[biz-engineer]

although perhaps it's easier to achieve in a huge lens.

Balancing of lens and camera body is often forgotten (I don't know why..).
Small primes made sense on film bodies because film bodies were smaller.
The limited primes made a lot of sense on K7, K5, K3 and now KP dslr series.
Now, although K1 is the smallest full frame DSLR, it is still a bit bigger than K7, K5 and K3, and the K1 body balances well with larger primes.
Slower primes for the K1 wouldn't make much sense as there is already a nice line of limited primes.
It makes sensor to design new primes lenses that balance well with full frame DSLR and take the opportunity of having a bigger size budget to max out the lens finishing and deliver unequaled optical quality.
If I look at third party lenses and lenses of other brands, they are as sharp or sharper than Pentax lenses but they kinda render pretty flat compared to the Star lenses from Pentax. We have to recognize things as they are: Pentax may be lagging behind in areas such as AF, but the Star lenses have their own beautiful rendering that no other lens can match exactly.

---

Last edited by biz-engineer; 07-24-2017 at 01:27 PM.

[Rondec]

According to Pentax:

“To minimize the level of vignetting at the edges of the image, a D FA-series lens must be designed considerably larger than its DA-series counterpart, because the incoming light must reach every corner of the larger image sensor,” the optics designer says. “But it isn’t the PENTAX style to avoid this problem by thinking first about the camera’s image processing technology while we are designing the lens. There are times when we discuss acceptable focal lengths and the reasonable characteristics of certain lenses with the product planning team. But in the end, we always work to design the most advanced optical units.”

In other words, the DFA* lenses will be huge to minimize vignetting. Pentax will not rely on image processing to deal with this issue:

“The PENTAX lens development policy has an unwritten rule that we won’t rely on image processing technology,” says a leader of the PENTAX optical design team. “The image desired by the photographer must be produced by the lens, with any remaining aberrations expected ones. We design with considerable respect for the distinctive character and flavor of the individual lens.”

I can find no convincing evidence to believe that Pentax has abandoned it's old lens philosophy. The DFA* 70-200 is sharp and renders beautifully. There's no necessary conflict between the two --- although perhaps it's easier to achieve in a huge lens.

Sony has tended to under engineer their lenses and then rely on in camera post processing to take care of vignetting and distortion, but even they decided that they needed a line up of bigger lenses that are (I think) sharp without a whole lot of post processing. The G Master lenses are quite large, but there is a group of photographers who want that sort of lens.

It is really impressive what lens profiles can do, either in camera or in Lightroom, but there is a price that is paid in terms of corner noise and sharpness when you fix a lens's flaws with computer algorithms.

[luftfluss]

The Hirakawa school of design was purged after the Hoya coup. His design philosophy of designing lenses to excel in 3d scenarios rather than on 2D test charts is no longer in practice anywhere. My next two lens purchases will likely be the 31 and 77. They bring something to the table not widely available in the camera world. It's sad to see so many folks praising edge to edge sharpness, not realizing they are giving up 3D rendering quality to get it.

Mr. Hirakawa;s lenses as far as I can tell concentrate more on an exceptionally sharp centre and smooth bokeh in out of focus areas than on edge to edge sharpness. The lenses produced today I would call "modern technical". More concerned with technical 2D sharpness than artistic 3D rendering.

Part of the issue, I think, is that more and more people conflate subject isolation with "3D rendering" - especially those who are somewhat new to photography.

[awscreo]

So many strong opinions lol. I enjoy shooting with A 50 1.4, but I'm definitely looking at buying new one when it's out. I remember really liking my friends art 50 1.4, and his other art lenses, and this new lens seem to be aimed at the same (if not higher) level of performance.

[Na Horuk]

Yes, the DFA* 50mm seems to follow the trend of large, highly corrected lenses. But remember, its a * lens, and star* lenses always had sharpness and fast aperture as priorities. The Limited series is the one with more character at the cost of slightly slower aperture (DA limited being super compact as well). And its still Pentax, so even the * lenses have some character.
I really hope this Pentax beats the Sigma 50mm art in colours, contrasts, bokeh, overall rendering. If it only wins in sharpness, it will be a hollow victory

[normhead]

“To minimize the level of vignetting at the edges of the image, a D FA-series lens must be designed considerably larger than its DA-series counterpart, because the incoming light must reach every corner of the larger image sensor,” the optics designer says. “But it isn’t the PENTAX style to avoid this problem by thinking first about the camera’s image processing technology while we are designing the lens. There are times when we discuss acceptable focal lengths and the reasonable characteristics of certain lenses with the product planning team. But in the end, we always work to design the most advanced optical units.”

That sounds suspiciously like the Sigma design team. Aw for the good old days when Pentax was Pentax and Sigma was Sigma. Now it appears Pentax and Sigma are both Sigma, although Pentax is Sigma lite, with a fraction the lens designs coming out every year.

[Rondec]

That sounds suspiciously like the Sigma design team. Aw for the good old days when Pentax was Pentax and Sigma was Sigma. Now it appears Pentax and Sigma are both Sigma, although Pentax is Sigma lite, with a fraction the lens designs coming out every year.

I feel like we are repeating stuff that was said earlier in the thread, but the Limiteds aren't going anywhere. You can still get the FA 31, 43, and 77 and they will still be as small and well made as ever.

But not all Pentax lenses have been tiny lenses and the * series has traditionally been bigger with larger apertures and a focus on wide open sharpness.

[normhead]

I feel like we are repeating stuff that was said earlier in the thread, but the Limiteds aren't going anywhere. You can still get the FA 31, 43, and 77 and they will still be as small and well made as ever.

But not all Pentax lenses have been tiny lenses and the * series has traditionally been bigger with larger apertures and a focus on wide open sharpness.

There has never been a Pentax 50 the size of this new 50, but there has been this....


Anyone else see the similarity?


We used to have Sigma making lenses to steal Pentax customers. Now we have Pentax making lenses to try and steal Sigma customers.

[biz-engineer]

We used to have Sigma making lenses to steal Pentax customers. Now we have Pentax making lenses to try and steal Sigma customers.

Warning! Hot topic. :-)

[awscreo]

There has never been a Pentax 50 the size of this new 50, but there has been this....


Anyone else see the similarity?


We used to have Sigma making lenses to steal Pentax customers. Now we have Pentax making lenses to try and steal Sigma customers.

But that's how all modern 50 1.4's look like no? Sigma, Sony, Zeiss, all their top offerings have massive size and a ton of glass inside, and they all look fairly similar.

[normhead]

Warning! Hot topic. :-)

I withdraw the remark then your honour.

[Rondec]

There has never been a Pentax 50 the size of this new 50, but there has been this....


Anyone else see the similarity?


We used to have Sigma making lenses to steal Pentax customers. Now we have Pentax making lenses to try and steal Sigma customers.

Have you seen photos of the newest Zeiss lenses? Or the G Master lenses? It isn't just Sigma making big lenses any more.

[biz-engineer]

I withdraw the remark then your honour.

Hopefully , people wouldn't complain about lack of third party lenses in k mount lol.

[wkraus]

The limited primes made a lot of sensor ...

Isn't that what we all want?

[biz-engineer]

Isn't that what we all want?

:-) , typo mistake, corrected