[cali92rs]

Weren't the 150-450 and DA 20-40mm also Ricoh lenses?

[jatrax]

Weren't the 150-450 and DA 20-40mm also Ricoh lenses?

I'm not sure how to define that at this point. I am sure there were a lot of projects in various stages. Some with work done on them, some just at the concept stage. Where do we say this is completely a Ricoh project?

I would think at this point even if something was in the concept stage when Ricoh took over that it would be considered a Ricoh project. If I had a vote I would say both the 150-450 and 20-40 were "on paper" as concepts. But a concept is a long way from a finished, shipped design. I would find it surprising that Pentax did not have a 70-200 concept in the works for a long time. By concept I mean that on their internal project list was a spot that included a 70-200 as a future need.

One thing I see different, and maybe it is nothing, but new lenses have the focus and zoom rings reversed. Whose idea was that? And why was it done? I think the 18-135 was the first with this style, then the 16-85 and now the 150-450 and 24-70. And I think the 70-200 has that configuration as well.

[monochrome]

One thing I see different, and maybe it is nothing, but new lenses have the focus and zoom rings reversed. Whose idea was that? And why was it done? I think the 18-135 was the first with this style, then the 16-85 and now the 150-450 and 24-70. And I think the 70-200 has that configuration as well.

The first three are DC - and the 24-70 is SDM (which is supposed to be just a designation - it's just a bigger ring motor). I wonder if that has something to do with it?

[jatrax]

The first three are DC - and the 24-70 is SDM (which is supposed to be just a designation - it's just a bigger ring motor). I wonder if that has something to do with it?

I don't know, maybe. There is an advantage to putting the zoom ring out front as it is used more than the focus ring on AF zooms. But it is clearly a different design than was used in the past. Was it something RIcoh brought to the table? Or just a change that was already in place? It seems the 18-135 was released in 2010 so that I would think would eliminate it being a Ricoh design, so there goes that theory

[zapp]

For all the wait ... in lens image stabilization in combination with sensor shake reduction would be nice in the new 70-200. I played with the SDM 300 + 1.4 TC today and thought that long lenses really benefit from in lens stabilization - less shake in viewfinder and better AF tracking. Looking later at the new Olympus 300 mm lens that can combine lens and in-body image stabilization new ideas fall into place. It is not either/or anymore. For long lenses both make sense. A monopod helps for now ;-)

[redrockcoulee]

The advantage of having a FF is that the lenses targeted to FF can also be used on APS-C. Those lenses are available for use in two separate markets. But there is still IMHO a need for a good line of APS-C dedicated lenses. Pentax (arguably) has one of the better line ups of dedicated APS-C glass and I see no reason they would not continue and even strengthen that line. We already have 10-17, 12-24, 18-135, 16-85, *16-50 and *50-135. Plus the DA Limiteds. I think all of those (except the recent 18-135 & 16-85 and Limiteds) are in need of updates and if I remember correctly a replacement for the 12-24ish is on the lens map. If they re-do the *16-50 and *50-135 in a year or so and re-do the 12-24 I don't know what else would be needed in dedicated APS-C.

The rest of the primes: 20, 24, 28, 35, 50, 85, 135, 200, 300 would also be FF lenses. The 15-30, 24-70, 70-200, 150-450 would also be dual purpose lenses. There are also the FA Limiteds which many expect to be updated like the DA Limiteds were. Add at some point down the road a 300 f/2.8, a 400 f/4 and a 600 f/4 and you have a fairly good catalog of glass. Not everything, but surely enough to keep most people broke. And then we can start to wish for more exotic things like 200mm macro and tilt/shift lenses.

Although I am on record here as saying I have no interest in the FF and I am also, when I include my wife's lenses, not in either the need or even the want of new lenses, I do agree that Pentax does have to upgrade the * zoom lenses with the new coatings and a better more dependable AF motor. I have no interest in either of those lenses but I do want to see Penatx APS-C continue well into the future along side the FF offerings. Any prime beyond 35mm or even 28 mm should be only FF as the size difference is not that great on them, unless Pentax wanted to start making very fast lenses that also smaller than FF but that would be an entirely different direction and not really expected.

There is a need for zoom lenses wider than the 20-40 and smaller than the 105-30 for one to be able to buy new.

I think that by med 2017 some on the FF bandwagon are going to be complaining about running out of money and not running out of LBA of new lenses. I am sure they hope so too.

[Weevil]

I had pre ordered the DFA 70-200 in October, but I finally cancelled my DFA 70-200mm pre-order and changed my mind for the DFA 24-70...
I am thinking I could live with the 60-250mm in the meantime, or get a used Tamron or Sigma for about 1/3 the price...


I just received it today...
It will replace my DA*16-50. The range will be completed with the DA15LTD in the meantime the FF is coming....

Here is my new toy

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

---

Last edited by Weevil; 01-08-2016 at 09:27 PM.

[kooks]

I had pre ordered the DFA 70-200 in October, but I finally cancelled my DFA 70-200mm pre-order and changed my mind for the DFA 24-70...
I am thinking I could live with the 60-250mm in the meantime, or get a used Tamron or Sigma for about 1/3 the price...


I just received it today...
It will replace my DA*16-50. The range will be completed with the DA15LTD in the meantime the FF is coming....

Here is my new toy

I got my 24-70 last week and loooooove it so far. great great lens. Enjoy it!!

[jatrax]

It will replace my DA*16-50. The range will be completed with the DA15LTD in the meantime the FF is coming....

I got my 24-70 last week and loooooove it so far. great great lens. Enjoy it!!

Any general comments on size versus the 16-50? I know the specs, just curious how it balances and if you notice the increase weight / size over the 16-50?

[Digitalis]

So far, Canon and Nikon have failed to make FF models as small and ergonomically sound as a K-3.

So far, Pentax has failed to make a full format DSLR with an integrated vertical grip, or an AF module that is has the same degree of customization and precision as the Canon 1 series.

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

So far, Pentax has failed to make a full format DSLR with an integrated vertical grip

That's OK by me. I had a D3 once, but that thing was just too big and heavy.

[Weevil]

Any general comments on size versus the 16-50? I know the specs, just curious how it balances and if you notice the increase weight / size over the 16-50?

Without the grip, it doesn't balance well... this tank is quite heavy compared to the 16-50, whereas the 16-50 can live without the grip...

[Rondec]

Any general comments on size versus the 16-50? I know the specs, just curious how it balances and if you notice the increase weight / size over the 16-50?

It is a lot bigger than the 16-50, you can definitely feel the difference on the camera.

(a couple of comparison shots)





(sorry to steer the thread away from initial subject).

I don't know the reason for the zoom/focus ring reversal on newer lenses, but the 24-70 is a Tamron design and so Pentax used what was there.

[jatrax]

I don't know the reason for the zoom/focus ring reversal on newer lenses, but the 24-70 is a Tamron design and so Pentax used what was there.

That was my initial thought, but AFAIK all recent Pentax glass starting with the 18-135 have had the focus / zoom rings reversed. 18-135, 6-85, 150-450.

Also curious about the hood. I assume it is designed for FF, but on APS-C does the hood work correctly? I thought someone (maybe Sigma) supplied two hoods with some lenses, one for FF, one for APS-C.

[kooks]

Also curious about the hood. I assume it is designed for FF, but on APS-C does the hood work correctly? I thought someone (maybe Sigma) supplied two hoods with some lenses, one for FF, one for APS-C.

In fact the Sigma ( at least the 85mm f1.4 ) comes with an extension hood to use with APS-C cameras. As far as this 24-70 dont really know if it works the way it is supposed to with an APS-C, I think that there's no review about that.