[Kunzite]

I am more concerned about af motors brakeing. Many lenses these days use focus by wire and those will not focus manually after the motor broke.

The D FA* 50mm f/1.4 is not focus by wire, and likely the 85mm won't be either.

[FozzFoster]

Bashing the modern solution is the wrong approach.

idk dude, my horse and buggy work just fine! and those newfangled cars break down all the time... and they scare the horse!

[pres589]

K-30 and K-50 (and possibly K-01 if cross-flashed with updated firmware for those cameras) support KAF4. Not costly to get a crop body that will support this lens.

It is nice knowing that it will function wide-open on my film bodies! Time to invest in some ND filters to deal with the lack of stop down. Imagine this lens with Portra 160 and a touch of over-exposure. Bellissima!

[Serkevan]

In both cases 4.4 (6.5 in crop mode) fps indicated. Is this value getting higher in case of KAF4 lenses?

No, of course. I just mentioned it as a reason why the KAF4 is, in principle, better. For our currently available cameras it is not an issue whatsoever, though.

[Pål Jensen]

That's possibly true. However, normally I change cameras more often than lenses. So defective lens is considered by myself as bigger problem.

If you change cameras more often than lenses, whats the problem then with KAF4? It has been supported for years.
There's nothing that suggest that the new * lenses are not built to last. Quite the opposite...

[pres589]

Yeah, what's the last k-mount camera that doesn't support this lens, the K-5II and IIs? From 2012? I've got one and I'm not mad about this in the least. Nearly a decade since that camera came out, and by the time this lens hits shelves in attainable numbers, it will be even closer to a decade old.

If you can really justify the purchase price of this lens, it shouldn't be that hard to find the money for a body that supports it, especially if buying used.

[deus ursus]

idk dude, my horse and buggy work just fine! and those newfangled cars break down all the time... and they scare the horse!

Idk. I've had several horses die on me up through the years, but my two feet are still working well.

[thibs]

I am more concerned about af motors brakeing. Many lenses these days use focus by wire and those will not focus manually after the motor broke.
I generally think, we need to accept that camera gear is build to be used one or two decades, not to be passed down generations.
If a lens brakes after 10 years, it is not unexpected. A FA77 may also fail after a few years (thinking of the screws came loose issue which happend quite a few times with the fa limites), still it is considered a high quality build.

AFAICT only the DA18-50RE is focus by wire. That's the only one (that I recall).

[acoufap]

AFAICT only the DA18-50RE is focus by wire. That's the only one (that I recall).

plus DA55-300PLM.

[acoufap]

I would not accept apremium lens that doesnt sport the top line KAF4 mount. I am quite relaxed in the way that I expect Ricoh to share my view 100%.

I think Ricoh would agree to call the DA*11-18 premium lens - it‘s KAF3 mount.

[zzeitg]

If you change cameras more often than lenses, whats the problem then with KAF4? It has been supported for years.
There's nothing that suggest that the new * lenses are not built to last. Quite the opposite...

Well, it's more like I care less about cameras than lenses.

Digital camera is nothing else than consumables. Lens is an (almost) timeless value. (Well, not if it changes to consumables, too…)

I guess everybody who likes legacy lenses might know what I mean.

[SSGGeezer]

Well, it's more like I care less about cameras than lenses.

Digital camera is nothing else than consumables. Lens is an (almost) timeless value. (Well, not if it changes to consumables, too…)

I guess everybody who likes legacy lenses might know what I mean.

I love my FA* lenses but KAF 4 is both the future and has been as close to flawless as an electronic device can be in my limited experience.

[normhead]

I love my FA* lenses but KAF 4 is both the future and has been as close to flawless as an electronic device can be in my limited experience.

I have had more digital bodies than film bodies in shorter amount of time, but that was because advances in the technology were appealing. My K-1 and K-3 and Tess' K-5 are reliable, completely viable technology and not much has improved since their release. I will use them until they die, same as my film cameras. I had 3 shutter failures with film, rendering the cameras useless. I sold three of my older bodies in great working condition and I can only assume they are still working.I don't know different. The big difference being I shoot a lot more now. I've actually never had a digital die in my hands. I had 3 film cameras die in my hands. A lot of the time, I see these comparisons, and I think people have trouble remembering how things were.

[Kunzite]

I can get used to. Or not. What's better for the brand in the end? To get over the loss of customer like me, or to invest some small money and maintain the backwards compatibility? (Maybe by implementing both mechanical and electronic aperture control?)

To move forward, recover the lost ground as much as possible (they're well behind in modernizing the lens line) and not lose people willing to buy their most expensive products.
People with very old cameras can simply use old lenses.

In both cases 4.4 (6.5 in crop mode) fps indicated. Is this value getting higher in case of KAF4 lenses?

I surely hope Pentax will not stay limited at 4.4fps (or 8 for APS-C cameras) forever.
Anything that makes the camera more responsive is a plus.

No need to get a K-1, as I have one already since May 2016 (early adopter).

Then, there's nothing stopping you from getting the KAF4 D FA*.

You have your opinion, I have mine. And I also have many nice experiences with SDM focus motors.

This isn't a case of two equally reasonable opinions, as you want Pentax to stay stuck forever in the dark ages of screw drive AF and mechanical aperture control.
And neither are the two types of SDM motors equal:

[zzeitg]

I love my FA* lenses but KAF 4 is both the future and has been as close to flawless as an electronic device can be in my limited experience.

K (and later M, A) lenses... Since 1975. Made 45 years ago. Working just fine. And (I believe) they will be working just fine even after another 45 years. Precise mechanical and optical work. Simple.

Surely there are new features offered by the latest models. But while the mechanical and optical part can still last long, the electronic part dies way too soon. Like the SDM motors in my DA* lenses. Yes, probably exactly this experience made me a little sceptical . (And considering the (un)availability of service....)

This isn't a case of two equally reasonable opinions, as you want Pentax to stay stuck forever in the dark ages of screw drive AF and mechanical aperture control.

Not necessarily. It's backwards compatibility I'm asking for. (And hey, that has been Pentax benefit for decades...) I never said there should NOT be new features implemented.

Considering the total price of the (*) lens, would it be much more expensive to implement the mechanical aperture lever, too? (Like in case of the DA* problematic lenses. SDM motor dead -> converting to screwdrive saves the lens AF.)