, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, portrait, production, sales, time, version, wierd
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-mount lens roadmap updated Daikokuya Pentax News and Rumors 571 09-28-2015 03:13 AM
Updated Fuji lens roadmap filoxophy Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 8 07-31-2014 04:42 AM
Updated Lens Roadmap Phil A Pentax Q 2 06-25-2013 01:53 PM
Pentax Q Lens roadmap updated... wanderography Pentax News and Rumors 23 10-03-2012 03:35 AM
Updated roadmap for 645 mount ogl Pentax Medium Format 9 09-26-2012 12:00 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:24 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