[pres589]

Actually the D-FA 15-30 is slightly lighter than this 14mm f1.8 Sigma. So, again, seems funny to me.

[Kunzite]

Refresh my memory, please... is Sigma allowed to use lead in their lenses? And I'm not talking about leaded glass

[RonHendriks1966]

Refresh my memory, please... is Sigma allowed to use lead in their lenses? And I'm not talking about leaded glass

There is a pot of gold in every sigma lens and you find the k-mount version under the rainbow.

[Kunzite]

Not under the big W?

[cesarfishman]

Pentax has shown lenses before, that weren't available next week. That would explain the lack of leaks in the marketing channel.

Sorry what do you mean? Genuinely don't understand what you're saying.

[Doundounba]

Sorry what do you mean? Genuinely don't understand what you're saying.

I think he means that they might show prototypes under glass - usually this is done with markings covered. This helps convince people that they are actually doing something but does not constitute credible evidence that a lens will actually be released one day... I really do hope we get a little more than that, in a year that is supposed to be all about glass.

[cesarfishman]

I think he means that they might show something under glass - usually this is done with markings covered. This helps convince people that they are actually doing something but does not constitute credible evidence that a lens will actually be released one day... I really do hope we get a little more than that, in a year that is supposed to be all about glass.

If there isn't an announcement of new primes, then I need to grab a couple of limiteds. It's not the end of the world, but was really hoping for DFA primes with good AF. Bummed.

[Uluru]

Either now with the KP during CP+, or with the K3Mk3 in 5 months, new lenses are coming.
I admit, expecting new 35 mm and 50 mm primes is always a moment of anxiety for any old school photographer. Those are the lenses that defined photography. They are safe haven in moments of lens doubts and agonies, and absolutely best tools to learn this art.
It is easy to discern which 'photographer' grew up with zooms, and which photographer grew up using the proven 35 and 50 methods.

[Schraubstock]

It is easy to discern which 'photographer' grew up with zooms, and which photographer grew up using the proven 35 and 50 methods.

Really ?

If it is that easy, care to give me some hints ?

[following.eric]

Either now with the KP during CP+, or with the K3Mk3 in 5 months, new lenses are coming.
I admit, expecting new 35 mm and 50 mm primes is always a moment of anxiety for any old school photographer. Those are the lenses that defined photography. They are safe haven in moments of lens doubts and agonies, and absolutely best tools to learn this art.
It is easy to discern which 'photographer' grew up with zooms, and which photographer grew up using the proven 35 and 50 methods.

out of curiosity I hear a lot of people love their 35 and 50 primes. Some people are only prime shooters. I have a 50mm prime from 1988 and it's hands down the best piece of glass I own. But on digital and pentax apsc crops, don't the whole dynamic of those lenses change? now with the crop they function different than on a 35mm film camera.

Are they safe havens because of the focal length even with a crop factor or are they safe havens because of built and quality.
Just curious

[cesarfishman]

out of curiosity I hear a lot of people love their 35 and 50 primes. Some people are only prime shooters. I have a 50mm prime from 1988 and it's hands down the best piece of glass I own. But on digital and pentax apsc crops, don't the whole dynamic of those lenses change? now with the crop they function different than on a 35mm film camera.

Are they safe havens because of the focal length even with a crop factor or are they safe havens because of built and quality.
Just curious

I'm not an old-school photographer at all, but there's just something special about primes. They just feel right.

[biz-engineer]

I'm pretty sure that Adam already knows what coming , coz he was probably at Ricoh labs for the KP; but he can't tell before the announcements.

[Uluru]

out of curiosity I hear a lot of people love their 35 and 50 primes. Some people are only prime shooters. I have a 50mm prime from 1988 and it's hands down the best piece of glass I own. But on digital and pentax apsc crops, don't the whole dynamic of those lenses change? now with the crop they function different than on a 35mm film camera.
Are they safe havens because of the focal length even with a crop factor or are they safe havens because of built and quality.
Just curious

Yes. On crop cameras everything about 35mm and 50mm lenses change. To have crop and 35mm FoV, 24mm lens must be used.
For 50mm, a 35mm lens must be used.

Why 35 and 50mm? It is related to the way human eyes and mind see. 35mm is approximation what both eyes see in one considerate glance, and 50mm is what mind sees in more clear focus out of that 35mm scene. They are very natural FoVs, as we approach to subjects following instincts of our eyes and mind, which work (approximately) in those FoVs. So we feel to be at a comfortable distance, and naturally close enough, when using those two FoVs. If we are to naturally appreciate wider FoVs, say 20mm, or more narrow FoVs, say 150mm, it would mean to have a different set of eyes and mind; that of a frog, or a hawk. That is why we approach to such extremes with a sense of wonder and fear. Also, wide and narrow FoVs loose or compress the background more severely, and we notice that too — that is not our everyday experience, it is alien to us.

Although Pentax delivered 35mm Macro Ltd, it was a macro lens, slow in operation and aperture, and the 24mm was lacking. (21mm/3.2 is not truly that useful — they should have made 24/2 instead).

So in a strange way, Pentax cut it itself off the traditional FoVs, and did not deliver classic lenses for the digital age.

That is why I use Leica for 35mm FoV photography. Please don't blame me! If Pentax delivers 24/2 or 24/1.4 lens usable on crop, I would be more than happy to use a DSLR again. Likewise, if Pentax makes a 35/1.4 or 35/1.8, I would be happy as well to use a DSLR once more. If they make modern 50/1.4 too (current FA is far behind other systems), then they will suddenly attract a wholla lotta more users to the system, both in crop and in FF.

Those three lenses: fast 24, fast 35 and fast 50, made for digital age and with HD coatings etc, would make Pentax system really, really attractive. They are more important IMHO than revamping of the FA Limiteds. 24mm is more important and usable than 31mm, and 35mm is more important and usable than 43mm — ask any good photographer. FA Limiteds are fine to have, but only when the system has essential FoVs sorted out first.

From what I saw in the lens roadmap, there is hope at least for a new 35 mm and 50mm, so .. fingers crossed!

[cesarfishman]

from what i saw in the lens roadmap, there is hope at least for a new 35 mm and 50mm (at cp+), so .. Fingers crossed!

ftfy.

[following.eric]

Yes. On crop cameras everything about 35mm and 50mm lenses change. To have crop and 35mm FoV, 24mm lens must be used.
For 50mm, a 35mm lens must be used.

Why 35 and 50mm? It is related to the way human eyes and mind see. 35mm is approximation what both eyes see in one considerate glance, and 50mm is what mind sees in more clear focus out of that 35mm scene. They are very natural FoVs, as we approach to subjects following instincts of our eyes and mind, which work (approximately) in those FoVs. So we feel to be at a comfortable distance, and naturally close enough, when using those two FoVs.

Although Pentax delivered 35mm Macro Ltd, it was a macro lens, slow in operation and aperture, and the 24mm was lacking. (21mm/3.2 is not truly that useful — they should have made 24/2 instead).

So in a strange way, Pentax cut it itself off the traditional FoVs, and did not deliver classic lenses for the digital age.

That is why I use Leica for 35mm FoV photography. Please don't blame me! If Pentax delivers 24/2 or 24/1.4 lens usable on crop, I would be more than happy to use a DSLR again. Likewise, if Pentax makes a 35/1.4 or 35/1.8, I would be happy as well to use a DSLR once more. If they make 50/1.4 too, then they will suddenly attract a wholla lotta more users to the system, both in crop and in FF.

Those three lenses: fast 24, fast 35 and fast 50, made for digital age, would make Pentax system really, really attractive. They are more important IMHO than revamping of the FA Limiteds. 24mm is more important and usable than 31mm, and 35mm is more important and usable than 43mm — ask any good photographer. FA Limiteds are fine to have, but only when the system has essential FoVs sorted out first.

From what I saw in the lens roadmap, there is hope at least for a new 35 mm and 50mm, so .. fingers crossed!

But if 50mm and 35mm back in the day on film where the best lens for what your eye sees and natural look of fov...How come they are still making 35mm and 50mm apsc lenses. Why not shift to only making 24mm & I guess 34/35mm apsc to replicate the 35 & 50mm film era.

Sorry if this is the wrong thread. I know ff camera lens tend to have different length. Usually when I see something like 24-70mm or 24-105 I know it's probably a ff lens because most apsc lens are 17/18- to something. or 55-something.