[sbh]

...

If you read the Development story on the Ricoh website, designer Masazuko Saori put an extra corrective group to the front to lift the performance of this thing up into and maybe above Sigma and Zeiss levels, never mind Canon, Nikon and Sony. Size, weight and cost wasn't his concern so he was able to do this.

And yes, the 85mm will benefit from his exciting design template. It was actually the first scheduled of the Star series, but market research caused them to do the Fifty first.

Yes, that was an interesting read, I really enjoyed it. I hope it works out that way and the market will perceive it like that as well. I think they deserved it.

In the K-5 era they offered the DA*55 as an 85 equivalent first – and IIRC there was no 50mm equivalent star lens. Now they put out the 50mm first followed by the 85mm. I think 35mm, 50mm and 85mm should be a standard offer for prime shooters. Add 20mm and 135mm for landscape and portrait shooters although the Pentax community might be too small for such star lenses to get profitable.

[monochrome]

Yes, that was an interesting read, I really enjoyed it. I hope it works out that way and the market will perceive it like that as well. I think they deserved it.

In the K-5 era they offered the DA*55 as an 85 equivalent first – and IIRC there was no 50mm equivalent star lens. Now they put out the 50mm first followed by the 85mm. I think 35mm, 50mm and 85mm should be a standard offer for prime shooters. Add 20mm and 135mm for landscape and portrait shooters although the Pentax community might be too small for such star lenses to get profitable.

I’d do a *105 before the *35 unless they add a 24~105 * Zoom. Not much call for 135 these days.

[tellwill]

I’d do a *105 before the *35 unless they add a 24~105 * Zoom. Not much call for 135 these days.

Actually i am pretty sure, PENTAX should deliver a real capable short zoom first, because despite that many hobbyists are as happy as a child on its birthday, for having a lens that is up to 2017s 3rd party standard quality,
the sharpness of the glass in the DFA 24-70 2.8 may be OK, but ---->


overall it feels a bit "unbalanced",
the focus ring isnt really smooth,
it collects dust way too soon for a sealed lens that wants to be part of a weather resistant system...
AND... to be honest, I dont like the onion-ring bokeh very much...

and IMHO many other designs would make more sense than another walk-around-zoom(be it star signed or not)
... lets take the classical ("not so much distortion spreading"-)wide angle lens : 24(or 25)mm ...
WHAT LENS SHOULD I BUY IF I WANT REAL GOOD RESULTS FROM A 24mm lens?


One of the old 24mm Taks? - stop kidding plz would you
SIGMA 24mm F2.8 AF Super Wide II?? - optically not exactly the 21st centurys bees knees of wide angle lenses...
SMC PENTAX-FA* 24mm F2 AL [IF]?? - used still a bit expensive for a lens from the analogue era (and actually i tried this bugger on my first K-3 and the results wide open and one aperture stopped down where far away from pleasing.)
The only thing i could think about that it would make any sense on a pixel-dense body like the K-1 MAY

... MAY be the
Carl Zeiss 25mm F2.8 ZK Distagon T*



or the
Carl Zeiss 25mm F2



(latter one would have to be adapted from a Nikon mount)

both are manual lenses which actually is OK for a wide angle lens if you dont make use of their exemption capabilities,

because you could pan-focus them if you stop them down to a certain point...
(but then on the other hand i could already buy some other "not that fast"-lens and stop it down to the point of "tolerability")


The new (also tokinaish)DFA 15-30(even its Bokeh is top notch) may be better zoom than the 24-70 and delivers real good results at 24mm but its still a zoom-lens, heavy as a whale(compared to a nice prime sized like the old FA lenses) and I(as much as many other photogs) am more fond of prime wide angle lens for street photography...
So I am 100% convinced that THIS ...

---> A not too heavy and rather fast (but not ART<y>)and TACK SHARP 24mm prime lens (be it a pancake, DC, WR or non-WR, a limited lens, or just a DFAL) for the casual street shooter

...is totally missing in the line-up(SINCE EVER)
and should be on the list even before an 85mil ...
(it would not even need to be a KAF4 lens, since many would be happy to make use of such a lens on their Z-1 or other film-bodies since a real good wide angle (24mil) is missing like... forever.

Bare in mind that 31mm ltd is far away from a 24mm view angle and the old FA* 24 is a hard-to-catch pokemon.)

I also think, that PENTAX leadership may think it was a wise decision NOT TO:
rework the formula of the
"SMC Pentax-A 28-135 F4" or

PENTAX-rebadge the Tamron 28-300 mm F/3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD...
... to keep the diversitiy of other prime and zoom lenses(with shallower range) more attractive, so people would buy more of the other lenses...


BUT THAT CAN BE CONSIDERED WRONG also,

since when i look at the market and want to buy a new walkaround zoom, I see the rather short and not very wide starting off DFA 28-105 in the quality of a kit lens, (be it full frame or not, kit is kit)
and for a kit-quality lens.... a price-tag of 600 space-bucks, can only be justified by the fact that its weather sealed.
And just for that very sole reason its accaptable .. but its nowhere near making me forget about my "TAMRON AF ASPHERICAL XR Di LD (IF) 28-300mm 1:3.5-6.3 Macro" lens, that actually is not weather sealed but IF and therefore easy to secure with a rubber gasket(dust donut) when its raining. And since this tamron lens is one of the great exceptions just like the 15-30.... its optical quality is nowhere behind a 24-240 sony walkaround.(it seems such long-range walkaround zooms are "hard to design"-beasts...(I would go so far and say, wide open at widest focal length even the old Tammy supersedes the Sony 24-240mm or its just that i have an eceptional good copy??)
Anyway I just dont see the great advantage in buiying the new 28-105...and many others also may have a problem with that PENTAX-logic.

so the 28-300 is defenitely the 2nd on my list of "most missing pentax lenses"


Dont get me wrong, ...I would drop 800-900 for a weather sealed up to date 28-300 with fast and silent AF drive every minute,but there is none... There is only this 28-105(why actually not 24-105?) with a not-that-cool DC drive...

Bottom line -> ask yourself:
Where is a 24mm prime for the PENTAX mount system that makes sense on a modern camera with at least a 36MP digital sensor?(yes, I hardly doubt that RICOH Imaging has the guts and sense to deliver a faster shootin 24MP FF DSLR to exist alongside with high-MP DSLR bodies...ever.)
Can the 28-105 be considered a really desirable walkaround zoom lens?



Thank you for your attention and taking the time to consider before chopping my post.

[BigMackCam]

Actually i am pretty sure, PENTAX should deliver a real capable short zoom first, because despite that many hobbyists are as happy as a child on its birthday, for having a lens that is up to 2017s 3rd party standard quality,
the sharpness of the glass in the DFA 24-70 2.8 may be OK, but ---->


overall it feels a bit "unbalanced",
the focus ring isnt really smooth,
it collects dust way too soon for a sealed lens that wants to be part of a weather resistant system...
AND... to be honest, I dont like the onion-ring bokeh very much...

I suspect you might get some quite robust responses to this

No lens is perfect - especially when it's a zoom - and I know you know that, of course. In addition to Pentax, I shoot Sony A-mount, and even my Sony Zeiss 24-70 f/2.8 SSM - perhaps the best lens I own - isn't perfect.

The "onion bokeh" doesn't seem to rear its head very often, and in any case it doesn't appear to impact many of our members' photos. That aside, it seems to be a largely well-respected lens of its type, if you consider how positive most owners are about the IQ of either the Pentax version or (on other formats) its Tamron cousin. And the cost vs IQ relationship seems about right. Could it be better? I'm sure it could. Would people buy it if it was considerably more expensive as a result? That's debatable.

since when i look at the market and want to buy a new walkaround zoom, I see the rather short and not very wide starting off DFA 28-105 in the quality of a kit lens, (be it full frame or not, kit is kit)
and for a kit-quality lens.... a price-tag of 600 space-bucks, can only be justified by the fact that its weather sealed.

Again, you might find you're met with some strength of opinon here. The DFA28-105 is very well-respected amongst our members. Most believe that it's far from a "kit" lens when it comes to IQ and build quality, such that the price is very reasonable for what it offers, and reviews - for what they're worth - seem to confirm this. That seems to be the prevailing opinion, at least.

As for why it's only 28mm at the wide end, making it 24mm would have resulted in a more complicated and/or bigger, heavier design, or one with more optical compromises, and greater cost. One of the key intentions of this lens, I think, was to offer a versatile focal length range with excellent IQ at a reasonable price point, and on that basis it was a success. For those that want or need 24mm, there's the DFA24-70 f/2.8. Of course, a good AF 24mm prime - as you suggested - would be a very nice addition to the lens line-up. I'm sure plenty of people would be interested in such a lens

And just for that very sole reason its accaptable .. but its nowhere near making me forget about my "TAMRON AF ASPHERICAL XR Di LD (IF) 28-300mm 1:3.5-6.3 Macro" lens, that actually is not weather sealed but IF and therefore easy to secure with a rubber gasket(dust donut) when its raining.

I have that very lens in Sony A-mount, as well as its later PZD replacement (which is mildly weather-resistant, and much better optically). There's no doubt that both are great little lenses - for what they are. I'm happy to use them when I want a large focal length range and have very good light to shoot in (so I can stop down a bit), and the IQ is certainly nice enough within the "superzoom" class of lenses - but not without significant limitations, IMHO... especially where the older pre-PZD version is concerned.

A Pentax-branded version of the later PZD model may have a place with K-1 users, but I doubt it would be particularly well-received, for the reasons already mentioned... and especially given members' views on the Tamron-based APS-C format 18-270 (which I've previously owned)...

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 08-16-2018 at 06:26 PM.

[Scorpio71GR]

The standard Japanese double Gauss designs for fast primes (all brands) don't get sharp until stopped down … the DFA 50 Macro is sharp wide open but it's a trick because it begins at f2.8.

What makes the DFA*50 different from the K50 f1.2, DA*55, FA 50 f1.4 and so on is the lack of that soft glow wide open … spherical aberration.

If you read the Development story on the Ricoh website, designer Masazuko Saori put an extra corrective group to the front to lift the performance of this thing up into and maybe above Sigma and Zeiss levels, never mind Canon, Nikon and Sony. Size, weight and cost wasn't his concern so he was able to do this.

And yes, the 85mm will benefit from his exciting design template. It was actually the first scheduled of the Star series, but market research caused them to do the Fifty first.

That is interesting to know. I'm not complaining about the DA*55. Just stating my experience with my copy. My Rokinon 85 1.4 is the same way. I actually try and use the wide open soft glow to my advantage. The DFA 85 is the one I'm waiting to see. From what I've seen with the DFA 50 I will not be disappointed.

[Sandy Hancock]

(long, shouty rant about wide angle lenses)

The DFA15-30 is at its best at around 24mm.

The FA*24 is a wonderful lens with unique rendering.

Yes, the DFA28-105 is a desirable walk-around. I prefer it to my DFA24-70 for all but indoor events. A DFA*24-120/4.0 would certainly get my attention, but the kit zoom is a superb package for the price.

[clackers]

Where is a 24mm prime for the PENTAX mount system that makes sense on a modern camera with at least a 36MP digital sensor?

Good rant to be sure, Tellwill, but a couple of things.

You may not realise but the K-1 is no more pixel dense than the K-5, and less pixel dense than the K-3, so I don't know how much air that lets out of your tyres.

I have zooms, but I also have the 24mm Samyang f1.4 and the 24mm Sigma f1.8 Macro, you can buy these if you like. The Samyang is of course Manual Focus, if that scares you.

I guess eventually an UW prime will appear, but it's not on the roadmap, and a hint about as to why would be the results of the 2018 Pentax Forums member survey - 1600 respondents.

It was advertised on the front page - have you seen the results?

The sort of prime you say is essential was relatively unpopular.

People wanted a short tele, then normal, primes.

So, what you think might be a critical need right now in the lineup, might not be to other buyers, that's all.

[ffking]

While we're off topic - and why not? the lens is here :} -I I'd definitely like something wider than my 24-70 - either prime around 20-21 or an f/4 WA zoom. I'm put off the 15-30 because of bulk (I'd use it for landscape, hence hiking, and f/2.8 has little application in landscapes anyway) and the lack of filter thread.However, only the former is on the roadmap (possibly), and that could be a long wait. The only other possibility is that a Tokina (possibly) appears out of nowhere like the 70-200/4 which also seemed to be a covered base. OTOH is's hard not to be even more tempted by the sheer beauty of the new D FA*s and want to redefine what you do round them Maybe the coming WA prime will be one

[robbiec]

Just get the Zeiss 25 and wait until your chosen special arrives

[Sandy Hancock]

f/2.8 has little application in landscapes anyway

Isn't astrophotography a type of landscape?
The DFA15-30 is less bulky than carrying high quality primes to cover the same focal range
Yes, the Lee filter system is clunky and expensive, but it works well and with a few cheap stepping rings it can be used for just about any other lens.

[Kunzite]

I guess eventually an UW prime will appear, but it's not on the roadmap

It is on the roadmap.

[ffking]

Isn't astrophotography a type of landscape?

dunno, is it?

I'd still prefer an f/4 15-30 and make do with the 24-70/2.8 for astro, if I did it.

(btw, I do use Lee filters, so I suppose I could get adaptors if I really wanted the lens - all a bit academic at the moment, financially speaking, so I might just be making excuses - have to see what I actually do when I have the cash )

[clackers]

It is on the roadmap.

Well, thanks for pointing it out, Kunzite!

Something between 15mm and 25mm, for 2019 or later.

[beholder3]

The sort of prime you say is essential was relatively unpopular.
People wanted a short tele, then normal, primes.

One could as well say: Tiny minority concern. Since nobody wants this type of lens it is likely not going appear in finite time. From a business standpoint it doesnt make sense.

It is on the roadmap.

The roadmap hints at something around 18mm. That is too far away from 24mm to avoid people continueing to whine that they do not get waht they personally want and claim their personal want is "essential".

Start a thread about "I want a 24mm" and give them a 28mm and you'll know what I mean. Probaby even a 26mm lens would be bashed as not being close enough to a 24mm lens.


I do not know why whining about personal christmas wish focal lengths of all sorts belongs into the "news and rumors section" about a new 50mm lens.

We could as well discuss why vanilla ice cream is inferior to chocolate ice cream here.

[sbh]

The new „nifty fifty“ is now my second lens with edge-to-edge sharpness. The other one is the 100mm macro WR.
I also like the AF with the 50, it feels fast and precise in my first tests. It‘s crazy heavy but I love it.

I compared it to the DA*55 in a few testshots and it is hard to find any difference from f/2.8 upwards in the center area. The 55 delivers the most pleasing rendering of all the lenses that I have used and I hope the new 50 continues to do that. Let‘s see.