[bxf]

Everybody's version of great is different...

Well, actually no, not everybody's is different, though I can see that there would be several versions, and sometimes more than one valid version. However, that does not mean that all versions are equally valid. In various fields where such variations of opinion may exist, there tend to be industry standards that define the desirable attributes of the various products. Such standards are generally developed over time by acknowledged experts in the field.

Just because I like a particular wine does not mean that it is a good wine. Perhaps I have crappy taste.

[filoxophy]

... Although I hate to be pessimistic, I think we can safely concluded that the Q line, if not officially dead, is at least unofficially abandonned...

O_o

We have it official from Ricoh that the K-1 development has sucked up a lot of internal resources. The K-3II and GR II were mostly warmovers (though I'm loving my GR II avec wifi), and the Q has admittedly gotten nothing new in some time now supporting that claim.

It's just a matter of limited resources.

Now if Ricoh hadn't released a Q roadmap at all (not even a copy/paste job like they did here), then yeah, I would be worried too.

[biz-engineer]

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.

I wrote that there is a threshold at $1000 and earlier I wrote that I use tamy 17-50, 28-75 and 70-200, all are f2.8... and cheaper than Pentax own f4 lenses. I don't have the luxury 31ltd and 77ltd. You reply fast, but if you could spend a bit more time to read that would be cool.

[Digitalis]

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.

On my optics bench both the FA31/FA77 do very well*, but then again perhaps that is because of my bench is an older zeiss bench designed to test lenses on 120 and large format film. About five years ago my bench was modified by a technician to the degree of precision demanded to test lenses to match current Imaging sensors.

* The FA43 is a bit disappointing on full format at f/1.9, but it beats the pants off the Leica Summicron-M 50mm f/2 pre-ASPH and ASPH versions @ f/4~f/5.6. Even though the FA43 doesn't have an aspherical element in it, rumors persist that early versions do (which is completely false) which amuses me when I point this fact out to leicaphiles. How can a non-ASPH lens beat an ASPH lens?...through better optical design.

[monochrome]

Of course FA31 does well. That doesn't mean certain current testing sites will 'test' it well on the K-1.

[Nicolas06]

I wrote that there is a threshold at $1000 and earlier I wrote that I use tamy 17-50, 28-75 and 70-200, all are f2.8... and cheaper than Pentax own f4 lenses. I don't have the luxury 31ltd and 77ltd. You reply fast, but if you could spend a bit more time to read that would be cool.

Yeah sorry. you go cheap but keep speaking on how the top gear is necessary.

[zapp]

Get serious here. Camera developers do not develop lenses. Lens developers do not develop cameras. When Pentax talks about limited resrouces, we look at the competition between Q, APS-C, FF, 645 camera and lens systems.
Bottom line: There will be no new APS-C lenses in the not so distant future. Startegy of the FF system may be judget after 2017 after the appearnce of the new primes. Curently all lenses are big - the opposite of what Pentax used to represent. FA Ltd will fade out.
Pentax is not looking for a small island in FF. They offer large apeture zooms and appear to present a line of f/1.4 primes. Impressive but also tricky as all new Pentax products can be compared against counterparts from several other companies.

[Kunzite]

The DA wide angle zoom (APS-C) is still on the roadmap, for "2016 or later"...

[biz-engineer]

Yeah sorry. you go cheap but keep speaking on how the top gear is necessary.

I don't mind cheap and fast lenses.

[MadMathMind]

I rather see a lens designed by the team behind the 31 Limited or the FA* 200/4 macro.

I'd wager half those guys have retired by now.

[Nicolas06]

Bottom line: There will be no new APS-C lenses in the not so distant future. Startegy of the FF system may be judget after 2017 after the appearnce of the new primes. Curently all lenses are big - the opposite of what Pentax used to represent. FA Ltd will fade out.

That's what wory me most. The 70-200 from Pentax is maybe the heaviest of all manufacturers. And the 150-450 is a huge beast.

People speak of Pentax soul and explain how this soul remained intact with Ricoh and they are very happy about FF.

But they forget that a good share of that soul was make small/light/well built gear. The FAltd are the the very example of best Pentax design and goals.

Very good compromizes, maybe not ultimate best test charts, but solid great performance and also full of character and pixie dust.

The DA ltd already in all honestly lost the fast appertures (f/1.8-f/1.9 all around for FA ltds) and honestly most of the pixie dust. But they are still great lenses in their own mind, albeit less special. And they kept the small size/weight.

Whatever your choice, DA plastic wonder, DA ltd, FA/FAltd you had a choice of rather small, good compromize lenses and still reasonnably priced lenses.

I don't care if a lens cover FF if I can put it to good use. Just the crop factor mean I get more reach on my APSC. But this isn't going to happen to any zoom weighting more than 500g or any prime bigger than an FA31 that already at the limit for me.

But do will actually get new lenses in that spirit in the years to come? Sure that the latest releases are quite the opposite. The last one was the 20-40 and in the spirit of DA (vs FAltd) they didn't manage to have it small and fast.

[Kunzite]

I wonder about that. Take the FA* 80-200 f/2.8... isn't it part of the Pentax heritage, just like the tiny Limiteds?
Well, at over 1.5 kg it was heavier than Canon and Nikon counterparts.

[thibs]

That's what wory me most. The 70-200 from Pentax is maybe the heaviest of all manufacturers. And the 150-450 is a huge beast.

People speak of Pentax soul and explain how this soul remained intact with Ricoh and they are very happy about FF.

Part of. As usual, you take a bit and you generalize.
Part of Pentax heritage is small and light so anything not small and light (lol those two bright zooms, really?) are Pentax negating their heritage.

[Nicolas06]

Part of. As usual, you take a bit and you generalize.

if you say so.

Part of Pentax heritage is small and light so anything not small and light (lol those two bright zooms, really?) are Pentax negating their heritage.

I am not saying that and I am not buying the Pentax heritage thing like for sure it will continue for ever. They have been brought 2 times, they switched strategies (like going FF for example) and many of the guys that made Pentax retired or got fired and put Pentax in bad position to begin with...

So, while I prefer small lenses and Pentax has done a lot of it in the past 10 years, Ricoh is now on a trend for big is beautiful, including the latest 16-85 for APSC. On the FF, they had to put a kit lens, so they did that, but all the rest is huge. Bigger that the competitors lenses with similar characteristics. i guess it make sense as many here ask for that even if I can't understand how people that want big managed to basically wait 10 years for it.

We will see how the primes on the road map look like...

On my side, I'll not wait 10 years of big is beautiful interlude.

[Barry Pearson]

That's what wory me most. The 70-200 from Pentax is maybe the heaviest of all manufacturers. And the 150-450 is a huge beast.

People speak of Pentax soul and explain how this soul remained intact with Ricoh and they are very happy about FF.

But they forget that a good share of that soul was make small/light/well built gear. The FAltd are the the very example of best Pentax design and goals.

Although that is the "soul" for many people, it doesn't apply to many others. I've used many Pentax SLRs since 1967, and I don't think I've even seen a Limited lens!

I tend to go for zooms (from wide to long) and long primes (not always Pentax).

The 2 kilogram 150-450mm enabled me to sell my 3 kilogram Sigma 500mm f/4.5, and, (in combination with my 1 kilogram 60-250mm f/4), has made my 1 kilogram 300mm f/4 surplus to requirements. So the 150-450mm lens has lightened my kit!