[Fenwoodian]

Lenses should be included in analysis of the situation and it would make no sense that Pentax would release the HD 10-17, HD FA 35, and DA *11-18mm if they weren't planning to continue to support K mount cameras. I know that the 10-17 and 35 are both based on old designs but, they required new production runs and if Pentax would shut down K mount operations, they would have a bunch of glass on their hands that no one was expecting.

I think the bigger thing to remember is that the overall camera market is tanking in a major way. Companies like Canon and Nikon and even Sony that are slamming out new release after new release could easily take a beating as their products get pumped out to require deep discounts to sell or worse yet, just sit on shelves, unsold. The most likely thing in this sort of a market is that Ricoh has decided that now is a time for patience, for conservative timetables for new releases, particularly camera bodies, where it will take significant R and D to match the performance that they have said is their goal.

I still expect a K3 sequel and K-1 sequel -- probably both with the same underlying auto focus engine and other updates. KP could just be discounted and take the place of the K-70. But please understand that I don't know anything. I just tend to be optimistic and don't see any reason to believe that the situation is as dark as some think it is.

---------- Post added 09-11-19 at 03:53 PM ----------



Just took a look at the sample photos there and the bokeh is not anything to write home about. It's OK, but certainly nothing that stands out.

Nothing close to what I would expect from my DA *55 or FA 77.

I just love it when people condemn a piece of gear based on one short internet article and a couple of photos.


First, that review you link to only comments on the shape and artifacts withing the bokeh balls. Like many photographers, many around here believe "bokeh balls" are bokeh; rather than a singular aspect of them. I could care less about the way a lens produces bokeh balls because I never shoot specular highlights.

Second, the background blur images posted at the end of this article are not at all indicative of what this lens can do in more normal shooting conditions. Shooting into a distant background that is harsh is hardly a test for bokeh.

Third, check out this MFT chart on the Sigma 35/1.2 lens. IF you understand the subtleties of MTF, you'll realize that this lens has a near perfect MTF for a bokeh lens.


Finally, if you're still not convinced, check out these real world images.

[normhead]

I just love it when people condemn a piece of gear based on one short internet article and a couple of photos.


First, that review you link to only comments on the shape and artifacts withing the bokeh balls. Like many photographers, many around here believe "bokeh balls" are bokeh; rather than a singular aspect of them. I could care less about the way a lens produces bokeh balls because I never shoot specular highlights.

Second, the background blur images posted at the end of this article are not at all indicative of what this lens can do in more normal shooting conditions. Shooting into a distant background that is harsh is hardly a test for bokeh.

Third, check out this MFT chart on the Sigma 35/1.2 lens. IF you understand the subtleties of MTF, you'll realize that this lens has a near perfect MTF for a bokeh lens.


Finally, if you're still not convinced, check out these real world images.

Are you by any chance influenced by pretty models?

IF you understand the subtleties of MTF, you'll realize that this lens has a near perfect MTF for a bokeh lens.

And you have comparative images to demonstrate this. I had no idea you can evaluate bokeh from an MTF chart.

[Socrateeze]

A complete lack of 3rd party support for K-mount is in no way a good thing for Pentax, but we have to live with it.
.

Errm, well, personal financial limitations to one side, there are always other options than just living with it. For some of us there is the option - costly as it may be - to move to a different system. In my case, that will likely be Sony, because I no longer have much faith in future lens support at full frame from Pentax or anyone else now.

The relative lack of modern lens support, especially at full frame, has long been a significant (almost the only) downside of Pentax when compared with other manufacturers. It was the main thing that caused me to have some second thoughts when I bought the K-1. But the K-1 was the best thing I could get at that price-point and it is a wonderful camera. I thought I could live with the paucity of modern lenses because there was just about enough third-party lens support and just about enough Pentax lenses to get me up and running, but I expected full-frame lens support to continue apace. A few nice primes have emerged, but things have become intolerably slow (e.g., the D-FA 70-200mm f4) and it seems to me that Ricoh have other priorities (such as the wonderful GR III and other aps-c cameras) - and good luck to them! After all, it seems to be working to some extent since Pentax have increased its market share from almost nothing to slightly more than almost nothing. We're soon coming up to four years since the K-1 was announced, and we still have no 70-200mm f4, no FF teleconverter, etc., and the refusal to embrace mirrorless at full-frame - which is central to Sigma's decision, it seems - means that some of us see the writing on the wall and will jump ship.

It's sad.

[Rondec]

I just love it when people condemn a piece of gear based on one short internet article and a couple of photos.


First, that review you link to only comments on the shape and artifacts withing the bokeh balls. Like many photographers, many around here believe "bokeh balls" are bokeh; rather than a singular aspect of them. I could care less about the way a lens produces bokeh balls because I never shoot specular highlights.

Second, the background blur images posted at the end of this article are not at all indicative of what this lens can do in more normal shooting conditions. Shooting into a distant background that is harsh is hardly a test for bokeh.

Third, check out this MFT chart on the Sigma 35/1.2 lens. IF you understand the subtleties of MTF, you'll realize that this lens has a near perfect MTF for a bokeh lens.


Finally, if you're still not convinced, check out these real world images.

I was looking at the statue images and I know what sort of background I get with the FA 31 and similar situations and I like it better. Bokeh is a matter of taste. I don't happen to like this very much, you do. I'm not sure there is much more to say.

[normhead]

Errm, well, personal financial limitations to one side, there are always other options than just living with it. For some of us there is the option - costly as it may be - to move to a different system. In my case, that will likely be Sony, because I no longer have much faith in future lens support at full frame from Pentax or anyone else now.

The relative lack of modern lens support, especially at full frame, has long been a significant (almost the only) downside of Pentax when compared with other manufacturers. It was the main thing that caused me to have some second thoughts when I bought the K-1. But the K-1 was the best thing I could get at that price-point and it is a wonderful camera. I thought I could live with the paucity of modern lenses because there was just about enough third-party lens support and just about enough Pentax lenses to get me up and running, but I expected full-frame lens support to continue apace. A few nice primes have emerged, but things have become intolerably slow (e.g., the D-FA 70-200mm f4) and it seems to me that Ricoh have other priorities (such as the wonderful GR III and other aps-c cameras) - and good luck to them! After all, it seems to be working to some extent since Pentax have increased its market share from almost nothing to slightly more than almost nothing. We're soon coming up to four years since the K-1 was announced, and we still have no 70-200mm f4, no FF teleconverter, etc., and the refusal to embrace mirrorless at full-frame - which is central to Sigma's decision, it seems - means that some of us see the writing on the wall and will jump ship.

It's sad.

Every time I advise people to buy Pentax, I advise them to not count on new releases, to make sure they have what you want before you buy. To bad i didn't get to you before you bought your K-1. Posts like this are entirely predictable and there have been a lot of them. Mind you, half of the K-1 production run was bought by photographers new to Pentax so a lot of them have been quite happy as well.

The writing I see on the wall is a bad gamble by Sigma on a type of body that it's looking less and less likely will ever be the largest part of the ILC market. Given that SIgma is 1/3 the size of Tamron and the market is shrinking, I'm seeing it as a sign of desperation. One last gamble that will pay off by bringing them back to profitability. But gambles go both ways. You can win or lose.

and we still have no 70-200mm f4, no FF teleconverter,

We have the DA* 60-250 ƒ4 which with slight modification is full frame lens, indeed it's listed as full frame lens on it's patent. It's not ideal but we have the F 1.7x AF adapter that is full frame. I use it with my DA*200 and Tamron 300 2.8. And for the Tamron I have the Tamron MC7 2xTC that works with screw drive lenses. Some of are complaining, some of us just keep on shooting.

So you see what you think is obvious, and I see what I think is obvious. Time will tell. Good luck in the future.

[monochrome]

Usually we get news about 2 weeks before a release. But you're right. There is not even any beta testers telling us they can't tell us what they know. When kenspo was here he knew when something was coming, even if he couldn't say what. " I can't say what but you're going to like it." We seem to be in a Pentax dark zone at the moment. As biz engineer pointed out, Pentax isn't going to say they've suspended operation until they're sure they won't revive it, even if they have stopped work on Pentax products.

However that doesn't really mean anything, it's just one perspective. There are other interpretations. Like a they've gone all Steve Jobs on us, and there will be a rollout announcement at some time with many featured products. Until Pentax rolls over and stretches so we can see what's under the blankets, we won't know. Odds are, it won't be what a lot of people want, but it also won't be nothing at all. It could be lots of new product, it could be no new product, just a birthday card with no presents. All are possible at this point. Without someone like kenspo, we can't even speculate on what's probable.

I say again, if the Vietnam and Sebu plants had ceased production we would have heard - at least from the suppliers of components such as Sony and SocioNext.

[monochrome]

Where do you think those fish eye lens are coming from or where the 85mm will come from.

And don’t forget about the special edition KP.

Vietnam or the Philippines or both. We haven’t heard they are closed (and we would have heard) so logically they are still producing new product.

[normhead]

Vietnam or the Philippines or both. We haven’t heard they are closed (and we would have heard) so logically they are still producing new product.

Producing new product and developing new product are different. But you're right. No plants have been closed, product is being produced, which suggests orders are still coming in and being filled. It's hard to imagine in that scenario that R and D aren't taking place.

[reh321]

Errm, well, personal financial limitations to one side, there are always other options than just living with it. For some of us there is the option - costly as it may be - to move to a different system. In my case, that will likely be Sony, because I no longer have much faith in future lens support at full frame from Pentax or anyone else now.

The relative lack of modern lens support, especially at full frame, has long been a significant (almost the only) downside of Pentax when compared with other manufacturers. It was the main thing that caused me to have some second thoughts when I bought the K-1. But the K-1 was the best thing I could get at that price-point and it is a wonderful camera. I thought I could live with the paucity of modern lenses because there was just about enough third-party lens support and just about enough Pentax lenses to get me up and running, but I expected full-frame lens support to continue apace. A few nice primes have emerged, but things have become intolerably slow (e.g., the D-FA 70-200mm f4) and it seems to me that Ricoh have other priorities (such as the wonderful GR III and other aps-c cameras) - and good luck to them! After all, it seems to be working to some extent since Pentax have increased its market share from almost nothing to slightly more than almost nothing. We're soon coming up to four years since the K-1 was announced, and we still have no 70-200mm f4, no FF teleconverter, etc., and the refusal to embrace mirrorless at full-frame - which is central to Sigma's decision, it seems - means that some of us see the writing on the wall and will jump ship.

It's sad.

yes, it is sad you feel that way.

If you want "FF" MILC, there is no reason to be here - Pentax has never even hinted at that, let alone promised it.

When I first joined here, almost five years ago, people were asking for a "FF" body .... not necessarily a "FF" system - "so we can make good use of the film lenses we already have". Yes, Pentax has released some modern lenses - but they have been few, far between. and {often} very expensive - so only a brave person would plan to get a "Pentax FF" system based purely on modern production. Summer 2018, when I thought about possibly ending up with a K-1, I picked up a few older/film lenses that could provide me with a complete kit: Tamron AdaptAll 17mm, Pentax-FA 28-105mm, Sigma 70-300mm; since I didn't end up getting a K-1, that is now the kit I use with my K-30, which developed Dark Image Syndrome just about a year ago .... but it is a doable, useable kit for me.

[RobA_Oz]

...When I first joined here, almost five years ago, people were asking for a "FF" body .... not necessarily a "FF" system - "so we can make good use of the film lenses we already have". Yes, Pentax has released some modern lenses - but they have been few, far between. and {often} very expensive - so only a brave person would plan to get a "Pentax FF" system based purely on modern production.

I was one of those people who deliberately chose to accumulate high-quality (ie FA* and FA Limited) lenses from the film era, in anticipation of the appearance of a 35FF Pentax body at some stage, a choice I haven't regretted, even though some of the modern Pentax lenses have exceeded their quality in some cases. I have bought a couple of recent Pentax lenses since, but the only remaining gap in my line-up may be covered by the DFA 150-500.

What an individual requires from a system varies according to need and style of shooting, so you don't have to be brave to invest in the existing lineup, just satisfied that it addresses your needs.

[bladerunner6]

The R&D resource cost contribution to the release of a new product is usually the smallest part in the cost structure of a new product.

I assume you have never worked in an R&D environment, have you?

Tooling, prototyping, testing in house and in the field, etc are all major expenses.

Especially for a small brand like Pentax.

All their prototyping and tooling must have to be outsourced.

I work for an automotive parts manufacturer. I can say with 100% confidence that bringing a manufactured product to market involves a lot more than a couple of guys playing a round in a lab for 40 hours a week.

[reh321]

Tooling, prototyping, testing in house and in the field, etc are all major expenses.

Especially for a small brand like Pentax.

All their prototyping and tooling must have to be outsourced.

I work for an automotive parts manufacturer. I can say with 100% confidence that bringing a manufactured product to market involves a lot more than a couple of guys playing a round in a lab for 40 hours a week.

At one time I was part of an effort that developed a prototype digital radio, which was large as a bread box so the Electrical Engineers could use standard sized boards for their work. I wonder how a prototype camera is developed to leave enough room for custom electronics.

[clackers]

I mean the fact that Sigma has launched an entire line of prime lenses from 14mm to 135mm...then retrofitted them for E-mount...but none of them were available for Pentax mount, should tell you the level of commitment that Sigma has to K-mount.

Yep, if they won't make lenses for Fuji because it's uneconomical (quote from their CEO: "I really wish we could make a lens for the X mount system but right now, just because our resources are limited, we don’t have such a plan") they certainly won't for Pentax!

They're such a small company - 100 million yen capitalization - one business mistake and the family business is up in smoke!

[luftfluss]

Poor @clackers has to copy & paste his thoughts into 2 concurrent threads that discuss the same topic...

[BigMackCam]

I've been asked by the OP to close this thread, since the intention was only ever to communicate the confirmation from Sigma.

Clearly, we have other threads discussing Sigma, so I'm happy to oblige...