[nzondlo]

agree, just an expression that it'll be great AF, which is reasonable to expect/think based on what we know of a new SDM ring motor (hope described correctly), and a general trend in Pentax lenses to improve on speed, and given what we think it's competing against etc, yes, really nice bang up autofocus is hopefully a given.

Bingo. Everyone here so jumpy.

[mee]

You know, I don't read anything about "the best AF of any lens Pentax has ever produced" in Nzondlo's post...

agree, just an expression that it'll be great AF, which is reasonable to expect/think based on what we know of a new SDM ring motor (hope described correctly), and a general trend in Pentax lenses to improve on speed, and given what we think it's competing against etc, yes, really nice bang up autofocus is hopefully a given.

Rangercarp didn't claim Nzondlo said it would have the best AF of any lens Pentax has ever produced though. Kunzite has either misread, is pointing out the obvious, or raising a strawman.

Rangercarp himself said HE thinks the new 50mm would have the best AF of any lens Pentax produced.. and yes I think if we just take that as a general statement that the lens should have high performing focusing capability, I think we can all agree. Obviously Ricoh isn't going to give their * D-FA primes, that they've spent years developing, an underperforming focusing motor.

That cheap 55-300 PLM is pretty snappy, surely this upscale prime should be at or better.

[clickclick]

Bingo. Everyone here so jumpy.

too much caffeine sitting on edges of our seats in anticipation?

[biz-engineer]

Lot of people laughs at really strange things...nothing to worry about that, unless you are an comedian.

Those who work as intermediary between camera makers and the end customers, get asked for feedback on new camera concepts year(s) before things are being discussed in internet forums. Camera makers and dealers can read forum discussions, what they say about it is that most forum info is totally made-up from very little data to begin with. They also say that information circulating over the internet is often completely wrong compared to what they know internally.

[repaap]

Those who work as intermediary between camera makers and the end customers, get asked for feedback on new camera concepts year(s) before things are being discussed in internet forums. Camera makers and dealers can read forum discussions, what they say about it is that most forum info is totally made-up from very little data to begin with. They also say that information circulating over the internet is often completely wrong compared to what they know internally.

Well, that is true. And the fact that in internet there is A LOT of false information, that is true too. Still they have been laughing a long time about this pentax thing. Old habits die hard. Even if Ricoh is building it up, it is still easy to neglect it just because.. let them laugh, as long as they keep things on the shelfs.

[bxf]

You know, I don't read anything about "the best AF of any lens Pentax has ever produced" in Nzondlo's post...

Nobody said that that's what he said.

agree, just an expression that it'll be great AF

Feel free to interpret it as such, but it's an assumption. A statement like this:

sharpness goes beyond just center. With bangin' AF to boot

Sounds like a statement of fact, which, as has been pointed out, cannot be established by looking at photos, excellent as they may be.

[Rondec]

It won't take too much to be the fastest auto focusing 50 available for k mount cameras. As before mentioned in this thread, the DA 50 and FA 50 are screw driven and not particularly fast to focus. The 50 macro has a longer focus throw since it is a macro. The DA *55 has a pretty slow SDM motor and a long focus throw to boot. I think we can safely say that the auto focus of this lens will be the best for this focal length without saying that it is the fastest ever.

At the same time, I don't even know why that's a big deal in this focal length. It isn't like you are going to be shooting sporting events with a 50mm lens -- at least, I wouldn't think so...

[Kunzite]

I'm just pointing out the disconnect between the actual posts and what he's been accused of.

It's reasonable to assume the new ring-type SDM would be somewhat faster than a DC motor (on a similarly built lens), because otherwise it makes no sense to use a new motor (DC is pretty much bulletproof). Assuming the AF would work much better than on the manual focus Zeiss is not wrong, either ;-)

By the way, how do you evaluate sharpness if not by looking at photos?

---------- Post added 14-12-17 at 12:46 PM ----------

At the same time, I don't even know why that's a big deal in this focal length. It isn't like you are going to be shooting sporting events with a 50mm lens -- at least, I wouldn't think so...

I'd say, this is not as much about the lens' usage - but rather about it being a high margin product which can include this technology.
Likely, the D FA* 85mm f/1.4 and maybe the D FA* 35mm f/1.4 (if that's what it will be) would use the exact same ring-type SDM; thus building up some volume on this expensive component.

[bxf]

By the way, how do you evaluate sharpness if not by looking at photos?

It's the AF, not sharpness, that cannot be evaluated from photos.

And just to be clear, I don't have a problem with the hope or expectation that "bangin' AF to boot" will be real. I'm merely defending Mistral75's comment

Shall I infer from the above that you have also seen the autofocus behaviour "here"?

[Kunzite]

People didn't even bother to ask Nzondlo what he meant.
And, do we really have to transform this into a prolonged discussion?

[nzondlo]

It's the AF, not sharpness, that cannot be evaluated from photos.

And just to be clear, I don't have a problem with the hope or expectation that "bangin' AF to boot" will be real. I'm merely defending Mistral75's comment

Was talking about the improved SDM motor already mentioned in a few articles. Kunzite has already figured out exactly what I meant by inferring from the context of what we already know and can see.

[Wheatfield]

Interesting comments!

Hard for us outside of the company to really know definitively. But I'll wager it is a combination of aspects -- mostly material cost due to higher tolerances and IQ requirements (higher resolution, sharper edges and corners, less coma and distortion) and less sales so more markup to make up for production costs. Possibly there is also added costs just to not be perceived as a budget brand. Sell it too low and some people incorrectly link that in their heads to the product being inferior to a higher costing competitor.

It is really hard to tell specifically. But I'm guessing the more optically corrected a formula, the more expensive it is to produce. I think the issue is the costs per performance is more exponential than linear.

It's because if the lens isn't perfectly sharp corner to corner wide open or displays any optical defects at all, it will be labeled as junk by people who take pictures designed to make the equipment fail and look at everything at 400%.
We have all been victimized by the zombies who sit in front of computer screens and bray like jackasses every time they are victorious and find one pixel out of 35 million out of place due to some random optical defect.
It costs a lot more to build a perfect lens than a merely very good one, put the manufacturers are forced into a situation where anything less than perfection just isn't good enough.

[pres589]

Anyone seen Kenspo lately?

[thibs]

Anyone seen Kenspo lately?

He's secretly toying with the dfa50 behind closed doors.

[Mikesul]

Anyone seen Kenspo lately?

He recently posted a spectacular shot in the K-1 forum. Probably a better use of his time than visiting here.