Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-18-2018, 12:10 PM   #2656
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Lawrence, KS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,938
No, I think Norm was suggesting that there's no Pentax lens known that has both SMC and HD coatings on different elements in the same specific copy of the lens. Like my DA 15 doesn't have some SMC coatings and some HD coatings in it at once. They're all SMC or HD.

Or maybe he's suggesting something else. And I'm not sure how we'd even know that there's such a lens on a shelf somewhere for sale today or in the past. Outside of a prototyping effort or some other odd situation I don't know why Pentax would do such a thing.

Today's contributions has me wondering about the line pairs that can be resolved by printing on canvas. Very thought provoking.

01-18-2018, 12:35 PM   #2657
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 30,199
QuoteOriginally posted by pres589 Quote
No, I think Norm was suggesting that there's no Pentax lens known that has both SMC and HD coatings on different elements in the same specific copy of the lens. Like my DA 15 doesn't have some SMC coatings and some HD coatings in it at once. They're all SMC or HD.

Or maybe he's suggesting something else. And I'm not sure how we'd even know that there's such a lens on a shelf somewhere for sale today or in the past. Outside of a prototyping effort or some other odd situation I don't know why Pentax would do such a thing.

Today's contributions has me wondering about the line pairs that can be resolved by printing on canvas. Very thought provoking.
This all goes back to the notion that FA ltd are assembled from old stock. I think we can assume that any lens since the DA 560 in 2013 has been HD. Components manufactured before that were SMC. With the lenses like the 21 ltd that have both SMC and HD versions, there was a second manufacturing run since that time. SMC lenses released since 2008 were sell offs of old stock, not new production runs, and that would include all the FA lenses.

That gives you a really good indication of how many manufacturing runs Pentax has going. Probably not more than 4 -8 per year/ or 4 at a time, of which 2 are old designs and 2 are new ones. You would guess given market share, Nikon or Canon would have up to 8 times that many. Hence the shortage of selection in modern Pentax glass.

At that rate, not only do they have a lack of new designs, they have no chance of catching up. Their new designs will no longer be considered "modern" by the time they've hit all the bases to fill out the line up.

What they've done is probably the best we could hope for. 15-450 covered in high quality zooms with a few modern primes thrown in. If you take that production as a base line, Pentax would need 20% more market share to go to 5 production lines instead of 4. So long story short, Pentax modern designs will always be behind the big boys. and they will lose ground year after year, At current market share they don't have the capacity to pull even forget about surpass anyone. They simply can't afford to run more production lines with this amount of market share. New lenses can only hurt sales of older lenses of which they still have stock. The pie is too small.

You gotta be happy with what you have. With two or three new designs a year, the odds of them getting to less popular UWA designs anytime soon is really poor. Too bad the new UWA is APS-c. It's hard to imagine that many shooters are going to be completely happy, without relying on some older pre-2008 glass.

Last edited by normhead; 01-18-2018 at 12:55 PM.
01-18-2018, 12:50 PM   #2658
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,730
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Since the limited are all hand assembled, my assumption is that they are assembled in small numbers to meet current demand, as needed. If you aren't doing an all machine production run, there is probably little cost benefit to assembling those lenses before there is a demand for them, and it would certainly mean less money tied up in the warehouse waiting for buyers.



Manufacture, or assemble? And how would we know?

The current 31 ltd listed at B&H, is SMC, the glass at least was manufactured while pentax was still doing SMC coatings. All the newly manufactured lenses are HD.

As well all the DA*s are SMC. All the DFAs are SMC but the 5 recent ones are HD. My guess is all lenses designed and manufactured after the HD DA 560 have been HD, while all lenses from before that have already been ground and coated, and will remain SMC until current blanks are gone. I really don't see Pentax going back and forth on their production lines producing both SMC and HD lenses on different days. Just a guess, but a guess with evidence to support it.

I'd give it at least a 70% chance all current production runs are with HD coatings. SMC are all being assembled from pre-manufactured glass.

As far as I know there is not even one lens that has been manufactured with both SMC and HD coatings. Another reason to believe the coatings have already been applied, and that new coatings are not being applied to older glass, or older coatings are not being applied to newly manufactured glass.

You can almost say, SMC, manufactured before the HD DA 560, HD, manufactured after the HD DA 560. There is not a shred of evidence that there is a coating facility still doing SMC coating. SO we know all FAs and Das were manufactured before 2013. When they were assembled is the only question.

Since the limiteds are hand assembled. whether or not they are assembled to meet demand or were all assembled at time of production is open to question. assembly line produced models I think you have to assume the entire production was done at time of manufacture, including assembly.

By my count, there are 9 HD lenses released including the 560, which we can round off to 2014, making a little over 2 releases a year. That would seem to be it for Pentax's production lines for APS-c and FF combined. People should temper their expectations with that knowledge.
To be fair, there isn't a shred of evidence that your guess is close to true either.
01-18-2018, 01:00 PM   #2659
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 30,199
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
To be fair, there isn't a shred of evidence that your guess is close to true either.
No , but it could be true. That's all we are saying here. There is however evidence that their hasn't been a production run of SMC glass since 1213, and probably quite bit before then. As I said, the only question is, has all FA stock been previously assembled, or are they still doing small hand assembled batches. The dates of manufacture for SMC glass, are pretty much known as to when the last batches were run. HD started in 2013. Just that gives you frame of reference for understanding how many production runs Pentax has pm a year,, how many old designs, how many new designs, and therefore a sense of "are they ever going to make the lens I want?" and the odds around that.

Or to put it another way, my desire for a new light weight 20mm prime given that the 50 and 85 are announced, new 35s 40s 70s 135s 20s and 24 are not announced. So if my guess is right and those will be the next 6 primes, the next year will be for producing 50s and 85s, we are almost guaranteed a 35 and 135 will come before the 20 and 24 we are looking at at least 2 years away before a 20-24 is even considered, And probably 3 or 4 before it arrives, if all my assumptions are correct, and they actually are going to produce those lenses. There could just as easily be a 22, a 28, a 30 1.4, a macro of some kind, a 150 or 180, there pretty much be any dam thing because they currently have almost nothing. But with shocking developments like the DA* 11-18, I don't think anyone has a clue what they're thinking. Why would they have 8-12 equivalent lens available in APS-c when most landscape people would prefer to shot UWA with a full frame? It's mystifying. The APS_c crowd already has the 12-24. They are duplicating APS-c lenses while ignoring UWA on FF, to me it makes no sense.

I just have to be positive and assume they re doing the best they can with what they have to work with. And given falling DSLR sales, what they have to work with is likely to include fewer production runs over the next 10 years, than there were over the last 10. Given that at least 20 viable lenses, both zooms and primes that would fill gaps in their line up are conservatively needed, at 2 per year, what are the odds fo them coming out with your dream lens? You are much better going with what's already out there, than dreaming about what might come.

Or to be even more to the point, if I really want a modern UWA I just have to cough up the doh for a 15-30 and quit dreaming about something else. Apart from the weight thing it sounds fantastic. There is probably no 15-30 ƒ4 ) -r 20 3.5 or 24mm coming, There are too many other gaps to fill and too few resources to fill them with.

Pentax should tap into Zeiss like Sony and Panasonic did. It might be their last shot at actually having a line up of modern lenses where a photographer can go too work with glass, all less than 10 years old in ti's design and concentrating more on the efficiencies of small scale production runs. More smaller shorter runs, more fvarities of glass a year, instead of long runs producing glass to last 10 years in a warehouse.


Last edited by normhead; 01-18-2018 at 02:47 PM.
01-18-2018, 01:05 PM - 2 Likes   #2660
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Durham, England
Posts: 10,056
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
There is however evidence that their hasn't been a production run of SMC glass since 1213, and probably quite bit before then.
1213... Did they even have the abacus back then?!
01-18-2018, 01:09 PM   #2661
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,409
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
No , but it could be true. That's all we are saying here. There is however evidence that their hasn't been a production run of SMC glass since 1213, and probably quite bit before then. As I said, the only question is, has all FA stock been previously assembled, or are they still doing small hand assembled batches. The dates of manufacture for SMC glass, are pretty much known as to when the last batches were run. HD started in 2013. Just that gives you frame of reference for understanding how many production runs Penta has year,, how many old designs, how many new designs, and therefore a sense of "are they ever going to make the lens I want?" and the odds around that.
But there was supposed to be a run of FA limiteds in 2016 according to Asahiman.

Confirmation FA Limiteds are back in production - unchanged from last batch - PentaxForums.com
01-18-2018, 01:10 PM   #2662
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 10,900
I don't believe they would make and keep large batches of coated glass elements, just to keep them in storage until needed (if ever). Rather, they kept some SMC coating equipment for such needs.
01-18-2018, 01:31 PM   #2663
Pentaxian
robjmitchell's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne Aus
Posts: 1,446
The vacuum deposition equipment are still there and are presumably being used for SMC coating as well as the Aerobright II coating (SMC + HD) that was apparently used in the DFA*70-200. Yes HD is cheaper but it may change the colour rendition of the lenses, so they would not change the formula for low volume high cost lenses.

01-18-2018, 01:45 PM   #2664
Forum Member




Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 80
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
I just sold several of my Pentax lenses on e-bay as I transition over to Sony as my main system. The Sony lenses are all more expensive than the Pentax/Sigma lenses that I was selling, so My idea was to sell on e-bay and buy used Sony on e-bay. I listed my 31mm LTD 3 times before getting a bid. Of the 3 times I listed it the highest number of people watching the lens was 6. After several weeks of my 31mm sitting on e-bay it sold for $650 to the only person who bid on it. I attempted to buy the Sony-Zeiss 35mm F/1.4 FE on e-bay, but there were very few for sale. The ones I did bid on ended up with 20-30 bids on them and the prices ranged from $1,200 - $1,400. I finally just bought a new copy from B&H for $1,499.

My Sigma 85mm in K-mount actually held its value better than the Pentax glass. I paid $899 for that lens new and sold it for $725. The Sigma 85mm had the most bids and watchers of any of the lenses I sold.

Nothing scientific about this, just my experience. The cost of switching over is going to end up being a lot higher than expected simply because there is very little demand for Pentax glass.

Ricoh needs to find a way to keep the brand relevant. They make really great equipment and they are very close to having some of the best you can buy, but they have to solve some really big problems. Since switching to the A9 as my primary camera I have had nothing but a great experience with the performance of the camera. No frustration with AF or buffer. Image quality is excellent.
Every thing I have read on Sony indicates it is the lens cost that is the biggest detriment to Sony's FF brand. I am not a pro but I still wanted to be able to afford to put together a high quality system. The K1 checked a lot more boxes for an all around everyday camera than any other; and I do mean near pro level quality. It is the best camera and system I will ever need to own.

It should not be a shock that finding used lens for a newer FF camera system is hard to do. Sony may have been around since the near pro release of the mirrorless A7R and lower priced A7; they really took off more recently with their second and third editions. Most who bought into the A7 or A7R have probably upgraded their camera and held onto their lens. Which makes a lot of sense when you have to invest 1000.00 to 2000.00 dollars in every decent lens you buy.
01-18-2018, 02:28 PM   #2665
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 3,574
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
(...) I think we can assume that any lens since the DA 560 in 2013 has been HD. Components manufactured before that were SMC. (...)
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
(...). There is however evidence that their hasn't been a production run of SMC glass since [B]2013, and probably quite bit before then. (...)
The smc Pentax-DA L 18-50mm f/4-5.6 DC WR RE was launched in February 2015 and is currently manufactured together with the HD Pentax-DA 18-50mm f/4-5,6 DC WR RE.
01-18-2018, 03:11 PM   #2666
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,730
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
24MP is perfectly fine for 36x24 on canvas. Even a 16MP APS-C camera can produce a great image that size on canvas. The texture of canvas hides a lot.

Sony A9 Review - Image Quality
"ISO 800 images, as expected, show a bit more noise that the previous ISO, and here, a 24 x 36-inch print looks fantastic. However, overall noise is still so low, and fine detail is still visible and sharp that a 30 x 40-inch print is definitely acceptable at this sensitivity, especially given the normal viewing distance for a print of this size."
When I was working with a studio here in town, we routinely blew up images from my K20, and later, K7 to that size. The reason they used my Pentax rather than their Nikons when they knew the customer wanted a big print was because they recognized the quality of the Pentax primes that I was using over the Nikon zooms that they had available.
It wasn't hard to see, either.
Pretty much, I got all the jobs that required really high resolution lenses, as the Nikon zooms just didn't cut it.

---------- Post added 01-18-18 at 04:18 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
No , but it could be true.
It could be true that pigs can fly too.

QuoteQuote:
That's all we are saying here.
Well, until you can come up with some sort of citation that it is true, why don't we just presume that this particular flight of fancy is nothing more than a work of fiction shall we?

QuoteQuote:
There is however evidence that their hasn't been a production run of SMC glass since 1213, and probably quite bit before then.
Citation please, and lets have real evidence rather than self referencing circular reasoning.
QuoteQuote:
As I said, the only question is, has all FA stock been previously assembled, or are they still doing small hand assembled batches. The dates of manufacture for SMC glass, are pretty much known as to when the last batches were run. HD started in 2013. Just that gives you frame of reference for understanding how many production runs Pentax has pm a year,, how many old designs, how many new designs, and therefore a sense of "are they ever going to make the lens I want?" and the odds around that.
ummm, you are aware that SMC stands for Super Multi Coating don't you?
Just wondering, as you seem a bit confused. There is no such thing as "SMC Glass".
01-18-2018, 03:50 PM   #2667
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 30,199
QuoteOriginally posted by robjmitchell Quote
The vacuum deposition equipment are still there and are presumably being used for SMC coating as well as the Aerobright II coating (SMC + HD) that was apparently used in the DFA*70-200. Yes HD is cheaper but it may change the colour rendition of the lenses, so they would not change the formula for low volume high cost lenses.
But they did, on the 15 ltd, 21 ltd, the 35 2.8, the 40 ltd.the DA 70 2.4 the 16-85 and the DA 55-300 ƒ4-ƒ5.8/

So if there is a colour change, why are those lenses not affected? When Pentax released the HD coatings they claimed it reduced the trasmision loss from the coating from about 4% to about 3.5% or something like that, I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong. It was never indicated cost was a factor (not surprising of course).

So the colour change thing really doesn't hold up. And the cost thing is suspicious. It may be cheaper, but supposedly it's better optically. And if that's so and there has been a 31 ltd production run since 2016, why would they change the 21 ltd coating, but not the 31 ltd coating if they had the choice? Are you saying they changed the formula for the 21 ltd to accommodate the new coatings?

I'm just looking at what they've done and tried to draw conclusions. The stuff you're putting out there needs sources.

Just, "I know guy who knows a guy" would be a good enough source for me.
01-18-2018, 07:13 PM   #2668
Pentaxian
robjmitchell's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne Aus
Posts: 1,446
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
But they did, on the 15 ltd, 21 ltd, the 35 2.8, the 40 ltd.the DA 70 2.4 the 16-85 and the DA 55-300 4-5.8/

So if there is a colour change, why are those lenses not affected? When Pentax released the HD coatings they claimed it reduced the trasmision loss from the coating from about 4% to about 3.5% or something like that, I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong. It was never indicated cost was a factor (not surprising of course).

So the colour change thing really doesn't hold up. And the cost thing is suspicious. It may be cheaper, but supposedly it's better optically. And if that's so and there has been a 31 ltd production run since 2016, why would they change the 21 ltd coating, but not the 31 ltd coating if they had the choice? Are you saying they changed the formula for the 21 ltd to accommodate the new coatings?

I'm just looking at what they've done and tried to draw conclusions. The stuff you're putting out there needs sources.

Just, "I know guy who knows a guy" would be a good enough source for me.
I'm just going off memory of the pentax press releases when these technologies were announced. HD was claimed to be both cheaper and better than SMC. Both aim to maximize transmission across the colour spectrum. We only know that HD improved transmission overall, colour effects are not known. SMC was constantly evolving over decades as well. The warm colour cast present in the Fa limiteds but not Da lenses could be due to either the glass or the coatings. Its possible pentax did not abandon that character by using HD coating. I also notice my Da* lenses have more natural colour than my Hd 21. Its also stated that the top of the line aerobright coatings are a combo of SMC and nanocoat, but pentax have not consistantly stated when they are using it. To make aerobright coating they use the same equipment as SMC, so if there are slight differences like colour cast it stands to reason they might not want to change the formula to HD without telling us.

Edit
Since you wanted references, everything I said can be confirmed by the following links other than HD being cheaper.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-reflective_coating
http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/lens/technology/
In terms of reflectance the following has been observed per surface
Uncoated Glass 4%
Single Coating 1%
Typical Multicoat 0.4%
SMC 0.1% (stated as 1/10th reflectance of single coat)
HD 0.1% (but with less aberrations)

Last edited by robjmitchell; 01-19-2018 at 12:02 AM.
01-19-2018, 03:58 AM   #2669
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Warsaw
Posts: 446
Last batch of FA limited are no different from previous production runs, beside somehow "adjusted" coatings according to Asahiman. But-not at all HD ghost less grade. Reason to revive them was simple- Ricoh had no other premium FF primes for K-1 new owners demand at that time. I can remember how fast used FA Limiteds hanging on ebay for months, was disappearing when K-1 was released, and that was just after the shops stock run out. Same was for used FA85/1.4. IMO I don't think they made any more production run of tree amigos since that.
01-19-2018, 04:00 AM   #2670
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,409
QuoteOriginally posted by robjmitchell Quote
I'm just going off memory of the pentax press releases when these technologies were announced. HD was claimed to be both cheaper and better than SMC. Both aim to maximize transmission across the colour spectrum. We only know that HD improved transmission overall, colour effects are not known. SMC was constantly evolving over decades as well. The warm colour cast present in the Fa limiteds but not Da lenses could be due to either the glass or the coatings. Its possible pentax did not abandon that character by using HD coating. I also notice my Da* lenses have more natural colour than my Hd 21. Its also stated that the top of the line aerobright coatings are a combo of SMC and nanocoat, but pentax have not consistantly stated when they are using it. To make aerobright coating they use the same equipment as SMC, so if there are slight differences like colour cast it stands to reason they might not want to change the formula to HD without telling us.

Edit
Since you wanted references, everything I said can be confirmed by the following links other than HD being cheaper.
Anti-reflective coating - Wikipedia
PENTAX Lens Technology / Lenses / Products | RICOH IMAGING
In terms of reflectance the following has been observed per surface
Uncoated Glass 4%
Single Coating 1%
Typical Multicoat 0.4%
SMC 0.1% (stated as 1/10th reflectance of single coat)
HD 0.1% (but with less aberrations)
I agree. Pentax called everything pre-HD coating as SMC, except for a few lenses that got aero bright. But that coating changed over time. I have to say that I thought that change to HD coating was more of a marketing gimmick than anything else. It may have better light transmission, but I don't know that I could pick out the difference between images of, say a DA 40 and HD 40 out of a line up. But it was something that allowed them to re-release a bunch of older lenses with the only changes being a slightly different coating (which actually was cheaper to apply) and rounded aperture blades.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, drive, dslr, effort, f/1.4, f1.8, fa, im, k-1, lens, lenses, management, omega, opinion, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, people, photo, product, quality, ricoh, sigma, size, statistics, tamron, taste, theory, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Diglloyd reviews DA 35, DFA 50 and DFA 100 Macro lenses on the K-1 Matchete Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 06-09-2016 09:18 AM
Sigma 50/1.4 EX vs. Pentax FA 50/1.4 and DA 55/1.4 DonovanDwyer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 01-24-2014 12:54 PM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 10-20mm/4, Pentax FA 50/1.4, DFA 100mm/2.8 Macro Alam Sold Items 5 11-20-2011 03:02 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:19 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top