[Nicolas06]

There's no reason to think Pentax/Ricoh are about to become a "video-centric" camera maker so I can't see why they'd be developing a separate lens lineup for video enhanced cameras. Given that, would there be any reason to spend a lot of time and money on an entirely new aperture control system if they didn't plan to broadly use it in future lens design?

If I understand it right, pro videographers, real pro, they tend to use dedicated gear. And their primary concen isn't that a 600$ machine should do more than a 4000$ or 50000$ dedicated device.

I get the impression that for video, manual focussing is often better and give control. They also not that necessarily focus on long single recording, but many small one short sequences and they have all the time to adjust diaphram. After all, people get bored if you keep the same point of view more than a few seconds.

So all this focussing while taking a video + change of apperture target more the beginner and maintream. They could very well make 3-4 dedicated video lenses like a 16-300 rebadge and give a revised version of the kit lens too like a 18-50 for video, and decide that for some other lenses, this is not worth the trouble.

It will depend how they analyse the market? if there new FA lltds or equivalent coming for example, Will they want to sell them as video lenses primes, will they want to have DC, will they want WR? Or will they favor a retro design and maybe even keep screw drive? Everything is possible.

It is key aspect to notice that all the recent lenses dedicated to the FF, lenses that may stay on sales for something like 10 years are not using this. Pentax may not want to risk it on pro quality gear until they tried it for 2-3 years on consumer zooms. A bit like they used DC first on the 18-135...

[pathdoc]

I dont think Pentax should discontinue the older version & must give it at a lower cost.

Agree.

I want to know whether Pentax in future will bundle the 55-300 PLM RE version or a scaled down version + a 18-55 as a dual kit with the K-70.

Ideally they'd bundle the 18-50RE, but then you lose the 50-55mm span. Does this matter? Not sure. Don't care. Not keen on buying either as the plan is for my next Pentax DSLR to be full-frame (by which time it will probably ship with KAF-4 firmware loaded ex factory).

[reh321]

Given that Pentax seem incapable of ensuring that their lenses leave the factory properly centered and stay that way, a collapsible 55-300 is a disaster waiting to happen.

I know this is a completely different scale, but most of us who use a camera of the "Q" family consider its "06" collapsible {roughly comparable to a 70-210mm for 35mm} to be a very good lens. The only time I'd put "06" and "disaster" in the same sentence {other than this one} would be one talking about using the 06 to photograph a disaster, when I absolutely wanted the pictures to turn out well.


(absolutely no wobble here}

[UncleVanya]

My 35-100 Panasonic and 14-42 Panasonic are collapsible and seem very solid.

[formercanuck]

This tells me that Ricoh is somewhat serious.
They've invested in Full Frame, new lenses and now - they're catching up in lens focusing and aperture technology.
I was wondering how long they'd keep away from an electronic aperture.

For them, it'll be a while, but I suspect they'll be overhauling many old lenses for both the screw drive and the aperture. The 55-300 was one of the last of the old / modern screw drive lenses.

[FantasticMrFox]

Also interesting that this lens appeared out of nowhere without having been on the roadmap.

[pathdoc]

Note also that this is a zero risk lens. If it fails for some reason, they haven't made a hole in the roadmap - there is a perfectly acceptable predecessor to fall back on that in some respects (half a stop of speed) is even better.

And it isn't the new camera's kit lens either, which would be a true embarrassment if it went all wrong. It's definintely something you choose to buy in addition to your kit lens rather than instead of it: if they had done this with the 16-85 or 18-135 and someone had bought it out-the-door instead of the 18-50 or 18-55 and had it fail, the user would be stuck with a useless camera. But you're very rarely going to own this and nothing else, and it's a fair risk for a field test.

[Simen1]

Also interesting that this lens appeared out of nowhere without having been on the roadmap.

According to asahi man, they should release four new APS-C lenses in 2015-2016, yet only one are on the roadmap. I assume the 55-300 is one of the three thats not on the roadmap. It looks like Ricoh like more secrecy about coming products then Hoya did. The K-70 went from first rumor to launch in just three weeks so they are pretty tight lipped in practice.

[pathdoc]

They might have learned something from the immense frustration we felt over the wait for the K-1. They were lucky that the K-1 was everything we could reasonably have expected it to be and did not seriously disappoint (apart from dashing a few wishlist hopes). Now it's tease, announce, release - get on and get it over with. I approve. We have what basically amounts to a K3 replacement and a nice new lens for it with which they can road test their new AF and electronic aperture technology.

[Fogel70]

Also interesting that this lens appeared out of nowhere without having been on the roadmap.

That is (almost) always the case when introducing new version of an existing lens.
The purpose of the road map is to show future releases of lenses that fills holes in the lens lineup.

If they would show upcoming updates on the road map there is a risk that sales would drop on the existing version long before the new is released.

[mee]

That is (almost) always the case when introducing new version of an existing lens.
The purpose of the road map is to show future releases of lenses that fills holes in the lens lineup.

If they would show upcoming updates on the road map there is a risk that sales would drop on the existing version long before the new is released.

It's not an existing lens though.. look at the optics for instance -- 14 elements in 11 groups vs the non-PLM WR version of 12 elements in 8 groups. The PLM version has 9 blades, 6 for the other. different aperture range too.. and size.. The only thing that is the same is the focal range.

Good point with the roadmap.. it is a 2 edged sword. On one side, it gives users as window into what is upcoming to entice them to stick around or even buy in. On the other side, it shows them what could be discontinued soon.. or even more so what is seemingly not on the horizon for that brand.

[Fogel70]

It's not an existing lens though.. look at the optics for instance -- 14 elements in 11 groups vs the non-PLM WR version of 12 elements in 8 groups. The PLM version has 9 blades, 6 for the other. different aperture range too.. and size.. The only thing that is the same is the focal range.

This update is quite substantial compared to what Pentax usually do, but an substantial update is also an update.
The changes in lens formula is probably necessary because of the new AF-motor, and that update may also have affected max aperture, and made it possible to make the lens retractable. As they also updated the aperture to a brand new electronic aperture, they choose to use different numbers of blades,

[Nicolas06]

I don't recall that the entry level camera were anounced that much in advance...

On the opposite people like to be surprised or even to say that no new APSC would be ever release again (like Nikon or Canon stopped?) for no reason while the release cycle of the APSC bodies has been quite regular over the years.

There should be a new APSC flagship by the end of year or early next year.

[mee]

This update is quite substantial compared to what Pentax usually do, but an substantial update is also an update.
The changes in lens formula is probably necessary because of the new AF-motor, and that update may also have affected max aperture, and made it possible to make the lens retractable. As they also updated the aperture to a brand new electronic aperture, they choose to use different numbers of blades,

Either way, its an entirely different lens. Everything is different from it. If the housing, focus power, and (more importantly) optics are different, how can you consider it a simple update to a lens? Changes are changes because it's not the same lens.

The HD 55-300 WR was an update to the SMC variant and this is true because the optics didn't change. The only difference was the addition of weather seals and the HD coating. It is so alike that one can use the SMC lens profile to correct the HD lens.

You won't be able to do that with this PLM lens. Just like you can't use the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 profile on the Pentax 70-200 f/2.8 lens and expect good results. They're entirely different lenses even though they share the same focal length range.

[FantasticMrFox]

This update is quite substantial compared to what Pentax usually do, but an substantial update is also an update.

At what point does a development stop being an update and become a new lens? As someone already pointed out, this has a new optical construction, maximum aperture, collapsible mechanism, focus motor ... It is essentially a new lens that just happens to have the same focal range as a previous lens.