[thibs]

The 16-50 will replaced. This is different problem.

The thing is: the usual f/2.8 zoom range is covered.

[Jyrkira]

No. No pentax! The 16-50 do not complete the large-aperture zoom lens lineup. The 16-50 is an old lens suited for K10D with bad corner quality and lot of CA and it need to be replaced in priority with a modern 16-50, 18-50 or 17-70 lens with a fast motor and top notch IQ corner to corner.

I hoped new version of DA 17-70 for years. I had two units of 17-70 and I was very pleased of image quality of them. Also the overall feel was good other than poor af motor which failed in both lenses. Sadly the af motor ruined the reputation of the otherwise excellent lens.

[repaap]

I wouldn't jump to Fujifilm just yet. Their colours while lauded by reviewers are fake looking, ie, not true to life and their lenses are still quite large and some pretty heavy. I think m43's is better if you are looking to downsize.

The 11-18mm is welcome and the HD FA 35mm F2 is also welcome albeit pretty underwhelming. Really new lenses should be coming with built-in motors.

I have the FA 35 F2 already and have to admit new coatings are probably a good idea. It's colours are definitely old school compared to the DA primes. Rounded aperture blades if they've changed them would also be a good idea.

I agree

---------- Post added 01-31-19 at 11:11 ----------

I hoped new version of DA 17-70 for years. I had two units of 17-70 and I was very pleased of image quality of them. Also the overall feel was good other than poor af motor which failed in both lenses. Sadly the af motor ruined the reputation of the otherwise excellent lens.

Id say that instead of 17-70 and 16-50, one should look at 16-85. Now I don’t have this lens, but looking at pictures, it seems really good. 16-50 is old desing, still can produce great images, but is usable only till 45mm IMHO. I have invested now FF, but if I was in aps-c my money would go there. Also this 11-18 seems amazing, albeit little expensive, but let’s see how it performs first..

[superdave]

The 16-50 will replaced. This is different problem.

The thing is: the usual f/2.8 zoom range is covered.

Pentax never said they will replace the 16-50mm, and I don't speak of a refresh like the FA 35mm...

Id say that instead of 17-70 and 16-50, one should look at 16-85. Now I don’t have this lens, but looking at pictures, it seems really good. 16-50 is old desing, still can produce great images, but is usable only till 45mm IMHO. I have invested now FF, but if I was in aps-c my money would go there. Also this 11-18 seems amazing, albeit little expensive, but let’s see how it performs first..

I just send back the 16-85 I purchased... May be it is my sample, but I can't recommand this lens. The IQ is just bad around the edges, its better than the two copies of the 20-40mm I tried too, but still not good enough for a fine art print, or for stitching a panorama...

[Digitalis]

I thought the DA35/2.4 wasnt that much FF if I can say so.??

On my optics bench the resolution characteristic of the Pentax FA 35mm f/2 never set the world on fire, the FA31 completely outclasses it. The way I see it: the qualities in favor of the DFA35 f/2 is small size, and high image contrast (even @ f/2), newer Pentax lens coatings should lend enhancement to the latter trait.

[Snakeisthestuff]

"New" full frame prime without WR is disappointing. Should be really mandatory by now. Feels like the DA Limited rerelease some years ago.
So still waiting for the wide star lens on the roadmap, hopfully this release does not postpone it until 2020 or later ...

[Mountain Vision]

Pentax never said they will replace the 16-50mm, and I don't speak of a refresh like the FA 35mm...




I just send back the 16-85 I purchased... May be it is my sample, but I can't recommand this lens. The IQ is just bad around the edges, its better than the two copies of the 20-40mm I tried too, but still not good enough for a fine art print, or for stitching a panorama...

It was your copy. The 16-85 is outstanding. I'll be using the 11-18 paired with the 16-85 and 55-300 for a weather sealed backcountry kit. Finally a weather sealed UWA to replace the 12-24.

[superdave]

It was your copy. The 16-85 is outstanding. I'll be using the 11-18 paired with the 16-85 and 55-300 for a weather sealed backcountry kit. Finally a weather sealed UWA to replace the 12-24.

Any chance you can post a photo of the edge/corners of your 16-85 ? Because online samples I can find (ephotozine) look like my copy.
Here attached my copy compared to DA50mm/1.8

[repaap]

On my optics bench the resolution characteristic of the Pentax FA 35mm f/2 never set the world on fire, the FA31 completely outclasses it. The way I see it: the qualities in favor of the DFA35 f/2 is small size, and high image contrast (even @ f/2), newer Pentax lens coatings should lend enhancement to the latter trait.

One of the reasons why I have been dreaming of buying FA 31 was because of your examples. I have both now. First FA35 and now 31. Even with out bench, I can see the difference. Little stoped down and viola! For 35, it has it’s strenghts. As you mentioned. Now some of negatives(hopefully) have been sorted. Can’t see it beating FA 31 still thou, but that does not seem to be purpose at here. Rugged, not afraid of little scratches(exterior), small quite fast 35 is the key, with good image guality.

[Trickortreat]

At least they could de-coupled AF ring while in autofocus mode on the 35. And tweak optics so CA doesnt increase drastically while stopping down.
I really dont know to who that lens is targeted to....

[Rondec]

From the Star lens special site (http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/star_lens/special/sp_da11-18/):



No. No pentax! The 16-50 do not complete the large-aperture zoom lens lineup. The 16-50 is an old lens suited for K10D with bad corner quality and lot of CA and it need to be replaced in priority with a modern 16-50, 18-50 or 17-70 lens with a fast motor and top notch IQ corner to corner.

p.s. too bad there is no development story for the 11-18 on the special site.

Obviously the point they are making is that with this addition they finally have sealed f2.8 zooms that cover the focal lengths from 11mm to 135mm on APS-C.

Honestly, I do think the 16-50 and 50-135 both need to be updated -- the 50-135 is great optically, but should get a DC motor for better auto focus and the 16-50 isn't the best, as you say. But Pentax isn't going to say that on their website.

[Kunzite]

Obviously the point they are making is that with this addition they finally have sealed f2.8 zooms that cover the focal lengths from 11mm to 135mm on APS-C.

Honestly, I do think the 16-50 and 50-135 both need to be updated -- the 50-135 is great optically, but should get a DC motor for better auto focus and the 16-50 isn't the best, as you say. But Pentax isn't going to say that on their website.

I wonder which company would say, "yeah, we have f/2.8 APS-C zooms covering from 11mm to 135mm, but two of them are not so good, don't buy those"
Obviously their marketing is trying to emphasis the good points, not the bad ones.

[fairyvilje]

Any chance you can post a photo of the edge/corners of your 16-85 ? Because online samples I can find (ephotozine) look like my copy.
Here attached my copy compared to DA50mm/1.8

You can have mine. I will let you judge on your own.
The exif data is all there. The focal length between the two lenses was manually matched. So even if it is written 53 for the 16-85, it is the closest to the 50 frame also considering the focus breathing for that focus distance. All the images were shot focusing on the cap for the leftmost ink bottle. The frame has been cropped to preserve the horizontal resolution and keep the subjects centered on the vertical axis. All the pictures have been shot on a tripod with pixel-shift enabled. The ink bottles have not been moved during the tests, as well as the tripod. I hope you may find them useful.

[biz-engineer]

The DFA*50 is too large. The HD FA35 is too small. Would it be possible to have f1.8 primes with size/weight around 500gr to pair with the K1 and K1 II ?

[thibs]

The HD FA35 is Just a cheap 35mm taking the same place in the Lens range as à Nikon 35/1.8 IMO. That or a plain and simple stopgap until a *lens can be developped.