Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-27-2016, 03:53 PM   #391
Imp
Pentaxian
Imp's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Washington, DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,323
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Maybe the Tamron 85mm/f1.4 with HD coating and WR will get a Pentax name. http://photorumors.com/2016/01/24/new-patents-tamron-sp-85mm-f1-4-di-vc-usd-...per-35-lenses/
I feel that's wishful thinking, at least that it's a Tamron lens. I'd expect a patent is placed long before the item is in production. But I don't really know... anyone here than can enlighten me on when patents are placed in the entire conception to shelf model timeline?

01-27-2016, 03:56 PM   #392
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,836
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Maybe the Tamron 85mm/f1.4 with HD coating and WR will get a Pentax name.

http://photorumors.com/2016/01/24/new-patents-tamron-sp-85mm-f1-4-di-vc-usd-...per-35-lenses/
Save that the lens's optical stabilisation wouldn't be of much use with a Pentax DSLR.

---------- Post added 01-27-2016 at 11:58 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Imp Quote
I feel that's wishful thinking, at least that it's a Tamron lens. I'd expect a patent is placed long before the item is in production. But I don't really know... anyone here than can enlighten me on when patents are placed in the entire conception to shelf model timeline?
The precedent Tamron patent for a stabilised 85mm, a f/1.8 this one, materialised shortly thereafter as... Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8.
01-27-2016, 05:28 PM   #393
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,429
QuoteOriginally posted by Imp Quote
Pentax has got three kit FA lenses already: not in production, of course, but they've got the formulas. How hard would it be to update them?
The 3.2-4.5 is the best of those but IMHO not good enough. Yes they have the formulas, assuming they do not contain lead or other things now banned. But if they can turn out a 18-135 and a 16-85 there is no reason they cannot design a new (and much better) kit lens for the FF.

I hope Kenspo is correct and the new glass (including the kit) are top notch. A 24-105 f/4 would be just fine provided the IQ was very, very good. If it's a $900 lens that's fine too. I have no need of a cheap, slow 'kit' lens on an expensive FF camera. I also have no need of a fast, heavy, expensive 70-200 f/2.8 lens. I'm glad the 70-200 f/2.8 is there, many do need that. But not everyone.

Last edited by jatrax; 01-27-2016 at 06:05 PM.
01-27-2016, 05:52 PM   #394
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 884
Original Poster
Film era is different. Camera body was relatively dirty cheap so the cheap FF kit lenses did make sense..

01-27-2016, 06:18 PM   #395
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Stratford, CT
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 655
QuoteOriginally posted by btnapa Quote
It was such a short time that I got to try the camera that I did not try that feature. I am not sure if it was there or not. I should have touched the back screen to check it out. But then again, I should have checked out a lot of other things too. Literally a few minutes with the camera was not long enough. Sorry no intel there.
So you flipped the screen around and twisted it but didn't touch the surface?
01-27-2016, 06:24 PM   #396
mee
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,463
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
The 3.2-4.5 is the best of those but IMHO not good enough. Yes they have the formulas, assuming they do not contain lead or other things now banned. But if they can turn out a 18-135 and a 16-85 there is no reason they cannot design a new (and much better) kit lens for the FF.

I hope Kenspo is correct and the new glass (including the kit) are top notch. A 24-105 f/4 would be just fine provided the IQ was very, very good. If it's a $900 lens that's fine too. I have no need of a cheap, slow 'kit' lens on an expensive FF camera. I also have no need of a fast, heavy, expensive 70-200 f/2.8 lens. I'm glad the 70-200 f/2.8 is there, many do need that. But not everyone.
There is no 24-105 f/4 on the lens pdf

There is a 28-105mm that is probably going to be the cheapy kit variable aperture lens though.

That is to say, I wouldn't hold my breath on a better kit lens just because they CAN.
01-27-2016, 07:17 PM - 1 Like   #397
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,660
No need for kit lens disdain. Sometimes they can be decent, and they have a role.

Pentax has made some very satisfactory ones in the past, I'm sure they can do it again.

A 24-105 f4 would be my preferred K-1 kit lens, but if it ends up as a $900+ lens and weighing almost 1 kg (eg like the Sigma A 24-105 f4), a cheaper and lighter alternative might still make sense for many people sometimes, even pros.
01-27-2016, 08:17 PM   #398
mee
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,463
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
No need for kit lens disdain. Sometimes they can be decent, and they have a role.

Pentax has made some very satisfactory ones in the past, I'm sure they can do it again.

A 24-105 f4 would be my preferred K-1 kit lens, but if it ends up as a $900+ lens and weighing almost 1 kg (eg like the Sigma A 24-105 f4), a cheaper and lighter alternative might still make sense for many people sometimes, even pros.
IF? Where did you learn there was a 24-105 f/4 in the works for K mount? That would be great but there is a 24-70 f/2.8 and there will be a 28-105 f/variable by Pentax. And the only 3rd party I know that makes one is Sigma and they don't make it in K mount.. plus I have not heard any news of them coming 'back' to supporting Pentax.

A bigger question I have is.. why would anyone pair such a fine camera body with such a crappy lens as the kit zoom? If one is spending 2 grand on the flagship camera body, it seems crazy to match it with poor optics..

01-27-2016, 09:18 PM   #399
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,660
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
If one is spending 2 grand on the flagship camera body, it seems crazy to match it with poor optics..
One shouldn't presume kit lens = poor optics. Often they may have more plastic, be less durable, be 1 stop slower, have no weather sealing etc, hence not be 'pro' grade tools, but optically they may be OK.

If those design compromises mean the lens is smaller and lighter, even pros sometimes like small and light.
01-27-2016, 09:42 PM   #400
mee
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,463
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
One shouldn't presume kit lens = poor optics. Often they may have more plastic, be less durable, be 1 stop slower, have no weather sealing etc, hence not be 'pro' grade tools, but optically they may be OK.

If those design compromises mean the lens is smaller and lighter, even pros sometimes like small and light.
Judging from all previous results.. it means just that.. poor optics. The goal is to get us to buy better lenses. Otherwise we'd all never upgrade from the crappy kit. Go look at the reviews, don't take my word for it.
01-27-2016, 10:35 PM   #401
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,660
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
Go look at the reviews, don't take my word for it.
True confessions time: my kit lens experience has generally been positive. My two Pentax 18-55 kit lenses (AL II and DAL) are great (not so much the 18-55 WR, which I also have). The cheapest and most plasticky of them (the DAL) almost magically never seems to take a bad photo when mounted on the K-x.

I also have two Sony NEX lenses that came as kit (SEL 18-55 OSS and the 16-50 PZ pancake). The 18-55 is entirely a respectable performer. Other kit lenses that I have used on other systems include 50mm f2 and f1.8 primes, and they were fine optically too.

Kit-lens pride, world-wide.
01-27-2016, 10:46 PM   #402
mee
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,463
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
True confessions time: my kit lens experience has generally been positive. My two Pentax 18-55 kit lenses (AL II and DAL) are great (not so much the 18-55 WR, which I also have). The cheapest and most plasticky of them (the DAL) almost magically never seems to take a bad photo when mounted on the K-x.

I also have two Sony NEX lenses that came as kit (SEL 18-55 OSS and the 16-50 PZ pancake). The 18-55 is entirely a respectable performer. Other kit lenses that I have used include 50mm f2 and f1.8 primes, and they were fine optically too.

Kit-lens pride, world-wide.
I thought we were speaking of full frame kit lenses since we are in a full frame (FX) thread?

That said, even on DX, I found the several 18-55mm kit lenses to only be acceptable. Stopped down they were somewhat improved. But any lens at say f/8 should look rather decent so that isn't saying much. Really, there is a reason they can offer that lens for so cheap with the camera body. It is like a doughnut spare tire. It is only meant to get you so far until you can get to a service station to get a serious tire.

I don't want just optically 'fine' lenses. I want great/fantastic. 'Fair to middling' doesn't excite me or generate desire for me to even bother capturing images with these camera systems. Especially if I'm paying top dollar for a body in which to capture images with said lenses... Otherwise I'd just shoot with a smartphone or small P+S/compact.
01-27-2016, 10:58 PM   #403
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 2,980
I'd very much prefer Limited prime updates as well as already projected 15-30mm wide zoom for the near future, if possible simultaneously with K-1's launch !

With DFA 24-70mm and DFA*70-200, we should already have the best-in-class optics for general purpose.

Cheap zoom would be probably welcome with entry-level full-frame, 1 or 2 years from now i guess.
01-27-2016, 11:42 PM   #404
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,660
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
'Fair to middling' doesn't excite me or generate desire for me to even bother capturing images with these camera systems. Especially if I'm paying top dollar for a body in which to capture images with said lenses.
No basic argument from me on this point. One always wants the best image performance, particularly the higher up the ladder of experience and spend we move.

But extra lens cost doesn't always equal extra optical quality, as many of the lens test sites reveal.

Plus quite often we choose lenses not because they are premium optics that are weather-proof, sharp across the frame, and have no distortion or vignetting, but for their other charms, 'personality' or features. Hence the great interest in the Pentax FF from people with older Pentax glass.
01-28-2016, 03:15 AM   #405
Forum Member
iudex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 52
There is one strong argument for a decent kit zoom and one similarily strong argument against it.
1. Itīs fullframe, the flagship of Ricoj portfolio (645Z aside), with high resolution and high pricetag, so it is obvious a potential customer does not want to put a crappy kit zoom on a high-end 2000+ USD fullframe. So the kit zoom should be optically decent and not too slow, something like 24-105/4 (many buyers would keep such lens). Itīs also a matter of prestige and another reason to choose K-1 over Canon/Nikon counterparts with crappy kit zooms.
2. If the kit zoom is decent, many buyers would keep it (look at Fuji and their very decent kit zoom 18-55/2,8-4). So Ricoh wouldnīt sell more expensive lenses like the 24-70 and 70-200. So it is economical to make a cheap slow kit lens, forcing the buyers to make another purchase and earn more money.
I guess the economical point of view prevails. ;-)
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!
25th 2016 cp, alive, camera, countdown, countdown to feb, coverage, cp, days, features, feb 25th, ff, flash, imo, matter, music, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, people, post, screen, shift, smartphone, thread, time, upload, vf, youtube
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New APSC Pentax by early 2016, using Sony A7000 sensor? falconeye Pentax News and Rumors 857 03-24-2016 08:45 PM
Ricoh Imaging is not doomed (or: Ricoh Financial Results Q1 2016) Kunzite Pentax News and Rumors 69 10-24-2015 10:31 AM
Pentax FF spring 2016 Daikokuya Pentax News and Rumors 971 10-14-2015 06:31 PM
2016 spring debut hansenn Pentax Full Frame 12 09-25-2015 08:05 AM
Photokina 2016 - FF RonHendriks1966 Pentax Full Frame 62 02-04-2015 10:43 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:07 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