[Zygonyx]

Thanks sir

[bobbotron]

A WR 18-250 with non-screwdrive motor would kill the reason to exist of the 18-135 DC WR immediately; remaining stock would be relegated at once to kit lens territory.

Disagree, I imagine the IQ wouldn't be on par.

[thibs]

Disagree, I imagine the IQ wouldn't be on par.

Nor would be its price.

[reh321]

A WR 18-250 with non-screwdrive motor would kill the reason to exist of the 18-135 DC WR immediately; remaining stock would be relegated at once to kit lens territory.

Disagree, I imagine the IQ wouldn't be on par.

A couple of years ago I purchased a Tamron 18-270mm for the Canon Rebel I was using a the time. Before that camera died a year later {and I moved back to Pentax}, I "retired" that lens and went back to the 18-55mm and 70-300mm lens combination I had been using before. I found that usually I knew which focal length range I would need before I had taken the camera and lens out of my bag, so the sacrifice in Image Quality {and other issues with that lens} just wasn't worth the limited benefits from this so-called "super zoom". My K-30 was kitted with an 18-55mm, but I bought the 18-135 DC fairly quickly solely because I wanted to get away from the screw-drive as much as I could. Today if I had a choice of an 18-135 DC or an 18-250 PLM, I'm fairly certain I'd go for the 18-135.

[totsmuyco]

I have an 18-135 and it's the most frequent lens that I use. If there's an improvement on the 18-135 that I'd like to have, it would be lowering it down to 16-135. Now that would be a perfect walk around lens. If the image quality would be as good as the 16-85, that would be a killer lens. But again, that would be asking too much.

[surfar]

Will be interesting to see to what point it is (or it is not) FF compatible. The usual DA is to a point of being usable. Somehow I expect this one to be less interesting on that point but would love to be proven wrong.

I tried this new zoom with my K-1

So a Q i have AM, Did you try it in FF mode and how did it perform? My DA55-300(first version) seems pretty reasonable on K1.No WR though,so if this new one works ok,i'm keen asap it gets downunder.

[mee]

I have an 18-135 and it's the most frequent lens that I use. If there's an improvement on the 18-135 that I'd like to have, it would be lowering it down to 16-135. Now that would be a perfect walk around lens. If the image quality would be as good as the 16-85, that would be a killer lens. But again, that would be asking too much.

It is an interesting idea... sadly, I think the barrel distortion would be tremendous on it.

My first 'upgrade' lens from the kit 18-55 DAL was an 18-200 that I used for a couple of years. But I think it spoiled me with such a wide range... I never took it off the camera (unless shooting macro images). I might as well have had a bridge camera at that point.

In any case, even if this lens is somewhat of a re-retread, at least it is a new crop oriented lens and seems to be an upgrade over previous models. I wonder if the 12-28mm got pushed way back due to the efforts with the FF system? I suspect there is a lot of tug of war on the corporate side, behind the scenes on what gets produced and when.. so I wouldn't count it out just yet.

[totsmuyco]

I wanted a 12-28 but unfortunately at that time, I bought my sigma 10-20. I wasn't able to find an alternative dealer which would give me better prices. I chose the the sigma because of the price difference since both lenses are not WR. However, the image quality of a Pentax lens such as the 18-135 is much better compared to the sigma 10-20. Had the Pentax 12-28 been WR, I would've chosen it despite its price. After all, one of the reasons I went to Pentax is the WR rating.

[Nicolas06]

I wanted a 12-28 but unfortunately at that time, I bought my sigma 10-20. I wasn't able to find an alternative dealer which would give me better prices. I chose the the sigma because of the price difference since both lenses are not WR. However, the image quality of a Pentax lens such as the 18-135 is much better compared to the sigma 10-20. Had the Pentax 12-28 been WR, I would've chosen it despite its price. After all, one of the reasons I went to Pentax is the WR rating.

You mean 12-24?

[totsmuyco]

Sorry yes, 12-24.

[planteater]

Must be a fantastic lens for trekking...

Absolutely. For several years I've been carrying a K30+ (HDWR) 55-300 together with a Canon G7X compact as a lightweight walking combo. I've got some great pictures with the 55-300 but the noise drives me nuts, especially in bird hides. The closer focusing would also be welcome as the current lens can't quite catch nearby insects. My only worry is the focus potential for focusing breathing robbing me of some reach. Oh, and it would be the third version of this lens I would have purchased!

Ricoh don't seem to have realised that they have cornered a significant niche - the outdoorsman who takes a lot of pictures. This isn't a wildlife or landscape photographers dream rig but it's light, cheap and weatherproof with some unique features. They really should be targeting the outdoor/active lifestyle segment with their advertising.

[JPT]

Ricoh has some product pages that seem to focus on exactly what you are suggesting for the K-70.

K-70 | RICOH IMAGING

The brochure for the K-70 and the in store displays use the same imagery.

HD PENTAX-DA 55-300mmF4.5-6.3ED PLM WR RE / Telephoto Lenses / K-mount Lenses / Lenses / Products | RICOH IMAGING

Of course, I don't know whether this material or the cameras are available where you live, but someone in Ricoh knows their cameras appeal to non-pro outdoor types.

[Belnan]

Since Pentax has so many interations of this lens how awesome would it be if the released a full frame version with an updated DC motor. I think Pentaxians would buy them up like hotcakes. In the same price range as the 28-105 that is.

[Nicolas06]

Absolutely. For several years I've been carrying a K30+ (HDWR) 55-300 together with a Canon G7X compact as a lightweight walking combo. I've got some great pictures with the 55-300 but the noise drives me nuts, especially in bird hides. The closer focusing would also be welcome as the current lens can't quite catch nearby insects. My only worry is the focus potential for focusing breathing robbing me of some reach. Oh, and it would be the third version of this lens I would have purchased!

Ricoh don't seem to have realised that they have cornered a significant niche - the outdoorsman who takes a lot of pictures. This isn't a wildlife or landscape photographers dream rig but it's light, cheap and weatherproof with some unique features. They really should be targeting the outdoor/active lifestyle segment with their advertising.

The cheap WR outdoor camera has been a target of Pentax for quite some time now. Pentax has also focussed for small lenses over bigger, potentially better performing lenses for a long time too. Recently this is DA20-40 and the RE version of 18-50 and 55-300 but there also the whole DA ltd serie, the DA35 and DA50 plastic wonder, and even the pro level lenses that are typically significantly smaller than their competitors (50-135, 60-250, DA300...).

Cheap all in one lenses like the 18-135 and 16-85 are also gens of Pentax line because they have quite affordable price, WR and for the 18-135 also quite small size.

The problem is that if you are serous about noise, issues that's basically an FF body with bigger lenses and if you are serious about insect photography, this is a macro lens (that exist in WR version in Pentax land). We are at least 10-20 years from the time where you can take a consumer zoom and have no noise in difficult conditions.

[planteater]

I must confess, I hadn't seen the Ricoh advertising promoting the Pentax range for outdoor use. Small, light lenses and cameras suit me perfectly - long may Pentax continue this aproach. I'l leave the quest for perfection to those with deeper pockets and stronger backs!