[pathdoc]

How much? Considering that this is going to be Pentax's flagship prime lens for the full-frame digital era, it will have to be at least as good as the FA31 - with a sticker price to match. And the cost of the FA31's tooling has probably long since been amortized...

Prospective owners who are counting their pennies will probably have to consider which of the 2.8 Trinity Zooms they can do without.

[Winder]

With all the leaks from the FBI, maybe Ricoh/Pentax can offer the bureau their secret to success. Since February, not a peep about the upcoming 50 and 85 1.4.

The camera side of the business doesn't seem to be much more than a hobby for Ricoh. They don't seem to have enough resources or they aren't willing to put those resources into R&D. The K-1 is an excellent camera for the money. Ricoh hit a homerun with the K-1 at that price point. But when you look at the K-1 it is simply a refinement of relatively old technology. The 36MP sensor is a 5+ year old sensor. GPS, Astro tracer, pixel shift, are all technologies that have been around for a couple of years. Ricoh has filed a lot of patents, but none of them have seen the light of day so far.

Maybe Ricoh has nothing to leak? Their strength seem to be in refining older technology and not developing anything themselves. Since announcing the Pentax K-1 3 years ago Ricoh has bought two lenses from Tamron and developed 2 lenses in house. They have the ability to build excellent glass, just not quickly. We get the 50mm this year (hopefully), the 85mm next year, a 35mm the following year, and a 24mm 4-5 years from now. Given that the K-1 is the best landscape camera you can buy, you would think Ricoh would have made the 24mm a priority, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Compare Ricoh to either Fuji or Sony and they are 180 degree opposites. The GFX line will have 6 lenses by the end of the year. With both companies we see aggressive marketing, strong product development and both companies are turning a profit from their camera division and growing it. Ricoh doesn't appear to have a marketing department and doesn't operate like a company that wants to grow its camera business. Ricoh might be as lost a Nikon, but since Nikon is bigger and has more of a market presence Nikon looks like a bigger train wreck.

[pathdoc]

@Winder

FUD merchant.

The only point where I think you're right relates to medium format - Fuji is about to eat Pentax alive in that market. As well as everyone else.

Unless of course the GFX's low price tag turns out to be a loss leader, boyed up by its APS-C sales. In which case Fuji have about twelve months before they crash and burn, after which Pentax will kick their bleeding corpse off the edge of a cliff and walk home with the medium-format prize forever.

[Kunzite]

Ricoh Imaging is not a hobby, but rather it must be able to stand on its own feet.

Since announcing the Pentax FF 2 1/2 years ago, they had the two lenses from Tamron and developed 3 D FA lenses in house (plus a DA). They're not stopping here.
The pace is slow, but we don't know what is happening: the D FA* 70-200 was delayed, and the story goes they had to revise the production process in order to offer the required level of quality. That's not entirely unexpected, as it's their first D FA* - and the most ambitious design in a while.
A fast (f/1.4) prime might pose similar challenges on its own, adding to the delay generated by the zoom. What we're seeing here is likely not a "business as usual" product launch rate.

[biz-engineer]

Sometimes no leaks means nothing to leak.

Well done moisture resistant lens seals don't leak.

[pathdoc]

And we have seen where churn-it-out-the-door "business as usual" got Nikon recently.

[Mistral75]

As for the price of the D FA★ 50mm f/1.4, based on the recently launched high-end 50mm f/1.4 lenses I would guesstimate €/$1,500 +/- €/$300.

[Winder]

@Winder

FUD merchant.

The only point where I think you're right relates to medium format - Fuji is about to eat Pentax alive in that market. As well as everyone else.

Unless of course the GFX's low price tag turns out to be a loss leader, boyed up by its APS-C sales. In which case Fuji have about twelve months before they crash and burn, after which Pentax will kick their bleeding corpse off the edge of a cliff and walk home with the medium-format prize forever.

I think the GFX is still a generation away from being a true competitor in the MF market. Fuji is using the same sensor technology as the K-1 and 645z and they are going to suffer from the same poor CDAF that those cameras deal with in live view. The readout speed of that sensor technology is not fast enough to get good AF. The second generation will probably have PDAF on sensor and then you will see a big jump in the AF of the GFX and that will make the camera appeal to a much larger market. If Fuji puts the A7rII sensor technology in a GFX body you will see a big jump in performance.

I don't see the GFX being a loss leader. The lenses are expensive and the body costs more than the 645z. It won't be a loss leader. Like the 645z, the GFX is going to open the door to more professionals than would otherwise be possible with just an ASP-C offering and Fuji is building on that in a way the Ricoh is not, or at least not currently. The 645 platform has more potential than the GFX if Ricoh will invest in it. The 645z line is designed for a larger 645 image circle and Ricoh has technology like pixel shift that they can employ. Like the K-mount line though, Ricoh doesn't seem to have the resources to develop and update glass for the 645 line. Simply getting one premium lens developed and to market seems to be a monumental task for Ricoh. The lenses that they do produce are excellent, but one lens every 1-2 years isn't going to get it done.

---------- Post added 05-13-17 at 12:08 PM ----------

And we have seen where churn-it-out-the-door "business as usual" got Nikon recently.

Nikon lost the battle several years ago and they are just now paying the price. You have to go back to the Canon 5DII launch to really see where the industry made a major change. Both Nikon and Sony has cameras that were better still image cameras than the 5DII. The Sony A900 and the D700 were both better than the 5DII in just about every way except that the 5DII had HD video. As much as I dislike it, video changed the DSLR market. Sony A900 became irrelevant and wedding shooters who wanted to expand their business offering dropped the D700 like it was radioactive to switch to the 5DII. Everyone from Zeiss to Samyang now make cine lenses for DSLRs. Nikon has matched Canon every step of the way in terms of still images, and in many cases Nikon has bested Canon in terms of still image quality, but Nikon never really embraced HD video like Canon. People have been more than willing to deal with the sub-par DR of Canon sensors.

Sony, unlike Nikon, dove head first into HD and 4K video. It was a pretty big slap in the face for Sony who was an industry leader in video to have Canon crush them by adding HD video to their DSLR. Given Sony's heritage you would have thought that Sony would have been the first to implement HD video in a FF DSLR. Until recently, Sony's marketing team has done nothing but throw as much crap on the wall as they can and see what sticks, but that seems to be changing. Video is something Sony knows a lot about and they have a long history in that arena. The blending of still and video opened the door for Sony and they will surpass Nikon in a couple of years. Sony has Nikon by the balls. Until a second sensor manufacturer enters the market who can challenge Sony's quality and technology Nikon is going to be in trouble.

Ricoh isn't in any hurry to do anything. Hopefully they will keep making high quality glass and bodies that represent a terrific value. They seem to have no desire to be an industry leader, but they seem to be in a good position to make market share from Nikon from below while Sony eats away at Nikon's top end users. The value the K-1 offers compared to a D810 is obvious. Nikon has been able to charge a premium for 5 year old technology and keep it profit margins, but those days are over. Ricoh is selling a camera that has more features for 1/2 the price, while Sony is making Nikon's most technically advanced cameras look like Commodore 64s. Yes, Nikon currently has more glass options and a better support network, but they don't have the technology.

[biz-engineer]

The second generation will probably have PDAF on sensor and then you will see a big jump in the AF of the GFX and that will make the camera appeal to a much larger market.

I did not know that photographers select a MF camera for its AF speed.

[Winder]

I did not know that photographers select a MF camera for its AF speed.

If you actually read my post you would understand what I mean by "make the camera appeal to a much larger market.".

[biz-engineer]

If you actually read my post you would understand what I mean by "make the camera appeal to a much larger market.".

Oh yes, I read your post, and I think I understand. Do you have a 600mm lens to mount on the GFX for action shots? If not, why would people need a fast AF on an MF camera?

[Winder]

Oh yes, I read your post, and I think I understand. Do you have a 600mm lens to mount on the GFX for action shots? If not, why would people need a fast AF on an MF camera?

It has nothing to do with long glass. The ability to track moving children of simply track a flower girl running down the isle in bad light is a big deal. I just shot a wedding where my K-1 w/31mm LTD was hunting just trying to track the bride walking down the isle. The wedding was moved inside due to weather and the lighting was awful, but they still expect image to be in focus. I was 50% on the keeper rate and that is not very good for a modern camera. I switched to my A7II with face detection and got better results.

MF is popular with portrait shooters and many portrait shooters also shoot wedding and family (moving children). The GFX is not going to be a viable option for these photographers because it can't focus quickly in challenging light and track a subject. Most of use don't have the money to spend on a GFX just to leave it on a tripod in the studio. We need a camera that can be used for a variety of projects. If the GFX were to get fast accurate AF then all of a sudden a lot of us can justify the GFX. The GFX becomes a more versatile camera to a lot more people. I shot wedding with a Canon 5D original and a Contax 645 for years, but the expectations of the clients have changed significantly in the last 5 years.

Fuji still has a long way to go. Their face and eye detection is pretty poor compared to Sony's. For portrait and wedding shooters the ability to get sharp eyes consistently is huge. When you can worry about composition and keeping the camera level while the AF automatically finds the face and tracks it about the frame you get much better images than if you are trying to focus on the face with the center AF and trying to recompose. Hard to do that when the subject is walking. Back in the day we just shot wide and didn't even try. Today its completely possible.

[D1N0]

No news no rumor just fact

[monochrome]

Off topic - following Winder:

Today was the Christening of my twin grandchildren. I forgot spare batteries for K-1 - DOA (rookie), so I shot all the baby-toss groups with a Canon 1" 20Mp G7 Xll that was in my son's car for video. Tiny - Q-sized. Touch screen AF, tracking face detection (and eye detection if a head shot), fast 31point AF, full manual available - would be a very nice dSLR. Cost $900 last year, still $680.

And the images were very nice for web display and probably printable. If this is possible on a 1" 20Mp sensor why can't Pentax do PDAF AF better?

(the more I mess with my son's Canon gear the more I understand Pentax's weaknesses and strengths).

[dstar]

Well very interesting comment about Sony
Pentax camera full line and Sony full line cant match 2. Sony price every new camera skyrocket up Interesting how many people can buy new A9 /4500 $ body??? . Pentax can be very attractive to people with price and super quality image

Also how much bigger sensor we need 36 , 45 or more .Price will not go down only up
Did you look price Phase one camera with 100MG sensor......480000$
Best Ricoh can do now lenses lenses lensess.
Also point shot camera market fast go down as well Why Everybody has Apple or Samsung phone with high quality camera
This another factor