[Reed]

Updates for "consumer" lenses are introduced between production runs and usualy not announced before the production starts. When current factory supply is gone-then I would expect they will make that move. As it was done for minor HD upgrade of DA limiteds, or DA55-300 both upgrades(being probably their best selling zoom lens beside the kit 18-55, now upgraded already to 18-50DC RE).

[Uluru]

What would hurt Pentax is having only very expensive lenses. They're not Leica; they cannot operate with obsolete technologies sold at premium prices.

I understand there is a bit of irony in this remark. But Leica do not sell obsolete technology. Let me explain; Leica M lenses are so simple they virtually avoid technology driven mechanism that could obsolete them. In that regard, they are almost technology free.
Regarding the optical design: construction of elements, choice for glass and coatings, Leica uses best of the best. So Leica M is kind of difficult to put into words. On the other hand, Leica SL / T uses latest and best in tech too. So they are not selling old tech; they are quite up there. I think Leica SL is the most modern mirrorless camera in fact, and SL lenses are cut above other mirrorless lenses.

The only problem I see with the DA 35 and 50mm is that they're not DC lenses. The screw drive AF noise can putt off people.

I think majority of Pentax users agree on these; any new lens that came in the last 6+ years, should have been DC or PLM only. Screwdrive is really not the way to go, and I don't really understand why Ricoh Imaging issued any lens with a screwdrive. It's noisy, it is bad for video, not so quick for stills, it just is ancient tech. I cannot even imagine that Pentax did not have some strategy for future lenses already (they must have had something), and I don't understand why the new entity resorted to the worst option of them all.

Can somebody enlighten me? Can this question be asked in some of the interviews?

[clackers]

I think majority of Pentax users agree on these; any new lens that came in the last 6+ years, should have been DC or PLM only. Screwdrive is really not the way to go, and I don't really understand why Ricoh Imaging issued any lens with a screwdrive. It's noisy, it is bad for video, not so quick for stills, it just is ancient tech. I cannot even imagine that Pentax did not have some strategy for future lenses already (they must have had something), and I don't understand why the new entity resorted to the worst option of them all.

Can somebody enlighten me? Can this question be asked in some of the interviews?

Pentax no longer design screwdrive lenses, Uluru, and haven't, for years.

[Uluru]

Pentax no longer design screwdrive lenses, Uluru, and haven't, for years.

The primes we talked about, then 18-55s and 50-200s are screwdrive lenses.
Macro lenses are too. All 55-300 iterations, up until this last one, were too. All DA Limiteds are.

18-50 is DC, but see what users say here on PF about its use in real life.

So in view of that, does it mean 18-55s and 50-200s will not be offered anymore, and instead, users have to buy much bigger 16-85 or 18-135? This in interesting question though, because six years after, there is finally a push in DC/PLM direction with those two or three new lenses offered in kits, but no prime lens is available with such or similar tech.

---

Last edited by Uluru; 04-25-2017 at 05:59 PM.

[clackers]

The primes we talked about, then 18-55s and 50-200s are screwdrive lenses.

These kit lenses are from 2008, the WR versions from 2013.

I'm sorry, but there is no interest from Pentax anymore in developing screwdrive lenses.

[Uluru]

These kit lenses are from 2008, the WR versions from 2013.
I'm sorry, but there is no interest from Pentax anymore in developing screwdrive lenses.

For a while, Ricoh Imaging was (re)issuing screwdrive lenses.
In 2013, under Ricoh Imaging, 55-300 was reissued with screwdrive, and all DA Limiteds again, with the screwdrive.
That was the matter of discussions above.
It is good they won't be doing it anymore, but the valid question remains: why they did it at all?
We'll probably never get the honest answer. So let's leave it at that.

[clackers]

For a while, Ricoh Imaging was (re)issuing screwdrive lenses.
In 2013, under Ricoh Imaging, 55-300 was reissued with screwdrive, and all DA Limiteds again, with the screwdrive.
That was the matter of discussions above.
It is good they won't be doing it anymore, but the valid question remains: why they did it at all?
We'll probably never get the honest answer. So let's leave it at that.

You speak as if it was a mistake!

I'll not sell my Limiteds, nor waste money buying upgraded versions.

My screwdrive lenses are fast to focus (such as the Tamron 70-200 and FA*300), just noisy.

Tamron and Sigma both chose to make screwdrive lenses for K-mount, not just Ricoh.

[BigMackCam]

You speak as if it was a mistake!

I'll not sell my Limiteds, nor waste money buying upgraded versions.

My screwdrive lenses are fast to focus (such as the Tamron 70-200 and FA*300), just noisy.

+1

I'd love to see the DA and FA Limited lenses updated with PLM (assuming it proves to be a long-term reliable motor), but only because I think that's the direction Ricoh should go with Pentax AF glass. I'm already very satisfied with my screw-drive HD DA Limited lenses and couldn't justify buying updated versions. The screw-drive is a little noisy, yes, but - as you rightly say - fast (and accurate, for that matter). The noise hasn't ever been a problem for me... I think it's one of those things people make a big deal about, when in a large majority of situations it really makes little difference. Much like the AF.C tracking arguments.

[Reed]

Uluru, There was no "new" screw drive lenses projects for almost a decade beside the 35 and 50 DA primes(that are to be honest little redesigned iterations of older FA series 35/2 and Fa 50/1.7),a that have their optical scheme shared with 40yrs old M series primes. DA limited are dated back to Hoya dark days, and probably designs are even older.
Almost all screw drive lenses released after 2005 are minor upgrades, or tweaks of existing production technology, done in between production batches.
Still older kit zooms, are probably the best kit bundled zooms ever made considering all big players in aps-c market. DA18-50DC RE is nice lens, its not very good. But its not ment to be stellar, it was designed to fit into jacket pocket along with K-S2. I had this lens for few days, never felt annoyed by it. It has nice resolution, nice color rendering and unfortunately slower autofocus. I like the idea of it being retractable.
Ricoh learned their lessons from 18-5DC with 55-300 PLM design, I believe there will be another revision of this lens. In my opinion this lens was test ground that proved them, that mechanical aperture lever is no go in the future.
Keep in mind that there is a main reason for not doing quick replacements and tweaks-overproduction. In some cases smaller batches that are sold out are better solution. No one want to keep "bad stock". Canon had produced their 50/1.8II for more than 20 years, even when production ceased some 5-6 years ago, they had and probably still have plenty of them, that was holding back introduction of 50/1.8 SDM till the last year.

[biz-engineer]

For a while, Ricoh Imaging was (re)issuing screwdrive lenses.

Screwdrive is not bad, it focuses fast and free of motor failure. Noisy yes, especially for the one behind the viewfinder, but it's not audible at 1 meter away from the camera.
The downside of the screwdrive on the plastic DA is that the material is so light weight that cameras like the K3 or the K1 drive the AF rather aggressively from one end to the other.
The DA plastic primes are cheap and good, but they don't have hoods, they don't have the better optical quality found in the FA35 or FA50. Those plastic DA go well on entry level camera, but kinda don't match well on a camera like the K1.

[Reed]

Most of screw drive annoying "angle grinder" noise is generated not by AF motor(that only gives sound similar to electric screwdriver) itself but because the metal drive shaft in lens friction on metal or plastic lens mount. I took mounts off from all my screw drive lenses and lubed that mount area and lens shaft with "dry" Teflon grease. Never had any more problem with that disturbing noise again.

[lightbox]

I wouldn't mind seeing PLM in the next generation of DA primes, but I'm not so sure about the Limiteds. If you think about it, the Limiteds are self-contained and more compact insofar as they don't require you to lug separate hoods that take up bag space. They'll ride along happily in a coat pocket or a small case, and all but disappear despite their heavier build.

If PLM detracts from that amazing quality of the Limiteds in any way I think it'll be a setback. The DA's can, IMO, afford to put on a little bit of mass without much complaint. People buy them for their cost first and foremost. Their lightness is marketed as a benefit (it is, caveat lens hoods) but it's really part of the cost savings.

[LightBug]

Isn't the DA 55-300 PLM lens focus by wire, i.e. has no mechanical linkage for focusing? Backward compatibility would suffer a lot if all future PLM lenses do not include mechanical linkage for focusing.

[Reed]

Indeed it is, but that is the price of upgraded auto focus drive and aperture module. Sometimes you have to cut out from past to move on.

[Jonathan Mac]

The only noisy screwdrive lens I have is my Sigma 24mm f/2.8. My other AF lenses (which are all screwdrive) I would not class as noisy, though they do make more noise than my Canon & Tamron EOS lenses, which have in-built focus motors. I have that same Sigma lens in EOS mount and despite the in-lens motor, it's noisier than my screwdrive DA limiteds.

Screwdrive is old technology and in-lens motors can be faster and quieter but they're also more prone to breaking down. Not that screw-drive is infallible - I recently had to have the AF on my DA 40mm limited repaired. Many lenses with in-lens motors are also bad to focus manually as they're designed so that the focus ring drives the motor rather than directly moving the focusing elements.