[Rondec]

How many people would actually buy a slight update of FA 50 or FA 43 with the addition of in lens motor and quick shift? Seems like if that is what Pentax came out with, most people would do a hard pass on such a lens. Those lenses do exist and will continue to exist. If want one of those, it is better to buy from current stock.

Options are good. I would rather walk into a restaurant with multiple things on the menu and choose, rather than only have one option to choose from. Eventually Pentax probably will update older lenses, but the priority is getting out new lenses with wide apertures, fast auto focus, and edge to edge sharpness. Which type of lens works best for an individual photographer is up to them and I for one am glad that both will be available to Pentaxians.

[normhead]

It does beg the question of where is this lens? What happened? FF cannot be the reason. And they can't blame that earthquake once more.

None of us has a clue what happened or what "should" be by now. The FF can be the reason, the earthquake could be part of it. Everything is still on the table. There's no reason to rule anything out. Plus there could have been a problem with suppliers of various glass elements or a manufacturing issue, there are so many possible reasons a lens didn't come out on time. The DAF 70-200 was released twice after a problem with the first design. If you don't know, it's because it's "need to know" information.

The only reason we know about the DFA 70-200 is because the problem didn't become apparent until testers were sent copies. I'm sure there are many instances where problems are caught before they get that far.

[awscreo]

Good point. Though I don't really count the 100 macro WR, as it was not a recent development (was it created during the Hoya ownership or even before that?)



Yes, please!



I can confirm that the DA21 can hold its own and outresolve the K-3's 24 MP sensor with small pixels. The DA 40 LTD and FA77 can both outresolve the K-1's sensor (the DA40 is weaker in the corners but it's not a FF lens in theory).

But the quality of these lenses is not their absolute sharpness, even though they are not lacking. It is their rendering. I'd be willing to sacrifice some test chart performance to preserve the so-called pixie dust.

How is it measured? Those lenses aren't tested at dxo with the k-1, and I have no other point of reference personally. Can you share your method of testing, I'd be very interested just to understand the principle behind it without just using dxo as a reference.

---------- Post added 02-23-17 at 08:36 AM ----------

Indeed. I'm glad Ricoh is producing those big monsters (50/1.4 and 85/1.4) for the pros who really need them (as well as for the review snobs and the test chart jockeys who will also buy them), but leaving that DA Wide Zoom on there so long without actually producing anything is getting pretty old.

Lol that's so condescending. So if you don't find the lens appealing, the other person is a test chart jockey?) jeez, someone has an ego the size of this lens

[normhead]

Lol that's so condescending. So if you don't find the lens appealing, the other person is a test chart jockey?) jeez, someone has an ego the size of this lens

Maybe you've missed the criticism of the DA 35 2.4 as being too "clinical". The test chart jockeys declared it a hit. I barely use mine. IN the following test, the sharpest lens barely exceeded the score it would have received by chance if i'd tested the same lens 7 times...
Your favourite image, 35mm images. - PentaxForums.com

Simple fact, the test chart junkies have done a huge disservice to photography by testing the low hanging fruit, the things easiest to quantify, not because they are the most important thing, but because they are easiest to test. Any honest person, would look at the above results and endeavour to find out what characteristics made the favourite the favourite.... the test chart junkies just keep cranking out tests, that have been demonstrated to have little to do with user appreciation of anything other than test chart images.

And really, test chart images are really unappealing.

---

Last edited by normhead; 02-23-2017 at 08:49 AM.

[gazonk]

DA21 isn't close enough?

Might be, but I'd prefer a somewhat faster lens. But the DA21 sure sits fine in the middle between my DA15 and DA35.

On the other hand, for the price of a DA21 you almost get a GR II

[awscreo]

Maybe you've mossed the criticism of the DA 35 2.4 as being to "clinical". The test chart jockeys declared it a hit. I barely use mine. IN the following test, the sharpest lens barely exceeded the score it would have received by chance if i'd test the same lens 7 times...
Your favourite image, 35mm images. - PentaxForums.com

Simple fact it the test chart junkies have done a huge disservice to photography by testing the low aging fruit, the things easiest to quantify, not because they are the most important thing, but because they are easiest to test. Any honest person, would look at the above results and endeavour to find out what characteristics made the favourite the favourite.... the test chart junkies just keep cranking out tests, that have been demonstrated to have little to do with user appreciation of the images.

But you can't honestly tell me that you think anyone that buys this lens is either a pro, or a test jockey? Can't I just want this lens? With my own reasons? Paying with my own money? Christ, it's such a dumb debate

[pres589]

I know its more to it then just that. Im not stupid. It was just one reason to get my point ahead to the complainers.

I didn't mean to insult you. Just, maybe, hold out more information as to why it's so large? Like "It's a no-excuses attempt by Pentax engineers to provide a well corrected lens that can compete with companies most of us wouldn't consider due to cost or availability. Small size is not a design priority vs. image quality and 'speed'." You've stated as much multiple times in this crazy discussion thread.

[mee]

None of us has a clue what happened or what "should" be by now. The FF can be the reason, the earthquake could be part of it. Everything is still on the table. There's no reason to rule anything out. Plus there could have been a problem with suppliers of various glass elements or a manufacturing issue, there are so many possible reasons a lens didn't come out on time. The DAF 70-200 was released twice after a problem with the first design. If you don't know, it's because it's "need to know" information.

The only reason we know about the DFA 70-200 is because the problem didn't become apparent until testers were sent copies. I'm sure there are many instances where problems are caught before they get that far.

Yet, norm, they released the DA 55-300 PLM, 16-85mm WR, 18-50 RE, Limited 20-40mm within the Ricoh time. I don't think all (any?) of them were on the timeline. It makes more sense, if completely unsure of delivery, to simply remove it from the timeline and 'surprise' everyone once it is more along in development. Instead of continually kicking that can down the road saying 'soon.'

[normhead]

The timeline only says what they want you to know they are working on. Nothing more. It's not supposed to say anything more than that.

It says, "if you are thinking of buying this from a third party you might want to wait to see what we come up with." But, no law says you have to wait if you find something else you like.

What would you prefer? That they don't announce anything until it's ready to roll off the production line?

[Doundounba]

So if you don't find the lens appealing, the other person is a test chart jockey?

I did not say I find the lens unappealing, and there were _three_ categories in my post, only one of which was "test chart jockey". Do note that my definition of "pro" is fairly wide - if you have enough photographic experience to determine that you have a genuine photographic need for one of these lenses, you are definitely a "pro" in my book. If you have lots of money and simply want the "best" - in this case, "best" usually means "best reviewed" - fifty money can buy, size no object, then by all means, go ahead, too!

Can't I just want this lens? With my own reasons? Paying with my own money?

You certainly can, and I hope you do! I hope Ricoh sells tons of these.

[normhead]

But you can't honestly tell me that you think anyone that buys this lens is either a pro, or a test jockey? Can't I just want this lens? With my own reasons? Paying with my own money? Christ, it's such a dumb debate

Whoever implied different?

I would caution against buying a lens on test chart numbers. Clearly, a lens can have features that make it's images attractive that don't show up on test charts. Why did a cheap kit lens ( the FA 35-80) do so well on my test? It renders better images than the "hot shot" lenses. No one knows why. The test chart junkies certainly won't have an answer. Everything they know, doesn't explain it.

The only reason I don't use my 35-80mm more is it's so cheaply made, I'm afraid of breaking it.

But it takes really nice images.....


Ultimately what will sells this new lens ( to most of us) will be it's images.

[BrianR]

People are overestimating the size of this lens. In the latest Pentax marketing materials, you can clearly see how our favourite Pentax stock-model has modified the 50/1.4 prototypes into a pair of earrings:

[Doundounba]

The timeline only says what they want you to know they are working on. Nothing more.

After five years, I now tentatively translate "DA Wide Zoom" as Japan-corporate-speak for:

"We are not abandoning APS-C and there will be new DA lenses, so we don't want to have a completely empty APS-C roadmap, because then you'd freak out. But those lenses we are working on, well, we don't want to tell you about them yet. Heck, we might not even know what they will be because we're currently super busy making much needed new full frame lenses on a very small R&D budget. So we're leaving that DA Wide Zoom on there as a placeholder. Yeah, that specific lens, it's probably never going to happen. We were going to rebadge the Tokina 12-28mm F/4, but that kinda fell through. Can't tell you why. But we are not abandoning you, APS-C shooter! So stick around and buy a KP!"

[MJKoski]

Now that there is some indication of its size, I estimate the price to be 1500 euros locally. That is, when compared to 55/1.4* SDM which sells for ~700-800 euros here.

[normhead]

After five years, I now tentatively translate "DA Wide Zoom" as Japan-corporate-speak for:

"We are not abandoning APS-C and there will be new DA lenses, so we don't want to have a completely empty APS-C roadmap, because then you'd freak out. But those lenses we are working on, well, we don't want to tell you about them yet. Heck, we might not even know what they will be just yet because we're currently super busy making much needed new full frame lenses on a very small R&D budget. So we're leaving that DA Wide Zoom on there as a placeholder. Yeah, that specific lens, it's probably never going to happen. We were going to rebadge the Tokina 12-28mm F/4, but that kinda fell through. Can't tell you why. But we are not abandoning you, APS-C shooter! So stick around and buy a KP!"

I don't need new lenses to sell me a KP. Pentax has the most extensive APS-c lineup out there. My 18-135 at 24mm is awesome. But I guess what you say is true for some people.

Any lens released for the K-1 will be useable on APS-c. My wife loves the DFA 28-105 on her K-5. It's not like the current focus on FF lenses doesn't also add to what's available for purchase for APS-c users.