[Kunzite]

I would love it if they would release more "limiteds", but so far all we have seen are the large "perfect" lenses, which I believe contradicts the "limited" 'small is beautiful" concept.

A series of D FA* lenses does not exclude a series of more compact, Limited-like ones.

[thibs]

A series of D FA* lenses does not exclude a series of more compact, Limited-like ones.

Indeed. But first things first. And the way I understood things, Ricoh considers Compact Limited as being an APS thing and perfect lenses for FF.

[MMVIII]

Indeed. But first things first. And the way I understood things, Ricoh considers Compact Limited as being an APS thing and perfect lenses for FF.

Which makes perfect sense. FF does take the position of former MF in many aspects and a set of modern * lenses covering this sensor format is necessary for any serious system. A set of limiteds with character is already available and for many people sensor development in APS-C will keep this a more than sufficient system for almost all applications, and offer the possibility to go for a smaller and lighter kit.

[reh321]

A series of D FA* lenses does not exclude a series of more compact, Limited-like ones.

But the company's capacity to design new lenses seems to be very limited, and so far all they have produced are the larger ones - I am saying that we need to see evidence of the smaller ones also.

[house]

The rate of releases is so slow now that I'm prone to thinking its not due to design capacity but rather an attempt to make sure what is made is sold.

[MrNPhoto]

Indeed. But first things first. And the way I understood things, Ricoh considers Compact Limited as being an APS thing and perfect lenses for FF.

The original limited lenses are full-frame and quite compact for what they deliver (esp. the 43mm). No reason why new FF limiteds can't also be compact. They aren't star lenses, and can be offered at apertures that allow more compact designs.

[Winder]

The original limited lenses are full-frame and quite compact for what they deliver (esp. the 43mm). No reason why new FF limiteds can't also be compact. They aren't star lenses, and can be offered at apertures that allow more compact designs.

I don't think you will see them as compact as the film era lenses. The film era lenses had screw drive AF motors in the body, so there was no AF motor in the lens and those early screw drive AF lenses were basically manual focus lenses with some minor modification. The resolution of film and the AF accuracy of early cameras was both seriously lacking compared to modern digital sensors and AF. The Sony A9 checks and adjusts AF 60 times per-second and that is not something old screw driven could keep up with. AF lenses from just 5 years ago can't keep up with that. The need for higher resolution glass with more correction will make the lenses larger, but the need to have fast accurate AF is what will really make the lenses larger. Unless Ricoh releases manual focus Limited glass, they will be larger.

I would love to see a manufacturer release a mirrorless body that didn't even have AF and a line of modern manual focus lenses like the Zeiss Loxia and the Voightlander 50mm F/2 APO..... One not made by Leica.

You Tube

You Tube

[reh321]

I don't think you will see them as compact as the film era lenses. The film era lenses had screw drive AF motors in the body, so there was no AF motor in the lens and those early screw drive AF lenses were basically manual focus lenses with some minor modification. The resolution of film and the AF accuracy of early cameras was both seriously lacking compared to modern digital sensors and AF. The Sony A9 checks and adjusts AF 60 times per-second and that is not something old screw driven could keep up with. AF lenses from just 5 years ago can't keep up with that. The need for higher resolution glass with more correction will make the lenses larger, but the need to have fast accurate AF is what will really make the lenses larger. Unless Ricoh releases manual focus Limited glass, they will be larger.

My Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7 resolves plenty well - in center of the image - for my 16mp K-30; that would be around 36mp for "FF". The real difference between film lenses and the demands of modern photographers is in the corners of images. I believe modern in-lens focus motors add very little in size to lenses, but corner-to-corner sharpness is what has been increasing their size. Since I usually arrange my photographs with the most important part of the subject towards the center, I am perfectly happy with the old lenses, but not so much for many 'modern' photographers.

[Winder]

My Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7 resolves plenty well - in center of the image - for my 16mp K-30; that would be around 36mp for "FF". The real difference between film lenses and the demands of modern photographers is in the corners of images. I believe modern in-lens focus motors add very little in size to lenses, but corner-to-corner sharpness is what has been increasing their size. Since I usually arrange my photographs with the most important part of the subject towards the center, I am perfectly happy with the old lenses, but not so much for many 'modern' photographers.

As the AF points spread out to cover 90% of the frame, the lenses have to keep up. If lenses get soft towards the edge then those AF points become pretty pointless. For AF to be fast and responsive they need to make the focusing element as small and light as possible. As you can see below the AF motors and the rack add a good bit to the size.

You Tube

You Tube

[reh321]

As the AF points spread out to cover 90% of the frame, the lenses have to keep up. If lenses get soft towards the edge then those AF points become pretty pointless. For AF to be fast and responsive they need to make the focusing element as small and light as possible. As you can see below the AF motors and the rack add a good bit to the size.

So, don't use as many points; I use either 1 or 9 of my KP's 25 points; remember, that I am concentrating on the center of the image; if you want to lug around large lenses, that is fine, but Pentax at one time was known for their smaller lenses. Which brings us to your Sony example - my Pentax DA 55-300mm PLM lens is not noticeably larger than its predecessor, a 55-300mm screw-drive lens.

[repaap]

Don't you think that some one could have fitted one more Sony camera on that table.


As I begin to write this off, I know that some know already what I'm goint to write. Regardless. New technology is great, and someone might actually need all of that(poor guy, how has She/He managed so far with out). But lot of photographers, even PRO has been doing just fine with less. Have captured feelings, dreams, once in lifetime shots...ect. also some has style that you can't fit these things in it.


I'm sure that this DFA*85 will be fast enough. And sharp from edge to edge, as DFA*50 also is.

[house]

I believe modern in-lens focus motors add very little in size to lenses

Judging by Fuji this would be correct by anyone else it does seem that in lens motors add a fair bit of girth to lenses. Could be just a design choice or that Fuji does something different. I haven't researched the topic.

[reh321]

Judging by Fuji this would be correct by anyone else it does seem that in lens motors add a fair bit of girth to lenses. Could be just a design choice or that Fuji does something different. I haven't researched the topic.

As an even better example, as I have already noted Pentax added no noticeable size to their 55-300 lens when they went from screw-drive to PLM.

[Kunzite]

As an even better example, as I have already noted Pentax added no noticeable size to their 55-300 lens when they went from screw-drive to PLM.

They completely redesigned that lens though...

[reh321]

They completely redesigned that lens though...

True - but if they are going to redesign the lenses anyway, I'm asking that they go more for "limited" lenses rather than for large "perfect" lenses like the DFA* 50.