Nippon Camera Ricoh/Pentax 2019 Interview

Mountain Vision · 01-09-2019, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by clackers

I own and use a range of Canon lenses (including EF) that cover between 28mm and 300mm, Mountain Vision, so, the answer is yes. Some of them are very good, too.

And the K mount catalogue is extensive, including WR, in-lens motors covering between 15mm and 560mm, if you want to view it that way.

But EF mount and K mount owners will always want more, and there's no way that either they or Canon and Ricoh would agree with you and say their work is done.

Fair enough. But Canon catalog is pretty damn deep both currently and used. Pentax is a lot less deep. Even buying from Japan or scrounging on the forums, some stuff just doesn't appear very often.

Trickortreat · 01-09-2019, 11:27 AM

Originally posted by Rico

What you said is only "true" to you.

I can not take serious anything you say when you want a DA 23mm ƒ2 prime.

No really... take any review site. Any. They all rank DA primes higher than DA LTDs.
And what would be bad with da 23mm f2?

---------- Post added 01-09-19 at 07:29 PM ----------

Originally posted by reh321

Did you mean 21mm f/3.2 lens, or are you asking for a new lens??

New lens ofc

phoebus · 01-09-2019, 11:31 AM

Originally posted by mtgmansf

....although a tempting Nikon Z6/Z7 successor with the newly announced for pre-order 14-30mm WR lens might my needs better (and maybe sooner and be just as light)....

For about £1000 less you can get the Irix 15mm in F (or K) mount and over a stop more light capture at similar weight to the Z 14-30. Most of the other wide zooms you quote are APSC lenses. Alternatively, the Pentax 15-30 WR is available now, and not shabby on the optical side.

RonHendriks1966 · 01-09-2019, 11:39 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by phoebus

For about £1000 less you can get the Irix 15mm in F (or K) mount and over a stop more light capture at similar weight to the Z 14-30. Most of the other wide zooms you quote are APSC lenses. Alternatively, the Pentax 15-30 WR is available now, and not shabby on the optical side.

He is looking for a camera not yet developed and a lens to match it not yet on the market........

That will never change, because the next generation of gear will be the one he is seeking for!

Mountain Vision · 01-09-2019, 11:48 AM

Originally posted by JPT

The flange distance will be the same of course, but even within Pentax's history, they have made K-mount DSLRs that are significantly smaller and lighter then the the K-70, such as the Km, Kx and Kr. The Nikon D3500 is an F-mount camera that weighs less than 400g. It can be done, and removing the heavy prism with a lighter EVF, eliminating the need for an AF sensor, metering sensor and mirror mechanism could be a way to achieve this.

I simply can't agree with Kunzite that EOS M buyers are buying a sub-standard product just because of the brand name. The brand and advertising will get the product noticed, but people aren't so stupid that they will buy something they don't want. EOS M is the right size and right design for people who a meaningful step up from a smartphone, but not something that is too big or complicated to use. I have to admit that I have been quite tempted by an EOS M body, the kit zooms and the 22mm lens as a travel kit.

Don't worry, though! Anyone who doesn't like the my idea for Pentax can sleep safe in the knowledge that this cheap, mirrorless abomination is only a figment of my imagination.

This is true. A K-mount camera can definitely be made lighter and smaller, perhaps by losing the mirror/AF system. This we know because the MX, Program Plus, P30T and so on were tiny compared to most of the Pentax DSLRs. So Pentax can definitely make a smaller camera if they want to.

Now the question is, do i/we want that camera? If it's done right and the technology is there to make the transition seemless, than I would love a Program plus sized camera. However, it it's not there than I am not ready to take a step backwards.

Rico · 01-09-2019, 12:29 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Trickortreat

No really... take any review site. Any. They all rank DA primes higher than DA LTDs.
And what would be bad with da 23mm f2?

---------- Post added 01-09-19 at 07:29 PM ----------

New lens ofc

Really review sites are meaningless. I own DA LTD's. I don't need review sites to determine my real world experience.

You want a +a da 23mm ƒ2 plasticky lens they will never make which is bad enough. If they make such a wide angle ƒ2 lens it will never fit into your cheap standards.

What Ricoh/Pentax needs to do is consolidate some of the DA LTD's into DFA LTD's. Like the DA21 LTD which should be optimized for FF. If they modernized the FA LTD's they could phase out the DA40 and DA70. One lens they should have made a long time ago is a DA28 ƒ2 LTD most especially for APS-C as 28mm is the same philosophy behind the use of 43mm focal length for 35mm film. At this point it should be FF. Please no autofocus motors. Keep these lenses as electronically and mechanically simple as possible.

Kunzite · 01-09-2019, 12:31 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by Mountain Vision

This is true. A K-mount camera can definitely be made lighter and smaller, perhaps by losing the mirror/AF system. This we know because the MX, Program Plus, P30T and so on were tiny compared to most of the Pentax DSLRs. So Pentax can definitely make a smaller camera if they want to.

Looking at the film cameras is a false start, I'm afraid.
That's because a digital camera - be it DSLR or MILC - has much behind the sensor (which is itself quite thick compared to film): the SR platform, mainboard, a LCD which should be articulated. Then there are 2-3 electric motors - AF, mirror/shutter, aperture. And a large battery.

You should take a look at the KP instead. They might be able to reduce the size just a tiny bit.

reh321 · 01-09-2019, 12:37 PM - **3 Likes**

Originally posted by Rico

Please no autofocus motors. Keep these lenses as electronically and mechanically simple as possible.

The EF system has worked fine for Canon for over thirty years now, including over twenty years in my very own camera bag. There is no reason a similar system would fail for Pentax. My Q-mount lenses have worked fine for four years. My 18-135 has worked fine for 3-1/2 years now. The 55-300 PLM lens is both faster and quieter than its screw-drive predecessor. Pentax cannot have a 21st century system without in-lens AF motors.

Kunzite · 01-09-2019, 12:45 PM - **3 Likes**

"No autofocus motors" means driving customers away, because the screw drive is both noisy and imprecise.
One of the reasons Pentax has so little market share is the "no autofocus motors" in too many of their lenses.

**BigMackCam** · 01-09-2019, 12:50 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by Rico

One lens they should have made a long time ago is a DA28 ƒ2 LTD most especially for APS-C as 28mm is the same philosophy behind the use of 43mm focal length for 35mm film.

Isn't that already well-covered by the FA31 f/1.8 Limited? I realise the field of view is very slightly tighter - but really only slightly. And it's already more than fast enough, with an outstanding optical reputation to boot...

Rico · 01-09-2019, 01:12 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Kunzite

"No autofocus motors" means driving customers away, because the screw drive is both noisy and imprecise.
One of the reasons Pentax has so little market share is the "no autofocus motors" in too many of their lenses.

There isn't anything more silent and precise than Quickshift focusing. If people are leaving because of autofocus lens motors than they are not really interested in photography. Good photography has nothing to do with autofocus motors. What the design of the FA and DA LTD bring is high quality at a reasonable price. Increased price through over design will drive away customers.

RonHendriks1966 · 01-09-2019, 01:14 PM

A DA 28mm/f2.8 would fit into that spot. A small lens and not to fast in a metal case. Not a fast and expensive lens.

reh321 · 01-09-2019, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by Rico

There isn't anything more silent and precise than Quickshift focusing. If people are leaving because of autofocus lens motors than they are not really interested in photography. Good photography has nothing to do with autofocus motors. What the design of the FA and DA LTD bring is high quality at a reasonable price. Increased price through over design will drive away customers.

Trying to sell a MF lens for anything other than landscape photography is so 1980's. I am quite convinced that their initial response to AF was Pentax's first step from prominence to the market position they are in today. People expect in-lens motors in a modern system.

Trickortreat · 01-09-2019, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by Rico

Really review sites are meaningless. I own DA LTD's. I don't need review sites to determine my real world experience.

Kudos to your anecdotal experiences...

Originally posted by Rico

What Ricoh/Pentax needs to do is consolidate some of the DA LTD's into DFA LTD's. Like the DA21 LTD which should be optimized for FF. If they modernized the FA LTD's they could phase out the DA40 and DA70. One lens they should have made a long time ago is a DA28 ƒ2 LTD most especially for APS-C as 28mm is the same philosophy behind the use of 43mm focal length for 35mm film. At this point it should be FF. Please no autofocus motors. Keep these lenses as electronically and mechanically simple as possible.

Nah - maybe you need those, but lot of us dont want to touch any FF stuff. Just plain old old crop only cause why carry extra weight?

Rico · 01-09-2019, 01:35 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by BigMackCam

Isn't that already well-covered by the FA31 f/1.8 Limited? I realise the field of view is very slightly tighter - but really only slightly. And it's already more than fast enough, with an outstanding optical reputation to boot...

In the digital age they could phase out the FA31. 28mm makes better sense for the reasons mentioned. 28mm fits better for both FF and APS-C.

I have an A-Series 28mm ƒ2 that was my most used lens on APS-C. It has stayed in my bag moving to the K-1. It replaced the M-20 ƒ4 I was using for APS-C. The secondary advantage a similar DFA 28mm ƒ2 design should bring over a DFA31 is size.

---------- Post added 01-09-19 at 03:38 PM ----------

Originally posted by Trickortreat

Kudos to your anecdotal experiences...

Nah - maybe you need those, but lot of us dont want to touch any FF stuff. Just plain old old crop only cause why carry extra weight?

I can assure you Trickortreat my experience is not anecdotal. Now you are just either being rude or ignorant.

01-09-2019, 01:16 PM	#388
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,180	Originally posted by Rico There isn't anything more silent and precise than Quickshift focusing. If people are leaving because of autofocus lens motors than they are not really interested in photography. Good photography has nothing to do with autofocus motors. What the design of the FA and DA LTD bring is high quality at a reasonable price. Increased price through over design will drive away customers. Trying to sell a MF lens for anything other than landscape photography is so 1980's. I am quite convinced that their initial response to AF was Pentax's first step from prominence to the market position they are in today. People expect in-lens motors in a modern system. Last edited by reh321; 01-09-2019 at 01:23 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax 100 YEARS anniversary 2019!	SunnyG.	Pentax DSLR Discussion	66	10-19-2019 04:35 AM
Ricoh Imaging Will Not Be Exhibiting At WPPI 2019 Conference & Expo	Kelvin 5500	Photographic Industry and Professionals	15	12-28-2018 11:05 PM
Nippon Camera Article about FA lenses	revdocjim	Pentax Medium Format	10	06-10-2014 01:59 PM
Nippon Kogaku (Nikon) Micro-Nikkor Auto 1:3.5 f=55mm vs. SMC Pentax-M 1:1.7 50mm	carpents	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	06-23-2007 07:22 PM

01-09-2019, 11:12 AM	#376
Mountain Vision Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: America's First Wilderness Posts: 529	Originally posted by clackers I own and use a range of Canon lenses (including EF) that cover between 28mm and 300mm, Mountain Vision, so, the answer is yes. Some of them are very good, too. And the K mount catalogue is extensive, including WR, in-lens motors covering between 15mm and 560mm, if you want to view it that way. But EF mount and K mount owners will always want more, and there's no way that either they or Canon and Ricoh would agree with you and say their work is done. Fair enough. But Canon catalog is pretty damn deep both currently and used. Pentax is a lot less deep. Even buying from Japan or scrounging on the forums, some stuff just doesn't appear very often.

01-09-2019, 11:27 AM	#377
Trickortreat Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 561	Originally posted by Rico What you said is only "true" to you. I can not take serious anything you say when you want a DA 23mm ƒ2 prime. No really... take any review site. Any. They all rank DA primes higher than DA LTDs. And what would be bad with da 23mm f2? ---------- Post added 01-09-19 at 07:29 PM ---------- Originally posted by reh321 Did you mean 21mm f/3.2 lens, or are you asking for a new lens?? New lens ofc

01-09-2019, 11:31 AM	#378
phoebus Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Buckinghamshire (UK) / Morbihan (FR) Photos: Gallery Posts: 470	Originally posted by mtgmansf ....although a tempting Nikon Z6/Z7 successor with the newly announced for pre-order 14-30mm WR lens might my needs better (and maybe sooner and be just as light).... For about £1000 less you can get the Irix 15mm in F (or K) mount and over a stop more light capture at similar weight to the Z 14-30. Most of the other wide zooms you quote are APSC lenses. Alternatively, the Pentax 15-30 WR is available now, and not shabby on the optical side.

01-09-2019, 11:39 AM - 1 Like	#379
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by phoebus For about £1000 less you can get the Irix 15mm in F (or K) mount and over a stop more light capture at similar weight to the Z 14-30. Most of the other wide zooms you quote are APSC lenses. Alternatively, the Pentax 15-30 WR is available now, and not shabby on the optical side. He is looking for a camera not yet developed and a lens to match it not yet on the market........ That will never change, because the next generation of gear will be the one he is seeking for!

01-09-2019, 11:48 AM	#380
Mountain Vision Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: America's First Wilderness Posts: 529	Originally posted by JPT The flange distance will be the same of course, but even within Pentax's history, they have made K-mount DSLRs that are significantly smaller and lighter then the the K-70, such as the Km, Kx and Kr. The Nikon D3500 is an F-mount camera that weighs less than 400g. It can be done, and removing the heavy prism with a lighter EVF, eliminating the need for an AF sensor, metering sensor and mirror mechanism could be a way to achieve this. I simply can't agree with Kunzite that EOS M buyers are buying a sub-standard product just because of the brand name. The brand and advertising will get the product noticed, but people aren't so stupid that they will buy something they don't want. EOS M is the right size and right design for people who a meaningful step up from a smartphone, but not something that is too big or complicated to use. I have to admit that I have been quite tempted by an EOS M body, the kit zooms and the 22mm lens as a travel kit. Don't worry, though! Anyone who doesn't like the my idea for Pentax can sleep safe in the knowledge that this cheap, mirrorless abomination is only a figment of my imagination. This is true. A K-mount camera can definitely be made lighter and smaller, perhaps by losing the mirror/AF system. This we know because the MX, Program Plus, P30T and so on were tiny compared to most of the Pentax DSLRs. So Pentax can definitely make a smaller camera if they want to. Now the question is, do i/we want that camera? If it's done right and the technology is there to make the transition seemless, than I would love a Program plus sized camera. However, it it's not there than I am not ready to take a step backwards.

01-09-2019, 12:29 PM - 1 Like	#381
Rico Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,205	Originally posted by Trickortreat No really... take any review site. Any. They all rank DA primes higher than DA LTDs. And what would be bad with da 23mm f2? ---------- Post added 01-09-19 at 07:29 PM ---------- New lens ofc Really review sites are meaningless. I own DA LTD's. I don't need review sites to determine my real world experience. You want a +a da 23mm ƒ2 plasticky lens they will never make which is bad enough. If they make such a wide angle ƒ2 lens it will never fit into your cheap standards. What Ricoh/Pentax needs to do is consolidate some of the DA LTD's into DFA LTD's. Like the DA21 LTD which should be optimized for FF. If they modernized the FA LTD's they could phase out the DA40 and DA70. One lens they should have made a long time ago is a DA28 ƒ2 LTD most especially for APS-C as 28mm is the same philosophy behind the use of 43mm focal length for 35mm film. At this point it should be FF. Please no autofocus motors. Keep these lenses as electronically and mechanically simple as possible.

01-09-2019, 12:31 PM - 2 Likes	#382
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Mountain Vision This is true. A K-mount camera can definitely be made lighter and smaller, perhaps by losing the mirror/AF system. This we know because the MX, Program Plus, P30T and so on were tiny compared to most of the Pentax DSLRs. So Pentax can definitely make a smaller camera if they want to. Looking at the film cameras is a false start, I'm afraid. That's because a digital camera - be it DSLR or MILC - has much behind the sensor (which is itself quite thick compared to film): the SR platform, mainboard, a LCD which should be articulated. Then there are 2-3 electric motors - AF, mirror/shutter, aperture. And a large battery. You should take a look at the KP instead. They might be able to reduce the size just a tiny bit.

01-09-2019, 12:37 PM - 3 Likes	#383
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,180	Originally posted by Rico Please no autofocus motors. Keep these lenses as electronically and mechanically simple as possible. The EF system has worked fine for Canon for over thirty years now, including over twenty years in my very own camera bag. There is no reason a similar system would fail for Pentax. My Q-mount lenses have worked fine for four years. My 18-135 has worked fine for 3-1/2 years now. The 55-300 PLM lens is both faster and quieter than its screw-drive predecessor. Pentax cannot have a 21st century system without in-lens AF motors.

01-09-2019, 12:45 PM - 3 Likes	#384
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	"No autofocus motors" means driving customers away, because the screw drive is both noisy and imprecise. One of the reasons Pentax has so little market share is the "no autofocus motors" in too many of their lenses.

01-09-2019, 12:50 PM - 2 Likes	#385
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,673	Originally posted by Rico One lens they should have made a long time ago is a DA28 ƒ2 LTD most especially for APS-C as 28mm is the same philosophy behind the use of 43mm focal length for 35mm film. Isn't that already well-covered by the FA31 f/1.8 Limited? I realise the field of view is very slightly tighter - but really only slightly. And it's already more than fast enough, with an outstanding optical reputation to boot...

01-09-2019, 01:12 PM - 1 Like	#386
Rico Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,205	Originally posted by Kunzite "No autofocus motors" means driving customers away, because the screw drive is both noisy and imprecise. One of the reasons Pentax has so little market share is the "no autofocus motors" in too many of their lenses. There isn't anything more silent and precise than Quickshift focusing. If people are leaving because of autofocus lens motors than they are not really interested in photography. Good photography has nothing to do with autofocus motors. What the design of the FA and DA LTD bring is high quality at a reasonable price. Increased price through over design will drive away customers.

01-09-2019, 01:14 PM	#387
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	A DA 28mm/f2.8 would fit into that spot. A small lens and not to fast in a metal case. Not a fast and expensive lens.

01-09-2019, 01:23 PM	#389
Trickortreat Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Posts: 561	Originally posted by Rico Really review sites are meaningless. I own DA LTD's. I don't need review sites to determine my real world experience. Kudos to your anecdotal experiences... Originally posted by Rico What Ricoh/Pentax needs to do is consolidate some of the DA LTD's into DFA LTD's. Like the DA21 LTD which should be optimized for FF. If they modernized the FA LTD's they could phase out the DA40 and DA70. One lens they should have made a long time ago is a DA28 ƒ2 LTD most especially for APS-C as 28mm is the same philosophy behind the use of 43mm focal length for 35mm film. At this point it should be FF. Please no autofocus motors. Keep these lenses as electronically and mechanically simple as possible. Nah - maybe you need those, but lot of us dont want to touch any FF stuff. Just plain old old crop only cause why carry extra weight?

01-09-2019, 01:35 PM - 2 Likes	#390
Rico Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,205	Originally posted by BigMackCam Isn't that already well-covered by the FA31 f/1.8 Limited? I realise the field of view is very slightly tighter - but really only slightly. And it's already more than fast enough, with an outstanding optical reputation to boot... In the digital age they could phase out the FA31. 28mm makes better sense for the reasons mentioned. 28mm fits better for both FF and APS-C. I have an A-Series 28mm ƒ2 that was my most used lens on APS-C. It has stayed in my bag moving to the K-1. It replaced the M-20 ƒ4 I was using for APS-C. The secondary advantage a similar DFA 28mm ƒ2 design should bring over a DFA31 is size. ---------- Post added 01-09-19 at 03:38 PM ---------- Originally posted by Trickortreat Kudos to your anecdotal experiences... Nah - maybe you need those, but lot of us dont want to touch any FF stuff. Just plain old old crop only cause why carry extra weight? I can assure you Trickortreat my experience is not anecdotal. Now you are just either being rude or ignorant.