[clackers]

With regard to full frame teleconverters, I don’t remember ever seeing one on the roadmap. This discussion was with the roadmap on the projector and discussing the items one by one. Of course, it is possible items to come out that are never on the roadmap, like the recent decorating of the FA35/2.



Did you hear anything about teleconverters from anyone at Ricoh?

Asahi Man made this claim, IIRC.

He makes lots of claims.

[BROO]

Asahi Man made this claim, IIRC.

He makes lots of claims.

I take any of his claims with a grain of salt. Maybe some time in the past he was reliable?
It's Ooku or nothing for me.
Ricoh keep a pretty tight ship.
Another sign of a professional organisation.

[monochrome]

If you really know you really can’t say or you’ll never really know again.

[wed7]

I take any of his claims with a grain of salt. Maybe some time in the past her was reliable?
It's Ooku or nothing for me.
Ricoh keep a pretty tight ship.
Another sign of a professional organisation.

JPT and Mistral are also included in my book.

[reh321]

I take any of his claims with a grain of salt. Maybe some time in the past her was reliable?
It's Ooku or nothing for me.

@Asahiman was the first voice before Photokina to tell us that the upcoming APS camera wouldn't be a DSLR; it turned to just be the GRiii. Now he is saying that most effort is going towards "FF"; no one else is saying much .... we can see what happens during the next year.

[BROO]

If you really know you really can’t say or you’ll never really know again.

Correct, unless you are Ooku and are instructed to release information from the inner sanctum!

[biz-engineer]

When there is a leak somewhere, Ricoh finds the source hole and fills it with bathroom silicon sealing paste. So every source of information leakage is short lived. It used to be Kenspo, Asahi man, now Ooku, but ultimately they all end-up under a patch of silicon.

[robjmitchell]

I'm not so sure. The following is from Ricoh Imaging:

Aero Bright Coating II / Aero Bright Coating

Aero Bright Coating is a new layer formation process based on nanotechnology. It applies a silica aerogel coating layer with a uniform porous structure over a regular multi-layer coating. By trapping low-refraction air between stable silica nanoparticles, it forms a super-low refraction, high-transparency coating. It also drastically reduces surface reflections, while minimizing flare and ghost images. With Aero Bright Coating II, by increasing the amount of air trapped in the silica aerogel layer, this process successfully form a super-low reflection coating superior to that of the original Aero Bright Coating.

HD Coating

The manufacturing process for traditional vacuum deposition coating posed problems. Uneven membrane thickness and variations in the refractive index tend to occur due to difficulties in enhancing membrane density. To solve this, HD coating is created via a specialized method to achieve a high-density membrane with nanometer precision. This method reduces reflectance across the entire visible spectrum. It also produces a very hard and durable coating.



Source: PENTAX LENS TECHNOLOGY | PENTAX STAR LENS | RICOH IMAGING

Well I suppose we have aerobright 3 in that case. Plus also multicoat HD whatever that means.
From the DFA*50 pentax page

The lens is treated with PENTAX-developed Aero Bright Coating II* — a lens-coating nanotechnology employing a super-low refractive film fabrication process. By coupling this advanced lens coating with the high-grade, multi-layer HD Coating** — which reduces average reflectance in the visible ray spectrum to less than 50% of conventional multi-layer coatings — this lens effectively reduces flare and ghost images to a minimum even in demanding lighting conditions such as backlighting. By incorporating three super-low dispersion glass elements and one aspherical element in its optics, it effectively compensates chromatic and spherical aberrations, and produces brilliant, high-contrast images with edge-to-edge sharpness. Since it minimizes distortion even at a focusing distance of approximately one meter, it produces crisp, distortion-free images over the entire focusing range, from the minimum focusing distance to infinity.

*A state-of-the-art, PENTAX-original lens coating technology developed from nanotechnology. It applies a silica aerogel layer with a uniform porous structure over a regular multi-coating layer to reduce surface reflections across a wide wavelength range and produce crisp, high-quality images.

**HD stands for High Definition.

Sure is confusing.

[Groucho]

I’m not so happy for that, fisheye is by no means just a novelty.

But then, if I remember right, @kenspo has made some really great shots with a Samyang fisheye on a K-1, so the need for a Pentax fisheye is not urgent.

I personally am devastated by the fisheye coming off the roadmap. Seriously. Well, devastated in a photographic sense, at least. It's been the lens I've been looking forward to.

I have been really hoping we'd see a Pentax fisheye zoom with weather sealing, much improved IQ over the 10-17, and an odd number of aperture blades. The 10-17 was great, but six blades meant somewhat boring starbursts and there was a whole lotta PF even for an APS fisheye.

I've been shooting with the Samyang 12mm fisheye on my K-1 for close to 2.5 years now (see thread here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/332449-sam...ntax-mount.htm - plus plenty of shots with it on Flickr and elsewhere), and while it's very very good, I would love to swap it for a Pentax one. F2.8 at the wide end, hopefully. The Samyang has terrific IQ, very very little PF, and seven blade, so great starbursts, but I want all-weather and I would prefer the traditional fisheye look over the Samyang's stereographic imaging.

[Paul the Sunman]

I'm really enjoying the DA 10-17 on the K1 (FF over 14-17), notwithstanding the chromatic aberration (easily rectified in post). Although I would like to see a modern FF fisheye zoom, I recognise that there are many other higher priorities at the moment.

[GregL65]

I wonder how much appeal a revised 16-45 f4 would hold? For those who need f2.8 there's the 16-50; for those who don't there's the 16-85. Yes, a little less bulky, a little faster at the long end and presumably cheaper than the 16-85, but much more limiting focal range for a walkaround lens.

I bought the 16-45 along with my *ist D in early 2004, and it was my main walkaround until finally replacing it five years later with the Tamron 17-50/2.8.

I always liked the 16-45. It was so lightweight for what it was -- a wider than average medium zoom with very good image quality. Only 366g. Not very long on the long end but there's always cropping. Though the Tamron is also lightweight for what it is, its additional weight compared to the 16-45 has always been my least favorite thing about it.

There's a lot of chatter about chromatic aberration on this lens, but in tens of thousands of shots I found it bothersome on exactly one. I'm sure I could find more with pixel-peeping.

It had an interesting locking feature where if you twisted it all the way to 45mm, it would go a bit further to lock against zoom creep. No button to push or release for zoom lock. The Tamron has a button. Every time I use that button on the Tamron I think of the 16-45's superior way of doing zoom lock.

Anyway -- I think the appeal of an updated version of the 16-45 would be the light weight for a very-good quality medium zoom that goes to 16mm. Weather sealing and a motor would add weight, but if they update this lens, I think it would be because it could still be very lightweight for what it is.

But it would surprise me if they updated this lens after all these years. I think the appearance of the 17-70 represented Pentax's decision that the 16-45 focal length range was a marketing mistake (it was their first DA lens; before that the *ist D had been paired with the cheap 18-35). Another update on the 18-55 seems more likely; it's been a while (HD coating??). Or something entirely new.

[Mountain Vision]

I bought the 16-45 along with my *ist D in early 2004, and it was my main walkaround until finally replacing it five years later with the Tamron 17-50/2.8.

I always liked the 16-45. It was so lightweight for what it was -- a wider than average medium zoom with very good image quality. Only 366g. Not very long on the long end but there's always cropping. Though the Tamron is also lightweight for what it is, its additional weight compared to the 16-45 has always been my least favorite thing about it.

There's a lot of chatter about chromatic aberration on this lens, but in tens of thousands of shots I found it bothersome on exactly one. I'm sure I could find more with pixel-peeping.

It had an interesting locking feature where if you twisted it all the way to 45mm, it would go a bit further to lock against zoom creep. No button to push or release for zoom lock. The Tamron has a button. Every time I use that button on the Tamron I think of the 16-45's superior way of doing zoom lock.

Anyway -- I think the appeal of an updated version of the 16-45 would be the light weight for a very-good quality medium zoom that goes to 16mm. Weather sealing and a motor would add weight, but if they update this lens, I think it would be because it could still be very lightweight for what it is.

But it would surprise me if they updated this lens after all these years. I think the appearance of the 17-70 represented Pentax's decision that the 16-45 focal length range was a marketing mistake (it was their first DA lens; before that the *ist D had been paired with the cheap 18-35). Another update on the 18-55 seems more likely; it's been a while (HD coating??). Or something entirely new.

A lot of people liked that 16-45. It was a very good lens. So good Pentax discontinued it rather than let it go head to head with updated offerings.

However, lightweight or not, releasing new lenses without weather sealing is a bad idea. If your cameras are sealed your entire system should be designed, marketed and sold as sealed. I'm hoping moving forward as Pentax updates lenses, they add sealing to the limiteds. I can't fault them for the FA 35mm f/2 because it wasn't really a full on update as much as a coating update and a superficial barrel tweak.

[lotech]

I think this is common practice to produce lenses at 2 classes for different kind of users, the top of the line f2.8 pro one and the cheaper and smaller f4 one for general use, I am glad that Pentax has plan for a 70-200 f4 lens, also waiting for a 1.4 TC FF I want both WR. I don't see the benefit of having a huge f2.8 wide angle zoom given the high IQ in high ISO in modern camera, and the difference in DoF is minimal, f4 is about right in my book like the Sigma 24-105 is perfect to me. I love my 16-50 f2.8 but it is just too short for portrait it is an "embarrassing lens" to use, I would rather sacrifice one stop for added reach, especially I shoot outdoors mostly.

[Andrea K]

Well I suppose we have aerobright 3 in that case. Plus also multicoat HD whatever that means.
From the DFA*50 pentax page

The lens is treated with PENTAX-developed Aero Bright Coating II* — a lens-coating nanotechnology employing a super-low refractive film fabrication process. By coupling this advanced lens coating with the high-grade, multi-layer HD Coating** — which reduces average reflectance in the visible ray spectrum to less than 50% of conventional multi-layer coatings — this lens effectively reduces flare and ghost images to a minimum even in demanding lighting conditions such as backlighting. By incorporating three super-low dispersion glass elements and one aspherical element in its optics, it effectively compensates chromatic and spherical aberrations, and produces brilliant, high-contrast images with edge-to-edge sharpness. Since it minimizes distortion even at a focusing distance of approximately one meter, it produces crisp, distortion-free images over the entire focusing range, from the minimum focusing distance to infinity.

*A state-of-the-art, PENTAX-original lens coating technology developed from nanotechnology. It applies a silica aerogel layer with a uniform porous structure over a regular multi-coating layer to reduce surface reflections across a wide wavelength range and produce crisp, high-quality images.

**HD stands for High Definition.

Sure is confusing.

"Coupling" means: we use ABCII+HD on internal elements and HD on external elements. The current ABC (I or II), that can not be used on external surfaces because of its fragility, is a finishing touch not a standalone antireflection coating.

[kenspo]

@kenspo has made some really great shots with a Samyang fisheye on a K-1, so the need for a Pentax fisheye is not urgent.

Yes, that Samyang 12mm and the K-1 combo was killer. Loved it. And use MF glass on Pentax is easy