[JPT]

I had a chance to try this lens on a K-70 today. I have a few observations.

- Build quality is nice - on a par with recent mid-range zooms like the 18-135, 16-85 and the 28-105. I couldn't detect any wobble in the double-extending lens barrel.
- The mechanism to extend the lens is strong and inspires confidence. It feels completely different to the 18-50 RE. The button to release it is a lot bigger and easier to press. It doesn't feel like a weak point of the lens.
- In terms of size, the reduction in length might not seem significant, but when you see it next to the 18-135, it doesn't look all that much bigger.
- Autofocus is a lot faster than the old 55-300 models and of course pleasantly silent. It's also a lot faster than the 18-135 on the same body. This applies to OVF mode and live view. It does tend to overshoot and readjust to come back to the point of focus, but it does so very quickly.
- I had no chance to try video mode, unfortunately.

I wasn't at all tempted by this lens until I saw it, but it is very nice in reality. It's a pity that none of my current bodies can use it. It will be interesting to see reviews to find out if the image quality has suffered in the redesign.

[anu l]

I had a chance to try this lens on a K-70 today. I have a few observations.

- Build quality is nice - on a par with recent mid-range zooms like the 18-135, 16-85 and the 28-105. I couldn't detect any wobble in the double-extending lens barrel.
- The mechanism to extend the lens is strong and inspires confidence. It feels completely different to the 18-50 RE. The button to release it is a lot bigger and easier to press. It doesn't feel like a weak point of the lens.
- In terms of size, the reduction in length might not seem significant, but when you see it next to the 18-135, it doesn't look all that much bigger.
- Autofocus is a lot faster than the old 55-300 models and of course pleasantly silent. It's also a lot faster than the 18-135 on the same body. This applies to OVF mode and live view. It does tend to overshoot and readjust to come back to the point of focus, but it does so very quickly.
- I had no chance to try video mode, unfortunately.

I wasn't at all tempted by this lens until I saw it, but it is very nice in reality. It's a pity that none of my current bodies can use it. It will be interesting to see reviews to find out if the image quality has suffered in the redesign.

How was the K-70's performance in live view, I mean as compared to K-s2 or K-3II was the live view very fast & definite. or Was it hunting??
If any performance increase was seen, was it due to the PLM Lens or the PDAF of K-70??

thanks for your observations above....

[JPT]

I didn't try the PLM lens on any other bodies, so I can't compare. I feel the K-70's live view AF is notably better than the K-S2, but it depends on the the type of lens. The SDM lenses are the same as always. The DC lenses are fine, but not exactly quick. Screw drive primes are very quick, except for macros. This PLM lens feels just like a modern lens on a mirrorless system, which is to say very quick.

But see the front page article for a different view. Clearly Adam didn't get the same impression from his testing. I think he was using the DA 18-135, and the new 55-300 is definitely better than that.

[Kunzite]

Actually Canikon quite cheaper to enter this club and Sony too.

Canon 6D on Amazon (fr): 1340€
D610 on Pixmania.fr: 1187€
D750 (grey market): 1499€
A7 on Amazon (fr): 1093€
A7R (Fnac.fr, great reputation): 1599€
A7II (Fnac.fr...): 1619€

K1 eveyrwhere: 1999€. While K1 as some edge overall all the others (pixel shift, GPS and for some 36MP) camera, the reverse also true some are small light with EVF, some have better AF...

This is irrelevant; the K-1's point is not to offer the cheapest entry into the FF market (thus competing with 3-4 years old cameras). By the way, all but the A7 and A7II were more expensive than the K-1 when launched.

The K-1's point is to expand the K-mount product line into the higher-end FF; it is to build a bridgehead, from where they could expand on the FF market. Yet a "cheapest" camera with "cheapest" lenses (bye-bye to all new D FAs except for the 28-105 - bargain hunters wouldn't want those) would be such a weak proposition... and no matter what, there would always be a cheaper camera, a 4-years old import, a barely hanging on second hand... the smart way is not to play this game.

Which brings us back to the idea of offering value, not cheapness, and that means "a decent feature set" for a good price. A camera people like me would be willing to pay good money for. They did a great job at that.
Price? Will be lower in 3-4 years.

(And after I wrote all this, I've read the title - isn't it a bit off-topic?)

---------- Post added 07-08-16 at 01:01 PM ----------

I had a chance to try this lens on a K-70 today. I have a few observations.

- Build quality is nice - on a par with recent mid-range zooms like the 18-135, 16-85 and the 28-105. I couldn't detect any wobble in the double-extending lens barrel.
- The mechanism to extend the lens is strong and inspires confidence. It feels completely different to the 18-50 RE. The button to release it is a lot bigger and easier to press. It doesn't feel like a weak point of the lens.
- In terms of size, the reduction in length might not seem significant, but when you see it next to the 18-135, it doesn't look all that much bigger.
- Autofocus is a lot faster than the old 55-300 models and of course pleasantly silent. It's also a lot faster than the 18-135 on the same body. This applies to OVF mode and live view. It does tend to overshoot and readjust to come back to the point of focus, but it does so very quickly.
- I had no chance to try video mode, unfortunately.

I wasn't at all tempted by this lens until I saw it, but it is very nice in reality. It's a pity that none of my current bodies can use it. It will be interesting to see reviews to find out if the image quality has suffered in the redesign.

Thank you, it's encouraging to hear about the better build quality (I tried the 18-50RE once and I was disappointed). I hope they'll redo the 18-50.

My camera can use it, but it's a crop lens so I'll pass.

[Pål Jensen]

Pentax is in a very nice position: they successes are all higher end products or enthusiast products. They are not relying on high volume, low margin products.

[Nicolas06]

This is irrelevant; the K-1's point is not to offer the cheapest entry into the FF market (thus competing with 3-4 years old cameras). By the way, all but the A7 and A7II were more expensive than the K-1 when launched.

The K-1's point is to expand the K-mount product line into the higher-end FF; it is to build a bridgehead, from where they could expand on the FF market. Yet a "cheapest" camera with "cheapest" lenses (bye-bye to all new D FAs except for the 28-105 - bargain hunters wouldn't want those) would be such a weak proposition... and no matter what, there would always be a cheaper camera, a 4-years old import, a barely hanging on second hand... the smart way is not to play this game.

Which brings us back to the idea of offering value, not cheapness, and that means "a decent feature set" for a good price. A camera people like me would be willing to pay good money for. They did a great job at that.
Price? Will be lower in 3-4 years.

(And after I wrote all this, I've read the title - isn't it a bit off-topic?)

K1 objective is known from Pentax Ricoh only and this is more philosophy than anything else anyway. What count is what exist and what people do or not with it.

Value and decent feature set is subjective. I don't think in term of practical phtographic quality that there any difference between a D610, K1 or why not A7RII or D810. Or even D5. All of theses camera would not let you down to print in the most demanding gallery and they would do everything except maybe the most demanding action/sports (except D5). Canon bodies are a bit behind in dymanic range but still many pro use them so I guess they are still good enough.

I just print a dozen pictures from my K3 and was blown away by the quality. A mere K3 !!! Not even an FF. But I know for some use case the high iso is not as great as it could be.

But you see that just me. Apparently for you, no FF bellow D800/D810/K1 offer anything decent. I wonder how all theses millions photographer that had 5Dmark II, D610 or A7 managed to get anything done?

I don't say Pentax strategy is wrong or whatever. They seems to sell everything they manage to make. Maybe because they had less stock due to the earthquake . maybe because the segment was new to their echosystem and they accumulated many years of demand. Their strategy to milk their use base with expensives lenses and a reasonably priced (but not cheap) flagship body is a sound strategy. it doesn't mean I want to be milked.

Still, I would not be surprised at all to find a lower end FF from Pentax to appear at some point to cover the loosers that could do with a more basic FF and the attrocious quality and feature set it would have.

[anu l]

I didn't try the PLM lens on any other bodies, so I can't compare. I feel the K-70's live view AF is notably better than the K-S2, but it depends on the the type of lens. The SDM lenses are the same as always. The DC lenses are fine, but not exactly quick. Screw drive primes are very quick, except for macros. This PLM lens feels just like a modern lens on a mirrorless system, which is to say very quick.

But see the front page article for a different view. Clearly Adam didn't get the same impression from his testing. I think he was using the DA 18-135, and the new 55-300 is definitely better than that.

So from your comments, I can say that the Camera AF speed in case of K-70 Live view AF is highly dependent on the AF technology used in the lens. So the speed can vary from that of pure CDAF to the likes of Hybrid focus as in A6300 or 80D.

One characteristic of Hybrid focus is that it eliminates focus hunting to very large extent - the back & forth "guessing" of the AF system. I hope there wasn't any hunting seen during Live view of K-70 irrespective of the lens used and the speed obtained.

[JPT]

So from your comments, I can say that the Camera AF speed in case of K-70 Live view AF is highly dependent on the AF technology used in the lens. So the speed can vary from that of pure CDAF to the likes of Hybrid focus as in A6300 or 80D.

One characteristic of Hybrid focus is that it eliminates focus hunting to very large extent - the back & forth "guessing" of the AF system. I hope there wasn't any hunting seen during Live view of K-70 irrespective of the lens used and the speed obtained.

It depends what you mean by "hunt". It seemed to me like in live view it almost always overshoots a little and then comes back to the point of optimal focus. So if that's what you mean by hunt, it does hunt a bit. It feels like a much faster version of the way the pure CDAF in my K-01 works on a good day. I didn't see it going back and forth multiple times to settle on focus. It was pretty decisive. I also didn't see a case where any of the lenses I tried went completely in the wrong direction from the start of the focussing operation. This sometimes happens with my K-01 with my FA100-300, and it takes ages for it to go all the way in the wrong direction, and then realise it must have gone the wrong way, and start again. Perhaps I should have brought the 100-300 as a torture test for it. This is the lens I would consider getting the 55-300 RE as a replacement for, and based on what I saw today, it would be a huge improvement

[anu l]

considering the fact that the HD PENTAX-DA 55-300mmF4.5-6.3ED PLM WR RE lens will work best with K-70 thanks to it's CDAF in Live view, it's a little disappointing to not see a double kit version of the K-70 similar to that of K-S2, with a kit version of the PLM 55-300 lens (low end often with SMC coating) bundled with a 18-55.

Would have liked if a PLM version was released for the 18-55 too to complement the 55-300.

This would have been a great kit option for the K-70.

[ogl]

So from your comments, I can say that the Camera AF speed in case of K-70 Live view AF is highly dependent on the AF technology used in the lens. So the speed can vary from that of pure CDAF to the likes of Hybrid focus as in A6300 or 80D.

One characteristic of Hybrid focus is that it eliminates focus hunting to very large extent - the back & forth "guessing" of the AF system. I hope there wasn't any hunting seen during Live view of K-70 irrespective of the lens used and the speed obtained.

Do you really know that K-70 has Hybrid AF on the level of Sony A6000 or A6300?

LV of K-70 has no difference from K-S2...Alas.

[anu l]

Do you really know that K-70 has Hybrid AF on the level of Sony A6000 or A6300?

LV of K-70 has no difference from K-S2...Alas.

It may not be as good as A6300, but may come close.....

Even that would be big feat...

I'll need for more evidence to rule out any possibility of performance gain over K-S2. Plus we cannot deny the possibility of a quick firmware update for AF improvements in Live view to K-70 since the whole hybrid focus is new to Pentax.
Hybrid AF is one of the biggest selling points for K-70, and the reason for all the hype around it.

---------- Post added 08-07-16 at 10:57 AM ----------

Do you really know that K-70 has Hybrid AF on the level of Sony A6000 or A6300?

LV of K-70 has no difference from K-S2...Alas.

I too was very disappointed by the K-70's initial impressions.

So I had been keeping an eye on the 80D. It click all the check marks in my list except a few-

fast AF
highly customizable AF
more AF points
class leading live view usability
touch screen
more buffer
7 fps
more dedicated buttons
more lenses (more feasible for me in my region since there are very few Pentax lenses available, it's mostly Nikon & Canon)

place where it fails is:
Sensor performance - one of the biggest things keeping me away from canon, despite the huge bump in image quality, it's not that good in dynamic range compared to nikon-sony-pentax - could be due to canon's 1.6x crop resulting in smaller sized photosites.
no focus peaking


Price is another thing which concerns me.
also the WR feature in Canon might end up being useless since I don't see consumer level Canon lenses which are weather sealed, just L series. Pentax is really the leader here.

[ogl]

It may not be as good as A6300, but may come close.....

Even that would be big feat...

I'll need for more evidence to rule out any possibility of performance gain over K-S2.

Pentaxforums review - is it good for you?
Pentax K-70 First Impressions Review - Hands-On Tests | PentaxForums.com
The live view AF options are 100% unchanged compared to the K-S2. Continuous focusing has not been added, nor is there any setting/indication suggesting phase detection operation.




Ricoh can't even offer any technical info about Hybrid AF.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/193-pentax-k-70/327211-no-hybrid-af-k-70-a.html


The main question - it it real Hybrid AF system or just marketing trick?

[anu l]

Pentaxforums review - is it good for you?
Pentax K-70 First Impressions Review - Hands-On Tests | PentaxForums.com
The live view AF options are 100% unchanged compared to the K-S2. Continuous focusing has not been added, nor is there any setting/indication suggesting phase detection operation.




Ricoh can't even offer any technical info about Hybrid AF.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/193-pentax-k-70/327211-no-hybrid-af-k-70-a.html


The main question - it it real Hybrid AF system or just marketing trick?

I have read some Japanese reviews on a site & it is getting some favorable comments. Anyways it's too early to conclude & write it off. I'll wait for a substantial & exhaustive review about it & it's live view performance.

[JPT]

Some samples with the K-70 from this lens, and some nice pictures of the lens on the K-70, which illustrate how much smaller its seems. Click on the small thumbnails to open the full-size images.

?????? HD PENTAX-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE ??????? ? ???????? - ????

It looks pretty good to me. The one with the lanterns looks pretty sharp in the corners, and the street scene with the stark lighting shows no issues with CA. Of course they are JPEG, so corrections are probably enabled.

[reh321]

Some samples with the K-70 from this lens, and some nice pictures of the lens on the K-70, which illustrate how much smaller its seems. Click on the small thumbnails to open the full-size images.

?????? HD PENTAX-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE ??????? ? ???????? - ????

It looks pretty good to me. The one with the lanterns looks pretty sharp in the corners, and the street scene with the stark lighting shows no issues with CA. Of course they are JPEG, so corrections are probably enabled.

And looking at its primary market, corrections are an integral and valued part of the overall product. That is why I'm so interested in the "accelerator".