[Rondec]

Kenspo this looks like you are leaving us? I hope I misunderstood

I think there are some "understood" words. "If you're not happy with Pentax, then goodbye, Canon is over there..."

[davidsladek]

Rondec, thank you, that's the meaning I was hoping for

[reh321]

While your suggestion may work on the long end lenses, it does not work on the wide angle lenses. For APS-C cameras 24mm is not considered wide angle whereas 15mm is.

I have a Sigma 10-20mm lens for my K-30. I also have Pentax 18-55mm, 18-135mm and 55-300mm lenses; of course, there are many more I could choose from. My point is that we who have APS-C cameras have at least one lens for each focal length. We can use the new ones if we are willing to pay for them, but we don't have any immediate needs.

[thibs]

While your suggestion may work on the long end lenses, it does not work on the wide angle lenses. For APS-C cameras 24mm is not considered wide angle whereas 15mm is.

On theory you're right.
In practice, aps range is already covered so it is a non issue except a replacement here and there.

I don't think Ricoh will kill all aps lenses because FF ones come.

[Uluru]

On theory you're right.
In practice, aps range is already covered so it is a non issue except a replacement here and there.

I don't think Ricoh will kill all aps lenses because FF ones come.

If they are smart (to which I seriously doubt considering consecutive FF blunders and inability to design a proper and usable 70-210, K-S1, K-01, etc.), they will issue lenses that could be used equally well on crop, and on 135 format. Say modern 24mm lens and 35mm lens for 135 format, which can be used well on crop, and which users begged for years. Instead they gave us 20-40 DA zoom for crop — waste of time, if they planned 135 camera. Which is a fine lens, but not prime, and no, users did NOT ask for it, and now they need to make those primes again..

[filoxophy]

If they are smart (to which I seriously doubt considering consecutive FF blunders and inability to design a proper and usable 70-210, K-S1, K-01, etc.), they will issue lenses that could be used equally well on crop, and on 135 format. Say modern 24mm lens and 35mm lens for 135 format, which can be used well on crop, and which users begged for years. Instead they gave us 20-40 DA zoom for crop — waste of time, if they planned 135 camera. Which is a fine lens, but not prime, and no, users did NOT ask for it, and now they need to make those primes again..

Sigh...good old Uluru.

[reytor]

Sure the DFA lenses can be used with APS-C cameras and normally even without visible vigneting.
The only problem I can see, is that those are/will not APS-C optimized ==> bigger and heavier than needed.

[jatrax]

Sigh...good old Uluru.

Aside from the unnecessary and debatable comments about "blunders" and "inability to design", he is correct.

Here I edited it for everyone: "If they are smart they will issue lenses that could be used equally well on crop, and on 135 format. Say modern 24mm lens and 35mm lens for 135 format, which can be used well on crop, and which users begged for years." With Uluru it is like panning for gold, you have to sort through a lot to find the nuggets.

[kooks]

Kenspo this looks like you are leaving us? I hope I misunderstood

Indeed i think that you misunderstood... what he said is that if someone is unhappy with Pentax then Goodbye... no body is stopping anybody to leave where ever they want to.

[MMVIII]

no body is stopping anybody to leave

not even if it is a full frame body?

:-)

[Rondec]

Aside from the unnecessary and debatable comments about "blunders" and "inability to design", he is correct.

Here I edited it for everyone: "If they are smart they will issue lenses that could be used equally well on crop, and on 135 format. Say modern 24mm lens and 35mm lens for 135 format, which can be used well on crop, and which users begged for years." With Uluru it is like panning for gold, you have to sort through a lot to find the nuggets.

Obviously lenses designed for a full frame sensor will be usable on APS-C, but I would just say that I do hope that they continue to work on APS-C lenses, at least a little bit. Because they don't cover as big an image circle, they should be able to be made a little smaller than full frame lenses.

The biggest difference in the formats is in the zoom department where it would be pretty hard to substitute a 24-70 for a 16-50 and to a lesser extent the 50-135 versus the coming 70-200. Both the 16-50 and 50-135 are due for a refresh -- hopefully with new motors. If that happened and Pentax released a sealed wide angle zoom, I think APS-C would be pretty set.

[falconeye]

it would be pretty hard to substitute a 24-70 for a 16-50

The 16-50/2.8 is a DA* lens targeted at serious photographers.

I am pretty sure they rather replace it with a DFA* 24-70/4 (or similiar) for FF (their new target for serious photographers) as such a lens would be cheaper to make and optically better too - keeping the same small size. At least, would make mote sense than refreshing the 16-50.

[Rondec]

The 16-50/2.8 is a DA* lens targeted at serious photographers.

I am pretty sure they rather replace it with a DFA* 24-70/4 (or similiar) for FF (their new target for serious photographers) as such a lens would be cheaper to make and optically better too - keeping the same small size. At least, would make mote sense than refreshing the 16-50.

But surely they will continue to make APS-C cameras and DA * lenses for those cameras for quite awhile. I understand equivalence, but if someone doesn't really want a full frame camera, it makes sense to make lenses that work for crop sensor. Even Canon and Nikon have 17-50 f2.8 lenses in their portfolio and they want to get every single person into full frame that they possibly can.

[D1N0]

But surely they will continue to make APS-C cameras and DA * lenses for those cameras for quite awhile. I understand equivalence, but if someone doesn't really want a full frame camera, it makes sense to make lenses that work for crop sensor. Even Canon and Nikon have 17-50 f2.8 lenses in their portfolio and they want to get every single person into full frame that they possibly can.

of course. The released the DA 16-85 didn't they? And the DA 20-40 limited is also pretty recent. The focus right now is on FF development, what happens after that will depend on 'market conditions'.

[mecrox]

The 16-50/2.8 is a DA* lens targeted at serious photographers.

I am pretty sure they rather replace it with a DFA* 24-70/4 (or similiar) for FF (their new target for serious photographers) as such a lens would be cheaper to make and optically better too - keeping the same small size. At least, would make mote sense than refreshing the 16-50.

I agree. I suspect that the recent 16-85mm is a foretaste of what lies in store for APS-C lenses - a good lens, the equal of anything similar from another brand, but clearly designed with different goals and a different price point from an f2.8 pro-level FF zoom. There's no need for the old (and expensive) DA* lenses when the kind of customer who uses them is far more likely to move up to FF or already be there.