interview with Ricoh Imaging General Sales Manager for Europe

**mlt** · 12-13-2019, 02:15 PM

Originally posted by Serkevan

It definitely is part of it. The other part is, I think, reduced aberrations. For what reason when most can be corrected with one click, I don't know. My new-to-me M20/4, however, arrives tomorrow in the morning and I cannot wait to go around the Christmas market with the small bandit on the K-1!

Let us know what shape it is in and post pictures.

**pres589** · 12-13-2019, 02:39 PM

That's just it though; at 20mm on full frame, the edges are very far apart, if that makes sense. For me, if I'm going out with a lens that wide, it's either got to be a sunny day or I have to bring a tripod, there's really no middle ground. And at that point f8 to f11 apertures are fine, and the M 20 f4 performs quite well there. It is a bit of a "if you're going to own and use this lens, you should be aware of the full requirements of use" kinds of things. The K 20 is huge compared to the M 20 which is why I went for the M; I wanted something I could put in a small pouch or case and take with me camping where space is at a premium. The K 20 is not huge at all compared to what I think Ricoh might try to sell us if they brought out an ultra-wide prime today.

Hope you got a good copy of the M 20 coming to you.

reh321 · 12-13-2019, 03:23 PM

Originally posted by pres589

That's just it though; at 20mm on full frame, the edges are very far apart, if that makes sense. For me, if I'm going out with a lens that wide, it's either got to be a sunny day or I have to bring a tripod, there's really no middle ground. And at that point f8 to f11 apertures are fine, and the M 20 f4 performs quite well there. It is a bit of a "if you're going to own and use this lens, you should be aware of the full requirements of use" kinds of things. The K 20 is huge compared to the M 20 which is why I went for the M; I wanted something I could put in a small pouch or case and take with me camping where space is at a premium. The K 20 is not huge at all compared to what I think Ricoh might try to sell us if they brought out an ultra-wide prime today.

Hope you got a good copy of the M 20 coming to you.

My AdaptaptAll 17mm f/3.5 is not huge at all. Here is a photo of it next to my Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7.
Yes it is bigger, but small enough I could carry it in a "FF" bag regularly and not think about it until it is needed.
And right now it is the lens I would use if I were to go "FF".
Maybe Pentax should leave WA and UWA "FF" to old and new manual focus lenses from other companies.

**pres589** · 12-13-2019, 03:30 PM

I also have an Adaptall 17 and it's pretty good. It would be better if they had put filter threads in the stupid thing. It would be amazing if they had produced a hood that mounted with a bayonet instead of *SET SCREWS* (I'm getting annoyed just typing it out) and had filter threads. I hope someone lost their job over that mess.

In any case, yeah, there's pretty good manual focus glass available brand new as well as old film-era stuff. That doesn't mean Pentax shouldn't have a couple more lens options available brand new. If I had a K-1 I would probably go looking for a Tamron 17-35 as it seems pretty capable and the 15-30 is just too big and expensive.

Between my Samyang 14, Adaptall 17, and M 20 I'm pretty well covered! And I should probably sell one of them just because I don't need so much wide glass.

**Serkevan** · 12-13-2019, 05:18 PM

Originally posted by pres589

That's just it though; at 20mm on full frame, the edges are very far apart, if that makes sense. For me, if I'm going out with a lens that wide, it's either got to be a sunny day or I have to bring a tripod, there's really no middle ground. And at that point f8 to f11 apertures are fine, and the M 20 f4 performs quite well there. It is a bit of a "if you're going to own and use this lens, you should be aware of the full requirements of use" kinds of things. The K 20 is huge compared to the M 20 which is why I went for the M; I wanted something I could put in a small pouch or case and take with me camping where space is at a premium. The K 20 is not huge at all compared to what I think Ricoh might try to sell us if they brought out an ultra-wide prime today.

Hope you got a good copy of the M 20 coming to you.

Honestly, the main reason I even went for an UWA was to have something for extreme perspectives more than all-encompassing landscapes. Since I normally don't plan for those things to appear, something that can go in a coat pocket as a "just in case" (if the D FA 28-105 is too long) was the logical option.

Regarding the size of the K, I indeed was thinking that it's small compared to any "modern" UWA lens; the M is just unbelievable small.

reh321 · 12-13-2019, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by Serkevan

Regarding the size of the K, I indeed was thinking that it's small compared to any "modern" UWA lens; the M is just unbelievable small.

Until computers were highly used, lenses had 'character' - usually dependent on the designer - now they are simply as close to "perfect" as possible.

Mistral75 · 12-13-2019, 09:09 PM - **2 Likes**

...and perfection is boring.

**Cerebum** · 12-14-2019, 12:56 AM

Originally posted by lsimpkins

I think the proportion of gear oriented individuals is much higher on the various photography forums and vlogger sites.
Such places give them their "fix" on the latest tech.

I took some vintage lenses into my camera club, 4 people had a look! If it had been a carb off an old Alvis, car enthusiasts would have surrounded me. I think availability and usability of vintage glass on Pentax bodies has wired pentaxians differently. Also I would hate to be a Sony shooter. Imagine paying a ton for a Sony A7ii only to see it get superseded twice in quick succession

thibs · 12-14-2019, 03:56 AM

Originally posted by reh321

Until computers were highly used, lenses had 'character' - usually dependent on the designer - now they are simply as close to "perfect" as possible.

Computers easily allows 'without character' lenses, maybe.
But close to perfection is possible with character. DFA50 is a proof.

**Serkevan** · 12-14-2019, 06:56 AM - **4 Likes**

Originally posted by mlt

Let us know what shape it is in and post pictures.

It looks like it has not been used in the last 40 years. It's basically the same size as the M50/1.7 (how did they manage?!) I will probably take it out for a spin later

**travelswsage** · 12-14-2019, 07:12 AM

That is quite the compact lens, and certainly beats lugging the 15-30. Any vignetting with an nd or circular polarizer on it?

**Serkevan** · 12-14-2019, 07:23 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by travelswsage

That is quite the compact lens, and certainly beats lugging the 15-30. Any vignetting with an nd or circular polarizer on it?

No noticeable vignetting with a fairly thick-framed UV filter!

Class A · 12-14-2019, 07:38 AM

Originally posted by Serkevan

It's basically the same size as the M50/1.7 (how did they manage?!)

Nice!

Do these "compact" MILC systems even have lenses as compact as this?

Certainly most recent lens releases were all about large and heavy lenses.

I understand the modern day expectations regarding lenses in terms of speed and optical quality, but what is the point of these ergonomically crippled MILC cameras if one doesn't have the option of slapping on a small (albeit slow) lens?

Dipsoid · 12-14-2019, 08:00 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Class A

Nice!

Do these "compact" MILC systems even have lenses as compact as this?

Certainly most recent lens releases were all about large and heavy lenses.

I understand the modern day expectations regarding lenses in terms of speed and optical quality, but what is the point of these ergonomically crippled MILC cameras if one doesn't have the option of slapping on a small (albeit slow) lens?

Sony has a 20mm APSC lens that is as pancake as pancake could be. For full frame, the Samyang primes are pretty compact. The Loxia 21 it's pretty compact and faster than the Pentax, I'd be curious to see its size comparison with the Pentax+adapter. There is a disappointing amount of small lenses for Sony. The Fuji stuff is pretty small, but only APSC.

**lsimpkins** · 12-14-2019, 08:06 AM

Originally posted by Class A

Nice!

Do these "compact" MILC systems even have lenses as compact as this?

Certainly most recent lens releases were all about large and heavy lenses.

I understand the modern day expectations regarding lenses in terms of speed and optical quality, but what is the point of these ergonomically crippled MILC cameras if one doesn't have the option of slapping on a small (albeit slow) lens?

It probably goes without saying that the majority of mirrorless devotees would be lost without the in-lens motors for autofocus and/or aperture control. And it would be tough to build comparable focal length and aperture lenses with such motors as compactly as the pre-F-series Pentax lenses.

12-14-2019, 06:56 AM - 4 Likes	#505
Serkevan Site Supporter Join Date: May 2019 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,976	Originally posted by mlt Let us know what shape it is in and post pictures. It looks like it has not been used in the last 40 years. It's basically the same size as the M50/1.7 (how did they manage?!) I will probably take it out for a spin later Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Imaging Resource's CP+2018 interview with Ricoh Imaging	Kunzite	Pentax News and Rumors	93	04-18-2018 11:12 PM
Interview with Chief Sales & Marketing Officer / Ricoh Imaging Japan	leonsroar	Pentax News and Rumors	464	01-13-2014 01:42 PM
A brief interview with Pentax UK manager from the BJP - Regarding the K-01	crabclawhands	Pentax K-01	12	02-02-2012 01:10 PM
Interview with Hiroshi Onoda. Manager of Pentax Europe.	Turo	Pentax News and Rumors	261	05-27-2010 04:38 PM
Pentax Marketing Communication Manager Interview	vinzer	Pentax News and Rumors	68	03-26-2009 09:39 PM

12-13-2019, 02:15 PM	#496
mlt Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Posts: 1,159	Originally posted by Serkevan It definitely is part of it. The other part is, I think, reduced aberrations. For what reason when most can be corrected with one click, I don't know. My new-to-me M20/4, however, arrives tomorrow in the morning and I cannot wait to go around the Christmas market with the small bandit on the K-1! Let us know what shape it is in and post pictures.

12-13-2019, 02:39 PM	#497
pres589 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Wichita, KS Photos: Albums Posts: 4,533	That's just it though; at 20mm on full frame, the edges are very far apart, if that makes sense. For me, if I'm going out with a lens that wide, it's either got to be a sunny day or I have to bring a tripod, there's really no middle ground. And at that point f8 to f11 apertures are fine, and the M 20 f4 performs quite well there. It is a bit of a "if you're going to own and use this lens, you should be aware of the full requirements of use" kinds of things. The K 20 is huge compared to the M 20 which is why I went for the M; I wanted something I could put in a small pouch or case and take with me camping where space is at a premium. The K 20 is not huge at all compared to what I think Ricoh might try to sell us if they brought out an ultra-wide prime today. Hope you got a good copy of the M 20 coming to you.

12-13-2019, 03:30 PM	#499
pres589 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Wichita, KS Photos: Albums Posts: 4,533	I also have an Adaptall 17 and it's pretty good. It would be better if they had put filter threads in the stupid thing. It would be amazing if they had produced a hood that mounted with a bayonet instead of SET SCREWS (I'm getting annoyed just typing it out) and had filter threads. I hope someone lost their job over that mess. In any case, yeah, there's pretty good manual focus glass available brand new as well as old film-era stuff. That doesn't mean Pentax shouldn't have a couple more lens options available brand new. If I had a K-1 I would probably go looking for a Tamron 17-35 as it seems pretty capable and the 15-30 is just too big and expensive. Between my Samyang 14, Adaptall 17, and M 20 I'm pretty well covered! And I should probably sell one of them just because I don't need so much wide glass.

12-13-2019, 05:18 PM	#500
Serkevan Site Supporter Join Date: May 2019 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,976	Originally posted by pres589 That's just it though; at 20mm on full frame, the edges are very far apart, if that makes sense. For me, if I'm going out with a lens that wide, it's either got to be a sunny day or I have to bring a tripod, there's really no middle ground. And at that point f8 to f11 apertures are fine, and the M 20 f4 performs quite well there. It is a bit of a "if you're going to own and use this lens, you should be aware of the full requirements of use" kinds of things. The K 20 is huge compared to the M 20 which is why I went for the M; I wanted something I could put in a small pouch or case and take with me camping where space is at a premium. The K 20 is not huge at all compared to what I think Ricoh might try to sell us if they brought out an ultra-wide prime today. Hope you got a good copy of the M 20 coming to you. Honestly, the main reason I even went for an UWA was to have something for extreme perspectives more than all-encompassing landscapes. Since I normally don't plan for those things to appear, something that can go in a coat pocket as a "just in case" (if the D FA 28-105 is too long) was the logical option. Regarding the size of the K, I indeed was thinking that it's small compared to any "modern" UWA lens; the M is just unbelievable small.

12-13-2019, 05:54 PM	#501
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,181	Originally posted by Serkevan Regarding the size of the K, I indeed was thinking that it's small compared to any "modern" UWA lens; the M is just unbelievable small. Until computers were highly used, lenses had 'character' - usually dependent on the designer - now they are simply as close to "perfect" as possible.

12-13-2019, 09:09 PM - 2 Likes	#502
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527 Original Poster	...and perfection is boring.

12-14-2019, 12:56 AM	#503
Cerebum Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2017 Location: Lancaster Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,829	Originally posted by lsimpkins I think the proportion of gear oriented individuals is much higher on the various photography forums and vlogger sites. Such places give them their "fix" on the latest tech. I took some vintage lenses into my camera club, 4 people had a look! If it had been a carb off an old Alvis, car enthusiasts would have surrounded me. I think availability and usability of vintage glass on Pentax bodies has wired pentaxians differently. Also I would hate to be a Sony shooter. Imagine paying a ton for a Sony A7ii only to see it get superseded twice in quick succession

12-14-2019, 03:56 AM	#504
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by reh321 Until computers were highly used, lenses had 'character' - usually dependent on the designer - now they are simply as close to "perfect" as possible. Computers easily allows 'without character' lenses, maybe. But close to perfection is possible with character. DFA50 is a proof.

12-14-2019, 07:12 AM	#506
travelswsage Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2016 Posts: 385	That is quite the compact lens, and certainly beats lugging the 15-30. Any vignetting with an nd or circular polarizer on it?

12-14-2019, 07:23 AM - 1 Like	#507
Serkevan Site Supporter Join Date: May 2019 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,976	Originally posted by travelswsage That is quite the compact lens, and certainly beats lugging the 15-30. Any vignetting with an nd or circular polarizer on it? No noticeable vignetting with a fairly thick-framed UV filter!

12-14-2019, 07:38 AM	#508
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by Serkevan It's basically the same size as the M50/1.7 (how did they manage?!) Nice! Do these "compact" MILC systems even have lenses as compact as this? Certainly most recent lens releases were all about large and heavy lenses. I understand the modern day expectations regarding lenses in terms of speed and optical quality, but what is the point of these ergonomically crippled MILC cameras if one doesn't have the option of slapping on a small (albeit slow) lens?

12-14-2019, 08:00 AM - 1 Like	#509
Dipsoid Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 241	Originally posted by Class A Nice! Do these "compact" MILC systems even have lenses as compact as this? Certainly most recent lens releases were all about large and heavy lenses. I understand the modern day expectations regarding lenses in terms of speed and optical quality, but what is the point of these ergonomically crippled MILC cameras if one doesn't have the option of slapping on a small (albeit slow) lens? Sony has a 20mm APSC lens that is as pancake as pancake could be. For full frame, the Samyang primes are pretty compact. The Loxia 21 it's pretty compact and faster than the Pentax, I'd be curious to see its size comparison with the Pentax+adapter. There is a disappointing amount of small lenses for Sony. The Fuji stuff is pretty small, but only APSC.

12-14-2019, 08:06 AM	#510
lsimpkins Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: SE Pennsylvania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 537	Originally posted by Class A Nice! Do these "compact" MILC systems even have lenses as compact as this? Certainly most recent lens releases were all about large and heavy lenses. I understand the modern day expectations regarding lenses in terms of speed and optical quality, but what is the point of these ergonomically crippled MILC cameras if one doesn't have the option of slapping on a small (albeit slow) lens? It probably goes without saying that the majority of mirrorless devotees would be lost without the in-lens motors for autofocus and/or aperture control. And it would be tough to build comparable focal length and aperture lenses with such motors as compactly as the pre-F-series Pentax lenses.