Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-27-2016, 12:39 PM   #151
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 621
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
I am guessing:
  1. Wide angle prime --> 28mm F2.8 (they always had this and its missing now; no large aperture; Pentax seems to prefer 28mm to 24mm)
  2. Standard "large aperture" prime --> 50mm F1.4 ("standard" has to be 43-50mm and I think 1.2 is off)
  3. Medium telephoto "large aperture" prime --> 135mm F2 (they are missing an 135 much more than a 85mm as there is the 77mm)
  4. Ultra wide angle "large aperture" prime --> 20mm F2 (something between 15 and 23mm)
  5. Fish-eye Zoom (anything)
I am hoping the ultra-wide is an 18mm f/2.8, anything wider and you have the 15-30, anything more than 18 is not really ultra-wide.

---------- Post added 02-28-16 at 05:43 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
So on day one for FF we have new modern FF lenses:
- DFA 15-30 f/2.8
- DFA 24-70 f/2.8
- DFA 70-200 f/2.8
- DFA 150-450 f/4-5.6
- DFA 28-105 f/3.5-5.6

And officially supported FF lenses:
- FA31 f/1.8
- FA35 f/2
- FA43 f/1.9
- FA50 f/1.4
- DA*55 f/1.4 WR
- FA77 f/1.8
- DFA100 macro f/2.8 WR
- DA*200 f/2.8
- DA*300 f/2.8
- DA*560 f/5.6

This is already an extensive line up allowing one to cover from 15mm to 450mm in newly released, fast AF modern zooms and a large set of high quality primes.
I would take a punt that the FA lenses will be less than stellar on the K-1. I don't think it will be like it was with the 645 system where pretty much most of the main FA lenses worked out to be excellent on the digital sensor.

Diglloyd already tested the FA31 on the K3 and concluded that it wasn't even worth testing.


Last edited by 2351HD; 02-27-2016 at 12:45 PM.
02-27-2016, 12:52 PM   #152
mee
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,867
QuoteOriginally posted by 2351HD Quote
I would take a punt that the FA lenses will be less than stellar on the K-1. I don't think it will be like it was with the 645 system where pretty much most of the main FA lenses worked out to be excellent on the digital sensor.

Diglloyd already tested the FA31 on the K3 and concluded that it wasn't even worth testing.
But that was on the K-3 II specifically in pixel shift mode .. diglloyd: Pentax K3 II: Evaluating SuperResolution Pixel Shift Mode with Zeiss Siemens Star Chart
02-27-2016, 12:54 PM - 1 Like   #153
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 362
The FA31 is not built to win resolution tests but to make nice pictures.
And remember that the k1 is less demanding than a k3. Pixel density matter and it's more like a K5iis in the center and not testable on aps-c outside of the center.

Last edited by Glorfindelrb; 02-27-2016 at 01:00 PM.
02-27-2016, 01:17 PM   #154
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,686
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Tamy 70-200 + TC => 100-300 f4. Cheap, fast, sharp and work with full frame.
Stopped down yes.

QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Ok ,I get it, it would be: 15-30, 28-105, 100-300. Strangely, 70-200 zooms are designed for full frame (->50-135 eq. on apsc) but find a nice use on apsc for shooting sports (same shutter speed as a 100-300 2.8 on FF). I don't know why only sigma offers a 100-300 2.8, it's a very usefull range for sport (f2.8), but a 100-300 f4 or f5.6 I wouldn't use much, maybe it's only me (no trying to be provocative or controversial here).
You target very high end gear that has to f/2.8... I suppose you spend your time shooting sport at evening events and have lot of money to spend.

I think there a market for something that is not top high end gear 2000$ at least, even FF.

Anyway I'll not insist.

I'am convinced that there a market for an entry/mid level FF telezoom, and I'am 100% sure Pentax will produce one at some point. Question is not if but when and the quality it will have.

But Pentax producing a 100-300 f/2.8 seem as quite unlikely with their current market share.

02-27-2016, 01:28 PM   #155
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,455
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
You target very high end gear that has to f/2.8... I suppose you spend your time shooting sport at evening events and have lot of money to spend.
Well, yes, I like f2.8 lenses, this help to have sharp focus and bright viewfinder, even if the lens needs to be stopped down to be sharp. I have Tamrons 17-50 f2.8 (approx. $300), 28-75 f2.8 (approx. $300) and 70-200 f2.8 (approx. $500). All screw mount noisy, but from f3.5 sharp and contrasty... to the point that I sold my Pentax zoom lenses of the same focal length range. Just to tell you how good the 70-200 is, when I mount the TC on it (280mm/f4) stopped down to f5.6, it is as sharp as the DA300 @ f5.6. The only reason why I can't get rid of the DA300 is because I can have 450mm with the TC on it, also I was thinking of selling this DA300, keep the TC for the 70-200 and buy a 500mm lens (the 300mm would be covered by the Tamy @200+TC). In fact, for sports, 70-200 on APSC / 100-300 FF is perfect range . For large animals, 100-300 is also sufficient, it only for birding that you need a really long lens (because birds are smaller and still have good eyes, so considerably more magnification is needed).

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
I think there a market for something that is not top high end gear 2000$ at least, even FF.
Yes, and beside the 70-200 f2.8, Canon also have a 70-200 f4 (cheaper). So, yeah Canon have a larger portfolio, so much that they are upgrading the same lenses (=version II). Pentax already have a hard time to keep their schedules so I guess they won't be doing a 100-300 anytime soon.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 02-27-2016 at 01:45 PM.
02-27-2016, 01:32 PM   #156
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 445
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Would be nice you check before saying such things... I don't speak of 15-450 but 70-300 and many quite good tele lenses have somewhat large range in the 3-4X like 150-450, 100-300, 100-400. I also said the goal was to not to have the best lens possible but more an entry lvl FF zoom but still with great quality.

Here the 70-300 L from Canon look to be quite good: Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 USM L IS - Full Format Review / Test Report - Analysis

Nobody want a a 200-400 f/4 for 10000 or even a 150-450 f/4-5.6 for 2000. There a place to me between the 70-300 from tamron a 100 and the 150-450 from Pentax a 2000.

I hope you can understand that. At least Canon understood...
The Canon lens you quote is $1349.
Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM Lens 4426B002 B&H Photo Video

That is way beyond entry level.

That aside, let's keep in mind fragmenting the lens line-up too much is a bad thing. One of the first things Steve Jobs did when he came back to Apple was pare down the number product lines.

How Steve Jobs Saved Apple

Too much variety raises prices.
02-27-2016, 01:36 PM   #157
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,686
QuoteOriginally posted by 2351HD Quote
I would take a punt that the FA lenses will be less than stellar on the K-1. I don't think it will be like it was with the 645 system where pretty much most of the main FA lenses worked out to be excellent on the digital sensor.

Diglloyd already tested the FA31 on the K3 and concluded that it wasn't even worth testing.
If I check photozone or ephotozine they say the lens is brilliant. All the people here say the lens is very sharp. The samples I checked o,n this website are all sharp even on K3 that require more than a K1... People that have tested it on 36MP on their Sony thing the lens is great.

So I am sorry but I'll not pay 60$ for 1 year of reading content from a troll.
02-27-2016, 01:59 PM   #158
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,455
I believe for non pro , there is a kind of psychological price barrier of about $1000. If you consider that you'll buy a ff camera body and three lenses in the next 4 years, you can think of having spent $4900 is already a lot for taking photos. But at the moment, there is a kind of inflation trend taking place on new lenses... now, new Canon lenses cost nearly $2000 each (to take digital pictures in 24x36... when I was a kid, 24x36 film was standard and so cheap in comparison...). The famous Pentax full frame "upgrade path" is actually harder to swallow versus if you were a customer of the competition.

02-27-2016, 03:05 PM   #159
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,686
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
I believe for non pro , there is a kind of psychological price barrier of about $1000. If you consider that you'll buy a ff camera body and three lenses in the next 4 years, you can think of having spent $4900 is already a lot for taking photos. But at the moment, there is a kind of inflation trend taking place on new lenses... now, new Canon lenses cost nearly $2000 each (to take digital pictures in 24x36... when I was a kid, 24x36 film was standard and so cheap in comparison...). The famous Pentax full frame "upgrade path" is actually harder to swallow versus if you were a customer of the competition.
My father brought his Pentax FF in time with a 50mm f/1.7 in 1969. He paid 1500 francs for that. By today this means 1800-2000$ and maybe 400-500$ for the lens alone.

Now a K30 + DA50 f/1.8 get better results and cost 450$...

You go after the best biz-engineer. That's a luxury. Not everybody has the same objective to pay much more for marginally better products.

90% DSLR sales are still APSC and DSLR + MILC is a small part of the camera market. P&S sell much more, even if the market shrink. And there more than billion smartphones, all with a camera sold each year.

Everybody choose what is enough for his need/requirement/purpose. While there nothing wrong going for the best, that an expensive route and it doesn't mean there will always be a large difference.

We all know the photographer talent, the subject and the light make or break the photo, not the gear. When you buy what Pentax or Canon or Sony have more expensive, you pay to actually get a better gear, but a good share of the money spent is being able to say "I have the best". You pay them to feel better, to match the image you have of yourself or the image you want to project to others.
02-27-2016, 03:35 PM   #160
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 885
QuoteOriginally posted by Glorfindelrb Quote
The FA31 is not built to win resolution tests but to make nice pictures.
And remember that the k1 is less demanding than a k3. Pixel density matter and it's more like a K5iis in the center and not testable on aps-c outside of the center.
I do not think so. FA 31 was one of the sharpest lenses at that time. Now it might not compete with new top lens like Ottus 55 or Sigma 35 art in sharpness but it is a very sharp lens. I do not believe the personal tests on one lens due to sample variance.
02-27-2016, 03:56 PM   #161
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,954
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
My father brought his Pentax FF in time with a 50mm f/1.7 in 1969. He paid 1500 francs for that. By today this means 1800-2000$ and maybe 400-500$ for the lens alone.

(...)
There was no 50mm f/1.7 in the Pentax line-up in 1969. It was either another lens or another decade.
02-27-2016, 05:08 PM   #162
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,259
QuoteOriginally posted by Mistral75 Quote
There was no 50mm f/1.7 in the Pentax line-up in 1969. It was either another lens or another decade.
Production Years
1977 to 1984

Must have been a super-takumar 55mm 1.8 (s-m-c came in 71)
02-27-2016, 05:53 PM   #163
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 621
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
If I check photozone or ephotozine they say the lens is brilliant. All the people here say the lens is very sharp. The samples I checked o,n this website are all sharp even on K3 that require more than a K1... People that have tested it on 36MP on their Sony thing the lens is great.

So I am sorry but I'll not pay 60$ for 1 year of reading content from a troll.
He is far from a Troll and calls a spade a spade. No alliances from Lloyd.

Photozone does report the FA31 to be great. However it will remain to be seen. Everybody's version of great is different and mine aligns fairly close to that of Lloyd.

I can only hope the the 31 will be excellent as that is a lens I would very much like for the K-1.
02-27-2016, 06:38 PM   #164
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,324
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
My father brought his Pentax FF in time with a 50mm f/1.7 in 1969. He paid 1500 francs for that. By today this means 1800-2000$ and maybe 400-500$ for the lens alone.
In 1977 I received a Pentax KX | 50/1.4 kit as a college graduation present. It cost $524 before tax, equivalent to 10% of the total expense of my last year of college (at a State U., but as an out-of-state student). The equivalent camera | fast normal lens value today is right at $4,000.
02-27-2016, 06:41 PM   #165
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,324
QuoteOriginally posted by 2351HD Quote
Everybody's version of great is different and mine aligns fairly close to that of Lloyd.
There's the rub . . . . the FA31 was designed with a different image taste in mind, not to win lens tests. I expect the FA Limiteds will not 'test' very well since all we can objectively measure is absolute edge to edge sharpness. What I consider desirable rendering qualities are subjective.
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!
28mm, angle, aperture, body, canon, contact, dfa, dslr, f/1.4, f/1.8, f/2.8, f/4-5.6, fa, fa50/1.4, ff, lens, lenses, models, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, people, price, ricoh, street, time, vc, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The lens road map is updated Grokh Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 03-07-2014 08:08 PM
Lens road map updated. LFLee Pentax News and Rumors 240 05-06-2013 05:48 PM
DA High Magnification Zoom Lens from The Lens road map? Snajder Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 05-22-2012 02:55 PM
New Road Map bobrapp Pentax News and Rumors 2 03-26-2009 11:13 AM
Pentax Lens Road Map azcavalier Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 04-04-2008 06:26 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:36 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