[Pål Jensen]

I think Pentax should seriously review and reconsider their lens roadmap.

Further investing deep into APS-C primes is not different from committing suicide, and they should re-design and rename all those DA longer primes or zooms so as to re-assure that those lenses are also full frame, so as to eliminate the hesitation of potential buyers who are interested in the lenses, but worried about the time longevity and full frame compatible of their investment.

Are you sure they aren't FF lenses? The 60-250/4 was an FF lens on the first roadmap. Theres little point making a non-FF 55/1.4 lens from a technical point of view...

[Pål Jensen]

We people are trully lucky with Pentax bringing more and more new lenses optimised for digital every year. FF of APS-C may be a personal choice for every ones investment but I feel that exquisite, not very expensive lenses are more of a bonus for a system than camera bodies coupled with 20 years old optics. Look these days at photozone's revies with 3 older lenses that Sony resurected from the past and their more or less big shortcomings (e.g. 35mm f/1.4 G). By making new glass Pentax it's doing the right thing and by making APS-C new glass it's doing what is economically sound at the moment.
I anxiously await the new DA* primes which will signal what "state of the art optics" means for Pentax and for what cost.

Radu

But the question is; how much cheaper are APS lenses anyway? Theres no doubt that for certain zoom lenses going into wide angle theres a price bonus; like the 16-50/2.8. However, a super wide angle for APS cost more than an FF 20mm lens so if you want to shoot really wide the cost of APS is significant. FF telephoto lenses cost no more than APS telephoto lenses....And a FF camera with pixel density like the K20D will have the same advantages as APS in cropped mode.
The whole issue boils down to as when FF can be made even more affordable than present....

[RiceHigh]

Are you sure they aren't FF lenses? The 60-250/4 was an FF lens on the first roadmap. Theres little point making a non-FF 55/1.4 lens from a technical point of view...

As long as the lenses are called DA, so far there is no guarantee for their use and good image quality on Full Frame bodies, that's the key problem here.

Also, to make a tele lens to be APS-C only has no real and significant advantage at all. So, why named them as DA? Could we ever see an EF-S or Nikkor DX tele? Canon and Nikon are just not so unwise as Pentax did, which was just a big mistake of Pentax marketing wise, nor, the making or just naming of DA teles suit the long term development of their system, putting aside the marketing obstacle they put for making or just naming these DA tele lenses *now*.

Do note again FF tele has no conflicts with the existing APS-C system, why still make them DA?? (But not FA J, which actually should be the correct thing to do, IMO)

[Asahiflex]

As long as the lenses are called DA, so far there is no guarantee for their use and good image quality on Full Frame bodies, that's the key problem here.

Also, to make a tele lens to be APS-C only has no real and significant advantage at all. So, why named them as DA? Could we ever see an EF-S or Nikkor DX tele? Canon and Nikon are just not so unwise as Pentax did, which was just a big mistake of Pentax marketing wise, nor, the making or just naming of DA teles suit the long term development of their system, putting aside the marketing obstacle they put for making or just naming these DA tele lenses *now*.

Do note again FF tele has no conflicts with the existing APS-C system, why still make them DA?? (But not FA J, which actually should be the correct thing to do, IMO)

Ricehigh, I agree with you that designing new DA lenses (i.e. APS-C only) would be a big mistake for Pentax. There's no reason not to create lenses with the full-frame sensor in mind, especially the non-wideangles. But I'm sure Pentax has learned their lessons with all the FF talk around. Hoya knows it, Samsung knows it, and Pentax should know that too!

Next, Pentax should *really* concentrate on its accessories. Way back in the 80's I could buy everything I need from Pentax with regards to macro work, such as extension tubes, bellows, ring flashes, etc. etc. I have just bought a Pentax AF-140c ring flash but that darned thing is TTL only, none of the current bodies have Flash TTL metering! If I want AF extension tubes, I cannot buy them on the regular market because no-one seems to make them anymore. Ditto for teleconverters: because nothing is currently in production, the prices of second hand teleconverters have plummeted (the worst example being the Tamron-F 1.4x converter which sold for more than $350 on eBay a few days ago). Sheesh, it's just a converter, not a Limited lens!

Pentax, are you listening? I'm tired from searching for hours a day on second-hand sites for items that should be readily available. Just how hard is it to produce and market a simple SDM teleconverter??? Just ask Kenko or Tamron, there's a lot of experience there.

I will never leave Pentax, but sigh... Sometimes I've had enough.

I have a personal theory about this I don't know how far fetched it is but I WANT to believe that Pentax' FF system will be DFA* only. That meaning a full range of lenses (zooms and primes) probably 12 tops build from the scratch and 3-4 improved designs in order to defeat any rival in the FF field at price/performance ratio. I imagine that this lenses will appeal to APS-C owners too but they will have to pay a premium compared to DA*s. More than that I suppose some focal lenghts will not be doubled up with FF and APS-C lenses (85, >400). And the Limiteds could be an APS-C alternative lacking SDM, ws and 1 stop of "speed" e.g. a small DA 135/3.5 Ltd. After all if Pentax could launch 10 APS-C new lenses this year for the next will have only minor holes to fill up in primes especially. And finally a totaly new range of lenses with today's design and coatings will blow away older designs from others in performance the only unknown being their prices. But if we look at current prices for 31 Ltd and 43 Ltd I guess we're in pretty good shape

Logical for me it would be this kind of FF setup:

Zooms:

24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 150-400/4

Primes:

20/2.8, 31/1.8 (reloaded), 43/1.9 (reloaded), 50/2.8 Macro (reloaded), 85/1.4, 100/2.8 (new design), 135/2.x, 150(180)/2.8 macro, 200/2.8 (maybe a ring motor version of curent DA* which will be retired), 300/2.8, 400/4, 600/5.6.

Total: 15 lenses to appear in 2 years (3 only improved and I guess the 600 it's in limited production). If they could make at least 2 zooms and 2-3 primes until the launch of Pentax FF and redo the 3 left from the recent past in a year's time we could have a pretty spectacular FF K mount system.

To me that seems a nice plan to fight Canon and Nikon who have older lenses and Sony with even older and fewer ones. And with the advent of the ~25 Mp sensors believe me the IQ will be even more dependent of lens quality than ever before.

Radu

P.S. *Reloaded* means up to date coatings if necessary, wheather sealing and SDM (pls ring motors, Pentax)

[GaryM]

That would really annoy me. Full-Frame bodies aren't going to be under $1000 for a decade or so. This means that despite the yammering about full-frame from gadget photographers, there's really not a mainstream market and won't be for a long time — and by that time, it's very possible that technological improvements have made the image quality gap insignificant.

Despite the armchair quarterbacking, this means there's a good long life left in APS-C, and I'd hate to have the roadmap all smashed up just for an appeal to the small high end and the non-existent (but somehow, very vocal) "Pentax needs this to compete even though I won't buy it myself" market.

Pentax needs to get quality product out there now, is what they need to do, and they need to emphasize the quality of each camera within its niche.

Well said!

[Art Vandelay II]

That would really annoy me. Full-Frame bodies aren't going to be under $1000 for a decade or so.

I have to disagree with that time table. I fully expect the Canon 7D to be $2,000 or less. The 40D retailed for less ($1300) than the 30D ($1400) when it was announced, so I expect the same from the 5D replacement. I think $2000 is the magic number right now for "entry FF". Nikon has way overpriced the D700. $3000 is outrageous. I expect Canon and Sony to blow them away on the price war. In fact Sony could very well be the one to bring the bargain FF to the market first. They already have by far the cheapest APS-C SLR on the market with the A200. I've used that camera, and $400 for the kit is raging bargain.

As far as Pentax goes, I wish they'd just make it clear on their website which DA lens are FF compatible and which ones aren't. I personally refuse to pay over $200 for any non-FF lens just because I want a "pro-sumer" body to use it on for the next 10 years, and I just don't see APS-C lasting that long in the pro-sumer and pro market.

The bottom line is I wouldn't be surprised one bit to see Sony or Canon (since they both make their own sensors) come out with an entry level FF in less and 3 or 4 years for $1000. If they can sell APS-C bodies for $350 and still make a profit they can sell FF for $1000 and do the same.

[RiceHigh]

I flew to Tokyo to get my Kenko Pro AF tele-convertor at the Biccamera and still was able to see the Pentax 1.7X MF-> AF convertor about 2 to 3 years ago. But you are right the availablity of such products is almost non-existent elsewhere in the world.

In the old days, Pentax accessories are already rare, but we could still order them if we needed.

I fully agree that Pentax have been so unwise to drop so many compatibilities of them but they has been unable to offer new replacement offers for those "dropped" old products of themselves.

Ricehigh, I agree with you that designing new DA lenses (i.e. APS-C only) would be a big mistake for Pentax. There's no reason not to create lenses with the full-frame sensor in mind, especially the non-wideangles. But I'm sure Pentax has learned their lessons with all the FF talk around. Hoya knows it, Samsung knows it, and Pentax should know that too!

Next, Pentax should *really* concentrate on its accessories. Way back in the 80's I could buy everything I need from Pentax with regards to macro work, such as extension tubes, bellows, ring flashes, etc. etc. I have just bought a Pentax AF-140c ring flash but that darned thing is TTL only, none of the current bodies have Flash TTL metering! If I want AF extension tubes, I cannot buy them on the regular market because no-one seems to make them anymore. Ditto for teleconverters: because nothing is currently in production, the prices of second hand teleconverters have plummeted (the worst example being the Tamron-F 1.4x converter which sold for more than $350 on eBay a few days ago). Sheesh, it's just a converter, not a Limited lens!

Pentax, are you listening? I'm tired from searching for hours a day on second-hand sites for items that should be readily available. Just how hard is it to produce and market a simple SDM teleconverter??? Just ask Kenko or Tamron, there's a lot of experience there.

I will never leave Pentax, but sigh... Sometimes I've had enough.

[RiceHigh]

Pentax do NOT have the resources to re-do and re-do the lens lineup again and again (or use your word "re-load"), NOT EVEN so for Canon and Nikon. They need to do the RIGHT THING at the FIRST TIME, like what Canon, Nikon and Sony have been doing for while.

Building a new lens lineup require for years. Canon's original EF lenses that were designed back to 1987 and many early 90s ones are still in production, just because Canon had been able to do the right thing on day one.

If Pentax many of those excellent FA film glass are still now in production, Pentax Full Frame DSLR system will not be a far-away dream - there is just a body left with a FF (possibly Samsung) sensor.

I have a personal theory about this I don't know how far fetched it is but I WANT to believe that Pentax' FF system will be DFA* only. That meaning a full range of lenses (zooms and primes) probably 12 tops build from the scratch and 3-4 improved designs in order to defeat any rival in the FF field at price/performance ratio. I imagine that this lenses will appeal to APS-C owners too but they will have to pay a premium compared to DA*s. More than that I suppose some focal lenghts will not be doubled up with FF and APS-C lenses (85, >400). And the Limiteds could be an APS-C alternative lacking SDM, ws and 1 stop of "speed" e.g. a small DA 135/3.5 Ltd. After all if Pentax could launch 10 APS-C new lenses this year for the next will have only minor holes to fill up in primes especially. And finally a totaly new range of lenses with today's design and coatings will blow away older designs from others in performance the only unknown being their prices. But if we look at current prices for 31 Ltd and 43 Ltd I guess we're in pretty good shape

Logical for me it would be this kind of FF setup:

Zooms:

24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8, 150-400/4

Primes:

20/2.8, 31/1.8 (reloaded), 43/1.9 (reloaded), 50/2.8 Macro (reloaded), 85/1.4, 100/2.8 (new design), 135/2.x, 150(180)/2.8 macro, 200/2.8 (maybe a ring motor version of curent DA* which will be retired), 300/2.8, 400/4, 600/5.6.

Total: 15 lenses to appear in 2 years (3 only improved and I guess the 600 it's in limited production). If they could make at least 2 zooms and 2-3 primes until the launch of Pentax FF and redo the 3 left from the recent past in a year's time we could have a pretty spectacular FF K mount system.

To me that seems a nice plan to fight Canon and Nikon who have older lenses and Sony with even older and fewer ones. And with the advent of the ~25 Mp sensors believe me the IQ will be even more dependent of lens quality than ever before.

Radu

P.S. *Reloaded* means up to date coatings if necessary, wheather sealing and SDM (pls ring motors, Pentax)

[RiceHigh]

There is no text.

I have to disagree with that time table. I fully expect the Canon 7D to be $2,000 or less. The 40D retailed for less ($1300) than the 30D ($1400) when it was announced, so I expect the same from the 5D replacement. I think $2000 is the magic number right now for "entry FF". Nikon has way overpriced the D700. $3000 is outrageous. I expect Canon and Sony to blow them away on the price war. In fact Sony could very well be the one to bring the bargain FF to the market first. They already have by far the cheapest APS-C SLR on the market with the A200. I've used that camera, and $400 for the kit is raging bargain.

As far as Pentax goes, I wish they'd just make it clear on their website which DA lens are FF compatible and which ones aren't. I personally refuse to pay over $200 for any non-FF lens just because I want a "pro-sumer" body to use it on for the next 10 years, and I just don't see APS-C lasting that long in the pro-sumer and pro market.

The bottom line is I wouldn't be surprised one bit to see Sony or Canon (since they both make their own sensors) come out with an entry level FF in less and 3 or 4 years for $1000. If they can sell APS-C bodies for $350 and still make a profit they can sell FF for $1000 and do the same.

[falconeye]

they also have a preannouncement on the Photokina there but all it says in very cryptic wording is roughly to the end of "there is something new to be shown but still a long way into production"

Nothing cryptic. They say: "Come, visit our booth. You will be able to touch some of the new products becoming available later [ed.: ... "this year", a German would think]".

[Pål Jensen]

Nothing cryptic. They say: "Come, visit our booth. You will be able to touch some of the new products becoming available later [ed.: ... "this year", a German would think]".

So basically we can expect more than one body. This is in line with Hoya comments that says two more DSLR's will be anounced this year. It is almost certainly the low end body and a high-end body....

[nanao.]

Nothing cryptic. They say: "Come, visit our booth. You will be able to touch some of the new products becoming available later [ed.: ... "this year", a German would think]".

Yep, the perils of translation and what is in the eye of the beholder. They don't use that specific (or "dry") wording as one would otherwise expect in a press statement (also for instance "Neuheiten" doesn't quite translate in my eyes as "the new products"). It's interesting stylistically. Elusive. My 2c.

Didn't want to split the thread in two because of trifling so what about: some new offerings...

[nanao.]

So basically we can expect more than one body. This is in line with Hoya comments that says two more DSLR's will be anounced this year. It is almost certainly the low end body and a high-end body....

It doesn't mention specifically or generally any bodies or lenses or any numbers of them. We just read too much into it.

[falconeye]

Yep, the perils of translation and what is in the eye of the beholder. They don't use that specific (or "dry") wording as one would otherwise expect in a press statement (also for instance "Neuheiten" doesn't quite translate in my eyes as "the new products"). It's interesting stylistically. Elusive. My 2c.

Well, I tried to provide the best possible translation from a person with German as his native language.

E.g.:
"Neuheiten. [...] diese können Sie [...] in die Hand nehmen" You cannot translate "Neuheiten" by "News" because you cannot "take News into your hands" So, the best translation here is "new products". Etc. pp.

They speak of "new products", but this is just to be less specific than "new product" and doesn't mean any particular number of products. Esp. as a new lens would count as well