[Winder]

I want Pentax to release more lenses, but I'm glad they didn't wait to release the K-1 until they had all of the lenses in place that they "needed."

Its great that they are communicating and showing that they are actually working on something. Everyone wants to them to release the highest quality lenses they can. A friend of mine shoots with an Olympus OMD-EMII and Olympus just announced the new 45mm F/1.2 PRO lens. He pre-ordered on Friday and they are shipping the middle of next month. This is how most companies operate most of the time. This is what you expect from a company that has it together. I know that all companies are going to hit delays and miss target dates every now and then.

[Wheatfield]

The K-1 is the meat! The K-1 is the turducken of cameras -- a K-5 stuffed inside a K-1 stuffed inside a pixel-shift 100 MPix body. The K-1 is a hearty feast of high performance that allows one to use millions of lenses of every description imaginable in a new a better way.

From my perspective, there no shortage lenses in the Pentax universe but there was a terrible shortage of Pentax FF camera bodies until the K-1.

It’s like owning a Ferrari, but having to drive it on old bias ply tires that were bought used off of an Edsel.

[normhead]

It’s like owning a Ferrari, but having to drive it on old bias ply tires that were bought used off of an Edsel.

Trust me, it's not like that.

It's more like you have all these lenses, and you buy this new body, and just like that , overnight, they all produce 30% more resolution than they did before and produce much clearer more desirable photos. There are piles of things I could do with better tires on my current vehicle, that doesn't mean I'm going to buy them if what I have does what i want to do. If all I'm going to do is drive twice a year to Niagara Falls, and the rest of the time I'm on dirt roads, off road or on pavement with an 80 KM speed limit. (50 mph) that are actually unsafe at that speed in many instances.

So a Ferrari even with good tires would be expensive, bottoming out all over the place and breaking struts etc.. The K-1 is the opposite of that. It works great in any conditions and any circumstance, generalized, not specialized, designed to do what i do. It doesn't take high end glass to do what i do. In fact I regularly get great results out of my FA 28-200/ FA 35-80 type lenses. Could they be better? Who cares, it's not like I'm competing with someone. A great scene taken with one of my crap lenses may be sellable. No image taken because I'm saving up for a lens I don't have isn't.

[Rondec]

It’s like owning a Ferrari, but having to drive it on old bias ply tires that were bought used off of an Edsel.

Not quite.

I just really am not sure how many images will be different between a K-1 shooting with the FA 43 or 50 macro and a K-1 with the new DFA 50 f1.4. Probably some, but it isn't as though I shoot a lot at f1.4. The issue isn't even sharpness, but depth of field and f1.4 has pretty shallow depth of field if you are anywhere close to your subject.

Driving a Ferrari on those sorts of tires would be flat out dangerous -- even at normal highway speeds, on the other hand, shooting a K-1, even with the lenses on the market currently, is a joy. We can always wish for better, but lenses like the FA limiteds didn't just turn into chopped liver with the advent of digital and they are more than capable of turning in outstanding images without too much effort.

[shardulm]

So it is now getting more clear to me that amongst stiff competition around the FL and aperture already this lens had to have the selling point. And that selling point is the ring motor which is clearly intended for Fast AF.

I would not be surprised if there is a D-fa*70-200ii version with ring motors on them are in the pipeline.

[bxf]

When I got my K-1 I had the FA 50 macro on it for a solid week. I had my FA 50 1.7 in the cupboard, waiting for a low light situation...
...
...Most of us are "around the house" type shooters.

Once again, Norm, in your somewhat typical fashion, you spoil the discussion with your pragmatism

[thibs]

I’m starting to feel that Ricoh threw us a bone when they released the K1, with very little intention of releasing anything with any meat on it.

Nope. The intention was to finally deliver an FF cam to Pentaxians. And do more if it sells well enough.
It did. So they moved.

Frankly, in the situation of RI, developing loads of lenses just in case the cam sells would have been stupid.

[Winder]

Frankly, in the situation of RI, developing loads of lenses just in case the cam sells would have been stupid.

If this were a completely new mount then could see that argument, but its not and these are not lenses that have not existed before for the K-mount. The 31mm, 43mm, & 77mm are all full frame lenses that have continued to sell well for APS-C bodies. Ricoh could have launched the K-1 with new versions of those lenses and that would have excited both ASP-C and FF users. The next issues is that the K-1 needs more glass if it is going to sell better. Not have a D-FA* 24mm on a camera that is arguably the best landscape FF camera on the market is pretty big mistake. A D-FA* 24mm would have also been a great lens for APS-C users.

I'm happy to see Ricoh announce the DA* 11-18mm. It shows they are focusing on the premium end of the market and keeping APS-C alive. They are in a great position to go head to head with Fuji in the premium APS-C market.

Hopefully the delay in getting these premium lenses to the market is because Ricoh has some premium bodies to launch this Spring with them. Sony marketing made the comment that they (Sony) were the challenger in the market and they had to innovate faster and bring new and exciting products to market faster if they were going to catch up to Canon and Nikon. Ricoh needs to be doing the same thing.

[normhead]

The 31mm, 43mm, & 77mm are all full frame lenses that have continued to sell well for APS-C bodies. Ricoh could have launched the K-1 with new versions of those lenses and that would have excited both ASP-C and FF users

That's quite an assumption. At best, an unsupported opinion. Let's never make the mistake of thinking of it as a fact.

The next issues is that the K-1 needs more glass if it is going to sell better. Not have a D-FA* 24mm on a camera that is arguably the best landscape FF camera on the market is pretty big mistake. A D-FA* 24mm would have also been a great lens for APS-C users.

There's a DFA 24-70... and a DFA 15-30 and a DFA 70-200, and a DFA 150-450. Every focal length from 15 to 450 is covered for everyone but the "I only like primes" crowd, and that's a very small (but vocal) crowd. Clients I have taken out with D800- D810s have owned exactly no primes, and just came out with the Nikon versions of the 3 above lenses. It's a lot more common than you might think, and just getting those guys to Pentax would probably up Pentax's market share about 500% percent. You don't have to do a frontal assault on every sector of the market all at once. You select the best strategy to get everyone with a specific need something that will work for them, like all the zooms. You can fill in primes at any point, or never, depending on demand.

Personally I have noticed the people carrying zoom lenses instead of primes has increased as zooms have become better and better, and with the Triumvirate type lenses championed by Nikon, Canon and now Pentax, I'm would need to be convinced primes are even necessary.

I once had a woman approach me, and ask how much my K-3 cost. I said about a gran. And how much did that lens (the DA*200) cost? Also about a grand. What's the zoom range? It's a prime it doesn't zoom. She yells out to her husband "Hey honey, this guy paid $2000 for that camera and it doesn't even zoom."

With the quality of modern zooms it is really hard to make case for primes. I carry my DA*200 instead of the DA* 60-250 because of the weight. And roughly 3 times out of 4, I regret it.

Where are the feet on this Reindeer? Or the tips of his antlers? I had the 200 prime on instead of the 60-250 which I left home. If I back up there's a fence in the way. I can't move forward, there's fence in the way. Oh well, I'll just have to snap a footless Caribou. That's blown opportunity. Honestly, in most of the situations I shoot, primes are not a functional solution. However in controlled situations like my blind, which is really a small bird photography studio, I like the primes. I build the studio to match my primes. Out in the real world, that's not a thing.



And the crazy thing is if you put the 60-250 image beside this image, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference without incredibly close and laborious examination 1:1 pixel peeping on a ,maximum 103 PPI monitor. You'd be looking for very slight differences in micro contrast. WIth a cursory glance they'd both be identical. But anyone who's done top quality zoom to top quality prime comparisons already knows this. Unless you're talking about the new Zeiss lenses, and Pentax isn't likely to invest in that kind of quality anyway. It's cost prohibitive.

So unless you're saying I need 24mm for some kind of studio work, I'm not buying it. I will try and pick up a K 20 F2 however. Just to have something when I want it. Something small, that doesn't take much space in my bag. The new designs are way to big to be carried "in case I need them" and usually not used.

The reason for the DFA 50 1.4 is that 50mm is such a versatile focal length on FF. I often go out with the K-1 and a 50 and nothing else. It can be purchased for an endless number of reasons, many of which I'm sure I can't even imagine. They will sell some. The 85 will be their studio portrait lens. They'll get to the others when more pressing needs have been addressed.

[aurele]

There's a DFA 24-70... and a DFA 15-30 and a DFA 70-200, and a DFA 150-450. Every focal length from 15 to 450 is covered for everyone but the "I only like primes" crowd, and that's a very small (but vocal) crowd. Clients I have taken out with D800- D810s have owned exactly no primes, and just came out with the Nikon versions of the 3 above lenses. It's a lot more common than you might think

I carry my DA*200 instead of the DA* 60-250 because of the weight. And roughly 3 times out of 4, I regret it.

it pretty much sum's up why people do buy zooms and high quality ones.

[Wheatfield]

Nope. The intention was to finally deliver an FF cam to Pentaxians. And do more if it sells well enough.
It did. So they moved.

Frankly, in the situation of RI, developing loads of lenses just in case the cam sells would have been stupid.

In other words, Ricoh threw us a bone.

[JPT]

The pictures that Ooku posted a couple of pages ago seem to have come from this blog post from Yaotomi Camera.

????????HD PENTAX-D FA ? 50mm F1.4 SDM AW - ??????????by????????

Besides the images, what they say is also interesting. they have evidently had some limited time to test the prototype.
- It is built to a new standard for Ricoh, to accommodate future cameras and sensors. Even if current lenses like the DA55 and FA50 do fine on the K-1, it seems that this lens is designed to exceed that.
- This will be only the second lens to be built to this standard after the DFA* 70-200. This is incidentally why the 70-200 was delayed so much, and the writer seems to hint that he knows the story behind that.
- It is confirmed to be KAF4, with electromagnetic aperture.
- Minimum focus distance of 40 cm.
- 9 aperture blades.
- The new ring-type SDM feels exactly like Canon USM lenses.
- Very smooth bokeh transition from in focus to out of focus.
- No purple fringing observed.
- Manual focusing is excellent.
- Price is not confirmed.
- Availability next spring - the writer speculated March.

[normhead]

In other words, Ricoh threw us a bone.

While I have no doubt that is true In your world view. It's pretty sceptical compared to many others.

Go to this page and check how many "likes" here are in the K-1 thread. If "likes" are "meat" there's more meat on the K-1 than any other Pentax camera, probably all the others combined and it's out performed cameras that have been out 5 years.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/190-pentax-k-1/

The enthusiasm for this camera has been lights out from day 1. I know this won't change your opinion, but you should at least be aware, others think very differently.

What you think, doesn't really matter for the people who post in this thread and how much they like the images taken with the camera. They just keep shooting and enjoying what they shoot, regardless of len is used or the assumed lack of lenses. It's amazing how much joy people can get out of a "meatless" camera. We just keep enjoying out K-1s with whatever we own.

I guess one person's "bare bones" is another's cornucopia. It's all about where you're coming from. Some look down from above and say, it doesn't reach my highest, others look up from below and think that's something I could never attain. They're both looking at the same thing. It's all about where they are looking from a personal perspective... but the overall forum response is not the one you've put forward.

The only people disappointed are those who wanted all new lenses for their K-1. Most of us aren't like that.
Most of us like the lenses we own and are delighted to be able to use them more effectively.

And the K-1 is a joy to use regardless of what I put on it. We don't need no stinking new lenses to be happy with this camera.

[ffking]

This will be only the second lens to be built to this standard after the DFA* 70-200. This is incidentally why the 70-200 was delayed so much, and the writer seems to hint that he knows the story behind that.

other than metal construction and aero bright coating, is there anything about that standard of construction that we know about, or do they just mean uncompromising (or scarcely compromising) optics I wonder?

[normhead]

The pictures that Ooku posted a couple of pages ago seem to have come from this blog post from Yaotomi Camera.

????????HD PENTAX-D FA ? 50mm F1.4 SDM AW - ??????????by????????

Besides the images, what they say is also interesting. they have evidently had some limited time to test the prototype.
- It is built to a new standard for Ricoh, to accommodate future cameras and sensors. Even if current lenses like the DA55 and FA50 do fine on the K-1, it seems that this lens is designed to exceed that.
- This will be only the second lens to be built to this standard after the DFA* 70-200. This is incidentally why the 70-200 was delayed so much, and the writer seems to hint that he knows the story behind that.
- It is confirmed to be KAF4, with electromagnetic aperture.
- Minimum focus distance of 40 cm.
- 9 aperture blades.
- The new ring-type SDM feels exactly like Canon USM lenses.
- Very smooth bokeh transition from in focus to out of focus.
- No purple fringing observed.
- Manual focusing is excellent.
- Price is not confirmed.
- Availability next spring - the writer speculated March.

Clearly information from some one who's actually had the lens in their hands.
More of that.... less of this please. ^