[BigMackCam]

Folks, may I respectfully request that we keep discussion of this lens, and Ricoh / Pentax in general, constructive and balanced. Criticism and dissatisfaction of the brand is fine in reasonable measure, but continued negativity over multiple posts doesn't help anyone on what is - when all's said and done - a Pentax enthusiast website, and may be considered brand-bashing on a case-by-case basis.

Thanks in advance & Season's Greetings to all

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 12-25-2017 at 05:01 AM.

[shardulm]

No, I shoot prime lenses not zooms.
You do understand that this makes a difference to people?

Appreciate your preference on primes over zooms. And I do understand that it makes a difference to people and more so it depends upon who you ask. Primes are great but they are too inconvenient and quiet unusable in event shoots. I come from a world where "Composition is everything" as far as image making is concerned. But I appreciate and welcome the advances in image quality.

The only ones that are available new, and reliably, are the 50 macro and the FA50/1.4. The DA50/1.8 is not a full frame lens, and does not cover the format especially well. Apparently the 55/1.4 does somewhat better in this regard, but it still vignettes quite badly wide open (I sold mine for that reason when I bought the K1)
What you are missing here is that while these lenses are out there, they are NOT available as new equipment, and they are not designed with the rigors of digital sensors in mind. You are moving the goalposts to a different stadium.

I have a feeling that you are in the wrong stadium. You should have never bought a K-1 and gotten into a system that offers most primes off the shelves instead, if it were so important to you.
The number one reason I considered Pentax was the backward compatibility of the lenses not their road map. And that is the beauty of the system that I cherish. On additional thoughts if DA*55 did not server the IQ (vignetting apart) then I wonder if you will ever like the new D-FA*. Good luck with that.
BTW that DA40/2.8 XS (super pancake and only one of its kind) is another beauty on K-1.

Well, the optics would be the biggie. That seems unimportant to you, and I guess that's fine if one doesn't care about image quality.

The trend in general is to make things the cheap (read as sustainable) way. So it is to be seen how much better the D-FA50s IQ is over the DA*55. IQ is right after composition in my book of photography. So yes I do care.

It's starting to look like the Second Coming will happen first. I've used the 15-30. It's an OK lens, but it's a horse, like it's stablemates the 70-200 and the 150-450.

Versatile is the word. Zooming in and out between 15 and 30 isn't practical in the field when you are shooting outdoor landscapes/skyscapes. As much as I love the the FA*24/f2, the D-FA24-70's versatility wins. Besides I hate to do lens swapping unless it is absolutely necessary to avoid sensor dust that almost always shows on the long exposures.
Having shot Canon FF system briefly before Pentax (and still occasionally) I can tell that no FF system is light and fluffy. FF systems are made of horses, stables and stablemates and is a given. Even the old FA* were heavy and big (with some exceptions).

[Jeff Lopez]

Well all said, like Repaap said, lets just enjoy our gear at hand...
Happy Holidays!

[Wheatfield]

Appreciate your preference on primes over zooms. And I do understand that it makes a difference to people and more so it depends upon who you ask. Primes are great but they are too inconvenient and quiet unusable in event shoots. I come from a world where "Composition is everything" as far as image making is concerned. But I appreciate and welcome the advances in image quality.

It's amazing I was able to make a living shooting events with primes only for a couple of decades then.

I have a feeling that you are in the wrong stadium. You should have never bought a K-1 and gotten into a system that offers most primes off the shelves instead, if it were so important to you.
The number one reason I considered Pentax was the backward compatibility of the lenses not their road map. And that is the beauty of the system that I cherish. On additional thoughts if DA*55 did not server the IQ (vignetting apart) then I wonder if you will ever like the new D-FA*. Good luck with that.
BTW that DA40/2.8 XS (super pancake and only one of its kind) is another beauty on K-1.

This may be. However, I've been in this stadium for about 30 years. The DA55 was fine except for the vignetting and rather rough bokeh, I had the 40 pancake and sold it. It was OK, but about two stops too slow to be a fast standard lens.

The trend in general is to make things the cheap (read as sustainable) way. So it is to be seen how much better the D-FA50s IQ is over the DA*55. IQ is right after composition in my book of photography. So yes I do care.


Versatile is the word. Zooming in and out between 15 and 30 isn't practical in the field when you are shooting outdoor landscapes/skyscapes. As much as I love the the FA*24/f2, the D-FA24-70's versatility wins. Besides I hate to do lens swapping unless it is absolutely necessary to avoid sensor dust that almost always shows on the long exposures.
Having shot Canon FF system briefly before Pentax (and still occasionally) I can tell that no FF system is light and fluffy. FF systems are made of horses, stables and stablemates and is a given. Even the old FA* were heavy and big (with some exceptions).

I think versatile is just another excuse for an unacceptably long timeframe regarding releasing lenses that should have been released concurrently with the K1.
As an aside, I own about 60 Pentax primes at this point, as well as half a dozen Fuji primes, I do know a few things about a lens system and what goes into it..

[Mikesul]

What on earth is the point of constantly complaining about this? Nothing we do will have any impact on Pentax release dates or the products they produce. Buy the products if and when they exist, use them and stop constantly whining about what they aren't. They will eventually release more lenses or, perhaps, they won't. Nobody here has any influence on that. I have always thought this was a great board for solving user problems, exchanging ideas about photography and photos. Please let it do what it does well and let go of the useless complaining. I thought I was a grumpy old many but jeesh!

[BigMackCam]

What on earth is the point of constantly complaining about this? Nothing we do will have any impact on Pentax release dates or the products they produce. Buy the products if and when they exist, use them and stop constantly whining about what they aren't. They will eventually release more lenses or, perhaps, they won't. Nobody here has any influence on that. I have always thought this was a great board for solving user problems, exchanging ideas about photography and photos. Please let it do what it does well and let go of the useless complaining. I thought I was a grumpy old many but jeesh!

Absolutely, Mike. Very well said, sir

[normhead]

And honestly, I'd like a 20-35 ƒ4 type lens but, my FAJ 18-35 has worked well when necessary. Maybe it's not the best lens ever but it works, and since I've never needed more than a 2650x1600 image, the K-1 gives me a 3x oversample and it's up to the job. Everyone tries to pretend things are critical. Things aren't critical. What we have from my perspective is a bunch of the immature throwing tantrums , because according to them, possible solutions "aren't good enough" for them.

In my experience there are lot of folks for whom nothing is ever good enough, and they are serious drains on the psyche. Best avoided and certainly not taken seriously.

If I took many of these posts seriously I would have dumped my Pentax gear long ago. But I continue to go out day after day and just shoot. And despite the objections of all these complainers, day after day, I come home, look at my images and they make me happy. I don't know exactly what it is these people want, but I know, it has nothing to do with my happiness. They are locked into some kind of myopic miserable mind state that has nothing to do with my reality.

Sometimes they do convince me that I should be unhappy.... then I come back to the real world. I have gear that does everything I ask it to.

Why do so many people want me to feel bad about what I own?

It wold make me really happy if they'd invest in some other brand, and go make those people feel bad about what they own. Pentax is such a small brand they shouldn't even be on the radar. They don't deserve the attention. We don't need buch of nagging nellies saying over and over "pentax isn't as big as many of the other brands and can't do what they do." Most of us accepted that long ago, and are just a happy with what they do.

Especially since I have a good kit that does what I want for prices I can afford. I don't know that could be true with any other brand. For me, I'm happy to make up for lack of cutting edge tech, too have decently priced gear. I know I have to make up for the limitations of the gear with technique. But that's exactly what I want.

My second hand Tamron 300 2.8 would cost me $9000 if were to upgrade to Sony glass and an A9. I have something. Switching to Sony, I'd have nothing. I'd barely have an A9 forget about a 300mm 2.8 lens. I'm not sure why that is so hard to comprehend. The choice is not Pentax or something else. It's Pentax or nothing. There seems to be a lot of folks here who have so much money that's not an issue for them,. They should learn some humility and stop shoving that in my face.

I have absolutely no respect for people who have so much money they can spend thousands to produce bad images and have $20,000 solutions to do what I do with $5000. To quote Shania, "that don't impress me much." And I certainly don't think they're smart.

---

Last edited by normhead; 12-26-2017 at 08:03 PM.

[Scorpio71GR]

Ugh, I don't understand the amount of negativity I have seen lately. It has driven me away from the forums. I keep coming back less and less. If I could buy a DFA*24-105 F4 lens for my K-1 it most likely would rarely come off. I have my DFA 28-105 which is just great. I do not know one professional photographer, and I know quite a few, who does not own a 70-200 f2.8 lens. I could not imagine shooting a wedding without one. The DFA*50 will definitely be a welcomed addition to the Pentax line up. I already have my DA*55 which I am quite happy with. The lens will be released when it is released. The DFA*85 is more appealing to me but I am sure it will be out of my price range so I will stick with my Rokinon 85 1.4. Pentax is such a small share of the market new items can only be released so fast. Release too many at once and you flood the market and do not recover profits fast enough. If you feel the need to always have the newest and "greastest" gear than switch brands and stop your whinning. Go pay twice the cost for your gear and let the rest of us enjoy taking photos with our outdated substandard gear. I know I certainly enjoy using all of mine.

[gazonk]

Ugh, I don't understand the amount of negativity I have seen lately. It has driven me away from the forums. I keep coming back less and less.

+1 to that, has happened to me too.

Happy holidays everyone and cheers to an amazing 2018 for pentaxians

[shardulm]

I think versatile is just another excuse for an unacceptably long timeframe regarding releasing lenses that should have been released concurrently with the K1.
As an aside, I own about 60 Pentax primes at this point, as well as half a dozen Fuji primes, I do know a few things about a lens system and what goes into it..

No it isn't. If they were not time conscious about their releases they would have never re-used Tamron's 15-30 and 24-70 designs (that were already established and proven better than even brand manufacturer lenses in those FLs) to bring them out with the K-1. The bread and butter (or their pride) of every manufacturer is the 70-200 and they kept that design to themselves but still released it with the K-1. This is so well thought out that there isn't any other strategy that could/would work for a company that has to to sustain given the smaller (smallest if you will) market share that it has. I want Pentax to sustain and thrive and they have a plan and I can see it.

On the other hand if I imagine K-1 being released with D-FA15/f4, D-FA 20/f2, D-FA31 (rebuilt FA-31), D-FA40/f2.8 (Rebuilt DA40), D-FA*50/1.4, D-FA*85/1.4, D-FA*135/1.4, D-FA*200/f2.8 (Rebuilt for FF although not necessary) and D-FA*300/f4 (Rebuilt for FF although not necessary) all at once and all priced at around $1200 instead of the holy trinity they released first then I see a disaster right there. It does not make business sense at all even for a non-business minded guy like me. Besides I would not like to carry 6 lenses and swap them during the events shoots. If you say you covered events with primes (in which coverage mattered) then you are the God of this business and I shall bow to you. I can't and don't even show up or sign up to events without the the 24-70 and 70-200 mounted on 2 K-1s (And DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 on 2 K-5ii before the K-1) unless I am not covering the event. And when I am not covering the event I usually do the K-01 and F-50/1.7 to have some fun.

[Winder]

1. Actually Nikon is doing most of the damage, probably because they are in trouble there are excellent Nikon FF deals for some time

Nikon with the D850 and Sony with the A7rIII are both really pushing forward hard, but they have to if they want to be successful. Both cameras are simply phenomenal.

2. 645z was Ricoh's cash cow for a few years but they are loosing market rapidly because of the same bad/slow lens release strategy as for K-1. Fuji doesn't share their MF "vision".

The 645 platform has a lot of potential, but it will take a lot of money to modernize and compete. Fuji is still a generation away from having a really good medium format body. The sensor in the GFX50 is simply too slow to really be a good mirrorless sensor.

3. Only APS-C has a decent modern lenses lineup and if Ricoh survive in camera business it will be because of APS-C cameras and lenses. Last peace of puzzle was DA*11-18 and it will be solved soon.

Ricoh is in a good spot with APS-C, but again they need to push forward and keep up if they want to attract new customer over other options from companies like Fuji. I expect that we will see 32MP BSI stacked APS-C sensors in the near future. Ricoh needs to update AF motors in some of the DA* lenses and optics in some other. Lenses like the DA* 11-18mm are great additions, but they need to be doing more. In the last 5 years there have been some significant improvements in lenses (quality of glass, manufacturing) to handle high resolution. We see this in the image quality of lenses like the D-FA* 70-200mm.

4. K-1 is much more consumer than a pro camera mostly because of consumer level AF capabilities (in compare to similar Canikon cameras). So their strategy with pro lenses for a consumer camera is a nonsense.

The K-1 is a professional grade camera in every way except AF and buffer/write speed. The image quality when pared with a lens like a D-FA* 70-200mm is amazing. Not everyone needs fast AF or big buffers, but a large percentage of the market does and the K-1 is not the best choice for them.

5. I don't think that Ricoh will be in camera business in 3 years because their slow motion business already looks like closing. Based on new lenses, even Sony's DSLR lineup looks much more alive than Ricoh's.

I have no idea where Ricoh is headed and that is a problem. They are obviously investing a lot in bringing high quality products to the market, but at they selling enough to continue doing that?

6. My strategy for a long time was Pentax ff. When I bought K-1 I thought that I'll never used APS-C again. But these days I am using my old K-5 10x more that K-1. I've been forced to changed my strategy because of lack of adequate FF lenses.

Once I received my K-1, my K-3 was relegated to being a back-up body that I never used. Sold it.

Ricoh has the ability to produce professional grade products, but are they willing to invest the money that it will take? The new D-FA* 50mm and 85mm lenses will be amazingly good, but the problem is that everyone's professional grade glass is amazingly good.

[ffking]

the problem is that everyone's professional grade glass is amazingly good.

No other manufacturer employs so many pixies though

[Imp]

I expect that we will see 32MP BSI stacked APS-C sensors in the near future

Ugh why, I don't need file sizes to keep getting bigger and bigger!!

Ricoh needs to update AF motors in some of the DA* lenses and optics in some other. Lenses like the DA* 11-18mm are great additions, but they need to be doing more

This I absolutely agree with. Pentax has the largest lineup of APS-C lenses, and yet the lens design philosophy is not clearly enumerated anywhere. Fuji was very clear that aps-c was good enough for them, and that they believed FF wasn't worth it, thus they would make a line of great fast WR primes.

I wish Pentax would simply be more assertive about their design philosophy, for those people who might look at the da limited lineup and think "what the?? why would anybody get those??"

If the DA* lenses became all metal build, ring drive SDM, HD, that would be nice to! Simply to create more confidence in the Pentax lens lineup. The lenses are there, a lot just need to be refreshed.

[BigMackCam]

Ugh why, I don't need file sizes to keep getting bigger and bigger!!

Agreed.

Personally, I've topped out at 24Mp... with my K-3/K-3II, Sony A7II and Hasselblad HV (Sony A99). I do understand why some people may need more (probably far fewer than those who want more), but I'm never going to be one of them. 24Mp provides me with all of the detail and most of the cropping range I'll ever need, and I don't sit around waiting for files to upload or obsess about the amount of disk space they take up...

There's a whole bunch of us on these forums still enjoying the 6 and 10Mp cameras from years back. The images look great to me

[ffking]

Personally, I've topped out at 24Mp... with my K-3/K-3II, Sony A7II and Hasselblad HV (Sony A99). I do understand why some people may need more (probably far fewer than those who want more), but I'm never going to be one of them. 24Mp provides me with all of the detail and most of the cropping range I'll ever need, and I don't sit around waiting for files to upload or obsess about the amount of disk space they take up...

I sort of agree and disagree:

I love he pixel density on APS-C 24Mp for wildlife - cropability for birds etc and fine detail for macro - and that would require over 50Mp on FF to replicate - but I also think that around 36Mp is a sweet spot for FF (given current technology) - it gives plenty of detail but good smooth transitions and high ISO and allows decent sized landscape prints with a bit of breathing space. I wouldn't want that to be much less for my style of photography. But it's very difficult not to be lured into more and more Mp when you see the crops available to the D850 etc - you just have to remind yourself what photography is really about.