[BigMackCam]

I have a use for this lens and I am concerned about length, weight and filter diameter. The 85 will be even bigger that is my major concern.

Then I stand corrected

I tend to see the size and weight as a fairly simple recipe... as I've already suggested, the optical formula will largely dictate the length. The speed of the lens will largely dictate the diameter, and of course the size of the optical elements. The number and size of optical elements, along with the number and sturdiness of metal components, will largely dictate the weight.

The length, size and weight can all be reduced, but at some cost and compromise - different / simpler optical formula, slower maximum aperture, reduction of mechanical complexity, greater use of plastics instead of metal.

I guess the point I was trying to make - and should have made more clearly on my first attempt - is this: potential buyers who prioritise speed, optical performance and build quality will simply accept the resulting weight and dimensions. Those who would happily compromise on any of those elements may legitimately wish for a lighter and physically shorter lens.

[D1N0]

If you want a small 50 1.4 There is the FA 50mm F1.4 or the 43mm F1.9 limited. If you want a compact portrait lens, there is the FA 77mm ltd F1.8. Why would Ricoh make a bunch of similar lenses? We will have choice between compact and portable with great IQ and ultimate IQ but somewhat heavy and large. You can't have both unless you get both lenses.

[Kunzite]

The 85 will be even bigger that is my major concern.

I wonder about that, and for the D FA* 35-or-whatever mm wide.
If they're all using the same ring-type SDM, and I mean the same - to reduce cost by not making different versions - the potentially smaller lens would be larger in diameter than necessary.

[Zygonyx]

The DFA/DA645 *25/4 was AW (as any star lens) and had the filter drawer so yes, that's possible.

DA560 also is AW and has a filter drawer.

Possible, but not useful : look at the deep filter shread in front of the 11-18mm.

[thibs]

Possible, but not useful : look at the deep filter shread in front of the 11-18mm.

Oh, I guess the size of filters has no impact on price then....

[JPT]

I think you are probably right, and they are positioning this lens as the ideal companion for Astrotracer.

In the light of Yaotomi’s comment, it would be very interesting if the mystery switch on the lens turned out to be an on/off switch for an integrated heating element to prevent condensation on the lens.

Now I think about it, the switch being a zoom lock makes a lot of sense if this is a zoom lens designed to be suitable for astrophotography. It will be pointed upwards for long exposures, so the zoom lock would be necessary

[ogl]

The weight will be a result of the number of glass elements and metal components (i.e. "build quality"). The length will be largely dictated by the optical formula.

Those who have a genuine use for this lens won't be concerned about the weight or length

I had just gave estimated information and nothing else

[Zygonyx]

Oh, I guess the size of filters has no impact on price then....

In any case peanuts compared to the lens price

[mee]

In any case peanuts compared to the lens price

It seems circular filter prices have come down quite a bit in the past few years.. or at least the budget ones have come up significantly in quality...

I would like to see more standard filter thread sizes on the entire lineup.. say 77mm or 82mm on the entire range. That way one can use a couple filters and skip the stepping rings. Plus, with the step rings, it means one cannot use their lens hood.

[k1man]

Wow, what a relevation, I have the 55mm F1.4 works a treat on my K1 but an 85 seems miles or years away

[JamesDCrockett]

If you want a small 50 1.4 There is the FA 50mm F1.4 or the 43mm F1.9 limited. If you want a compact portrait lens, there is the FA 77mm ltd F1.8. Why would Ricoh make a bunch of similar lenses? We will have choice between compact and portable with great IQ and ultimate IQ but somewhat heavy and large. You can't have both unless you get both lenses.

For people like me who are going to get full use out of my FF weather resistant camera. I bought into this system and will not buy another lens that is not weather sealed. They need a FF Nifty 50 that is weather sealed. They also need a FF prime wide angle that is weather sealed. I am not patient but I am determined, so I can wait

[awscreo]

For people like me who are going to get full use out of my FF weather resistant camera. I bought into this system and will not buy another lens that is not weather sealed. They need a FF Nifty 50 that is weather sealed. They also need a FF prime wide angle that is weather sealed. I am not patient but I am determined, so I can wait

Isn't the 50 2.8 macro weather sealed?

[Zygonyx]

No
Unlike the last DFA 100 macro version.

[JamesDCrockett]

Isn't the 50 2.8 macro weather sealed?

Not according to BH. There is no WR or * designation either. So I would assume they are correct.

[awscreo]

No
Unlike the last DFA 100 macro version.

I see. Then I guess we still have the 55 1.4) it's AW right? Should be pretty tough. I saw few on ebay for pretty reasonable amounts, below $500 used