[reh321]

Reading some posts, which dismiss the new DFA 50mm as a lens like all the others, makes me think that some people have no idea of what they're writing about.

Do you mean DFA* 50?
That star makes a large difference.

[Dericali]

The DFA 50mm f1.4 is unquestionably the best modern lens made by Pentax. That's my opinion... I don't think I know any users that are dissatisfied with the performance of this lens. The only downside of course is the weight.

[reh321]

The DFA* 50mm f1.4 is unquestionably the best modern lens made by Pentax. That's my opinion... I don't think I know any users that are dissatisfied with the performance of this lens. The only downside of course is the weight.

Fixed it for you.
The star is very important - it denotes a step above usual Pentax good.

Pentax does need more new DFA* primes, but it also needs more DFA lenses depending on exactly how good the FA lenses are on the K-1.

[cyberjunkie]

Please explain. Is this not a ★ lens (which are always designed in-house), with Pentax owning the design patent, manufactured in the Pentax facility in Vietnam?
Are you implying that Pentax would not have released it if Tokina had not been willing to buy a license to build it in other mounts?

Please don't read my words for what they are not.
We all know that it's a Pentax design (even if there is some online disinformation).
From what has been divulged, Tokina's contribution has been far more "practical" than releasing the design for other mounts.
The extent of the collaboration is known by a restricted few.
It could relate to the plant in Vietnam.

cheers

Paolo

[kooks]

I have no problem with the fact that many will want this lens. What I reacted to was the phrases "most pros" and "basic tools". Neither is true. Basic tools for most, pros or not, are zoom lenses these days....

When i said that, i was talking about the pushing back the release of products, the 85mm was just an example... Now if you talk to the pro portrait/weddings now days, the primes are basic tools, as simple as that... some classic style photographers might still preffer zooms, and that is ok, but the current people leading the industry mostly shoot with primes splited in 2 cameras.. One camera with 35 the other one with 85.. one with 24.. the otherone with a 50.. as an example.. Zooms cam be use ofcourse, but not as it used to be.. Zooms will only give you a f2.8 and are heavy most of the time.. Now if you talk about landscape, nature, etc.. well that's another photo field and a complete different story, this tools/lenses might not that important, but for portrait/wedding it is a most and basic tool.

[reh321]

When i said that, i was talking about the pushing back the release of products, the 85mm was just an example... Now if you talk to the pro portrait/weddings now days, the primes are basic tools, as simple as that... some classic style photographers might still preffer zooms, and that is ok, but the current people leading the industry mostly shoot with primes splited in 2 cameras.. One camera with 35 the other one with 85.. one with 24.. the otherone with a 50.. as an example.. Zooms cam be use ofcourse, but not as it used to be.. Zooms will only give you a f2.8 and are heavy most of the time.. Now if you talk about landscape, nature, etc.. well that's another photo field and a complete different story, this tools/lenses might not that important, but for portrait/wedding it is a most and basic tool.

So, as a portrait or wedding photographer, what DFA primes do you still lack? {or should I have said DFA* primes - do you need that extra boost of quality??}

[kooks]

So, as a portrait or wedding photographer, what DFA primes do you still lack? {or should I have said DFA* primes - do you need that extra boost of quality??}

IMO the new 50mm is great.. but a modern 20/25mm 35mm f1.4 85mm f1.4 and just to put some cherry on top a 135 f2.0.. those are the "basic" ones missing... Ofcourse the old FA lenses are around but.. those are old, noisy and in some cases the IQ is not a match to modern standards.

[ogl]

And there are no pairs of lines on film, either.

Of course...

But to make film photo of black and white lines and make the same with digital sensors are not the same.
Sorry, I don't know English very well to discuss this theme.

[northcoastgreg]

The 55-300 PML is innovative only in relative terms, because for the first time Pentax gave its users a long zoom with fast internal motor.

It's a mistake to believe that innovation has to involve technology. I follow the economist Joseph Schumpeter (he's the guy that introduced the concept of innovation into economic theory) in regarding any new combination as innovative, regardless of whether it involves technology or not. Using that standard, I don't actually regard the PLM as all that innovative. Fast focusing lenses, even fast focusing compact slow aperture lenses, aren't that unusual. But making a very slow aperture lens that performs as well as prosumer glass — that's new and different and therefore innovative. I've been looking for just that kind of lens for years and haven't been able to find it. Prior to the 55-300 PLM, if I wanted to comparable optical quality for telephoto shooting to what I had at wide and normal focal lengths, I would have to get a lens like the DA* 60-250, which is large, heavy and expensive. I just don't want to drag around something that heavy, nor would I want to leave a lens like that in the car. The DA 55-300 PLM has made feasible a whole new world of photography to me: telephoto landscapes. Why is that not innovative?

For the 28-105 full frame I would use different words, like "sensible", "useful", "no-nonsense"... but it's not breaking any record, nor setting a new standard in price vs performance ratio.

Where can you find an f3.5-5.6 SLR FF standard zoom lens that weighs less than a pound with as good edge sharpness and contrast (or very close to as good) as prosumer/pro constant aperture zooms at a $500 price point? If you want comparable image quality in a Canon or NIkon FF lens, you'd have to spend more than twice as much and bear, minimally, around 50% more weight. I know that there's a lot of people around here who seem to worship f4 zooms and think that such glass would constitute a lighter alternative to the heavy 2.8 monsters that grace Pentax's DFA lineup. But high-quality f4 zooms aren't that much lighter, and they can be pretty darn expensive. I wouldn't be at all surprised if this new DFA 70-200/4 that's coming out in the next few months winds up being introduced at an MSRP of $1,300 or more.

[Kunzite]

Do you mean DFA* 50?
That star makes a large difference.

Of about 2 stops, 645g, 23mm on the filter thread...

[reh321]

That star makes a large difference.

Of about 2 stops, 645g, 23mm on the filter thread...

I keep hoping Pentax will release some non-star lenses now. I understand why they need some, but having smaller, less expensive, less perfect lenses would make FF more feasible for some of us.

[beholder3]

Discussing lens priorities is generally somewhat pathetic. Simply because there is such an infinite number of different lens option you could want.


When we did the survey here we got about 1600 people to vote on lens priorities. That is a lot.

Even the top chosen lenses got only a vote of about 1 out of 20 people participating in the poll.

So whatever lens you pick you will have one fan and at the same time 19 who will be unhappy because to them it is an unimportant lens.
The 19 will certainly come up with all sorts of reasons, why it is a bad choice. I am no different, but at least I ackowledge the fact that there is no "right" choice for the maker.

And that is even though everyone could pick five (!) favorites, so overlap is already fivefold that of only getting to choose a single lens favorite.

[Kunzite]

I keep hoping Pentax will release some non-star lenses now. I understand why they need some, but having smaller, less expensive, less perfect lenses would make FF more feasible for some of us.

There are 4 non * lenses on the roadmap - and only 2 D FA*s.

[reh321]

Discussing lens priorities is generally somewhat pathetic. Simply because there is such an infinite number of different lens option you could want.

If that is how you want to think of it.

I'm thinking in terms of certain focal lengths that "everyone" expects to see in a lineup. My opinion that they should fill out that list in DFA - then they can be imaginative or "innovative". DA was somewhat different because of the effect of "crop".

[Rondec]

I keep hoping Pentax will release some non-star lenses now. I understand why they need some, but having smaller, less expensive, less perfect lenses would make FF more feasible for some of us.

I think we are looking at DFA 70-200 f4 (not a star), some sort of DFA 70-300 variable aperture zoom (not a star), full frame fish eye zoom (not a star), and a "ultra wide angle" prime (not a star). The star lenses that remain (as currently on the map) are the 35-ishmm f1.4 and 85mm f1.4 and it doesn't sound as though either of those will be released this year. Of course, there is always the possibility that there is other stuff, not on the map, that could come out at some point.