[house]

Having a cheap line of small hd fa lenses with so so optics makes sense to me. You can make beautiful images with those existing fa lenses. As mentioned the HD FA 35 has been sold quite cheaply. I'm just "worried" the build quality is to good. For the cheapest line they should drop build quality a la plastic fantastics. That said the plastics already exist...

[TwoUptons]

Having a cheap line of small hd fa lenses with so so optics makes sense to me. You can make beautiful images with those existing fa lenses. As mentioned the HD FA 35 has been sold quite cheaply. I'm just "worried" the build quality is to good. For the cheapest line they should drop build quality a la plastic fantastics. That said the plastics already exist...

DFA 24mm f2.8, in about the same housing as the 35 mm f2.

Great walk around lens on APS-C, great inexpensive wide on FF. Everyone wins.

Then they can do a 20mm f1.8 Limited or whatever that is big, modern, and awesome.

-Eric

[jcdoss]

Let's hope some more TamTax models.....

Although I would prefer "PenTam," thanks at least for not saying "TamPax."

[surfar]

PenRon!...a Pentax makeover of a Tamron lens

[fsge]

Yep, Pentax-rebadged L-mount Sigma lenses for a Pentax-rebadged Sigma fp camera.

Sorry, couldn't resist either.

I would buy one

[PJ1]

Pentax is not a company anymore, Pentax is brand name

It has been a brand name forever. The original camera was the Asahiflex. They developed the pentaprism for the first SLR and called it the Asahi Pentax where Pentax was a contraction of PENTAprism and AsahifleX. Pentax was registered as a trademark. It was not a company. The trademark (which is now considered the brand) has been Asahi Pentax, Honeywell Pentax, just Pentax when it was owned by Hoya, and now Pentax while it is owned by Ricoh (although some have complained when Ricoh appeared on the box or back of the body). Pentax has never been a company. Think of it more as a line of DNA. It will only stop being recognisable as a Pentax when the name is sold without the continuing line of expertise.

[BarneyL]

Pentax has never been a company.

Pentax - Wikipedia

"The company was renamed Pentax Corporation in 2002."

[Mistral75]

FWIW, the D FA 70-210/4.0 is not a clone. It differs obviously in multiple respects from the similar Tamron offerings for Nikon and Canon (neither identical to the other). Probably, the most tantalizing is the claim by Pentax of using different glass (anomalous dispersion in two elements) than Tamron uses. Beyond that the short list runs like this:

• Quick Shift (+)
• Focus Limiter (+)
• HD SMC (+)
• SDM (may or may not be different/better than the Tamron USD)
• WR (may or may not be better than Tamron moisture resistance)
• No VC
• No Tamron Tap-in Console support
• No Tamron 6-year warranty
• No matched 1.4x and 2.0x TCs
• Does not require purchase of a Canon or Nikon body (+)

Steve

The Tamron lens has Quick Shift (just not named that way), SDM = USD here and the seals are positioned at the same places in both versions.

Tamron

Pentax

[superdave]

I just want a good 16-50 mk2 asap and later 300 f2.8 or 300 f4 mk2 or 400 f5.6.

[RobA_Oz]

Regarding the DA*300 f4, it's an important lens in the Pentax lineup, so it makes sense to release an HD coated version of it, in my opinion.
But it probably won't happen... bigger fish to fry.

Surely they’d just have to wait until they were preparing a new batch for manufacture, and shift to the HD coating line. Of course, that would also require rebadging and repackaging, not to mention holding off until warehouse stocks of components were exhausted.

[BigMackCam]

Surely they’d just have to wait until they were preparing a new batch for manufacture, and shift to the HD coating line. Of course, that would also require rebadging and repackaging, not to mention holding off until warehouse stocks of components were exhausted.

I think they'd have to ditch the old SDM too and go with a newer / better equivalent, no?

[stevebrot]

Pentax - Wikipedia

"The company was renamed Pentax Corporation in 2002."

And before that, in the late 1970s the regional Asahi subsidiaries transitioned to Pentax as the primary aspect of their company names; for example, Pentax Corporation for the U.S. entity that used to be in Englewood, Colorado.


Steve

[RobA_Oz]

I think they'd have to ditch the old SDM too and go with a newer / better equivalent, no?

That’s be helpful, but it would probably require a new/modified lens barrel to accommodate the ring motor. Maybe not, but I’m not familiar with the innards of the DA*300.

[PJ1]

"The company was renamed Pentax Corporation in 2002."

I take your point (thank you, I should have picked that up - my mistake). My only point was that it was a particular brand. We don't question whether anything manufactured before 2002 qualifies as a Pentax, so I see no reason to split hairs now.

[BigMackCam]

That’s be helpful, but it would probably require a new/modified lens barrel to accommodate the ring motor. Maybe not, but I’m not familiar with the innards of the DA*300.

Even though the DA*300 wasn't badly impacted compared to other SDM lenses, I don't think Ricoh could or should release a refresh without replacing the old SDM AF motor somehow - just as we wouldn't want them to release another camera with the K-30 / K-50 aperture control mechanism and solenoid part...