[FozzFoster]

would it be much more expensive to implement the mechanical aperture lever, too?

you want this big and expensive lens to be bigger and more expensive?

[beholder3]

The more I think of it, I think my personal summary is : Me wants HD Pentax-D FA★ 85mm f/1.4 SDM AW.


Yes, it just might be LBA and brainless consumerism, but ...

[MikeyBugs95]

....
People with very old cameras can simply use old lenses.

...

There's certainly plenty to choose from in that regard.

And if there's still not enough for ones liking in K-mount, they can always adapt some Nikon pre-AI, AI, and AI-S lenses.

[normhead]

Am I the only one that hates that aperture lever sticking out the backs fo non-KAF4 lenses?

That thing just scares me during lens changes.

[Kunzite]

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.)

Backwards compatibility means cameras are able to use older lenses. It always meant this.

Do you know the D FA* 50mm f/1.4 is the least expensive of all its non third-party peers? (that would be, Sony and Nikon).

This is the aperture mechanism:

It's not just the classic mechanism with everything stuffed inside the lens. It is made to be fast, accurate, silent.
Try to combine it with the mechanical control and at best you'd negate these advantages... at the same time adding complexity thus reducing reliability; then, why doing it at all?
Yes, you are telling Pentax to not make long overdue progress.

[Kunzite]

Am I the only one that hates that aperture lever sticking out the backs fo non-KAF4 lenses?

That thing just scares me during lens changes.

I'm using it as a guide when mounting the lens... yes, I know there's a red dot somewhere

[zzeitg]

you want this big and expensive lens to be bigger and more expensive?

Bigger than FA* 85 f/1.4? Come on... The difference in price would not be that dramatic (I guess).

It's not just the classic mechanism with everything stuffed inside the lens. It is made to be fast, accurate, silent.

After seeing this photo, I'd be scared even more. Tiny little fragile thin and subtle. That's the essence of today's innovation, I know.
In case of, let's say, a mobile phone, who cares. Anyway, there will be another new generation next year. But when it comes to an (expensive) lens, I simply expect something long-time-reliable, fully functional and durable. But it's only me...

[Kunzite]

After seeing this photo, I'd be scared even more. Tiny little fragile thin and subtle. That's the essence of today's innovation, I know.
In case of, let's say, a mobile phone, who cares. Anyway, there will be another new generation next year. But when it comes to an (expensive) lens, I simply expect something long-time-reliable, fully functional and durable. But it's only me...

I expected confirmation bias. But do you really have more confidence in this?


But what do I know. Write letters to Canon so they'll give up on the electronically controlled aperture used in all their lenses, and implement the mechanical linkage. Pentax could make lots of money by licensing this amazing, ultra reliable, ultra-everything technology nobody else was able to discover!

[ThorSanchez]

After seeing this photo, I'd be scared even more. Tiny little fragile thin and subtle. That's the essence of today's innovation, I know.
In case of, let's say, a mobile phone, who cares. Anyway, there will be another new generation next year. But when it comes to an (expensive) lens, I simply expect something long-time-reliable, fully functional and durable. But it's only me...

Do you have any data on the failure rates of electronic aperture vs mechanical aperture lenses?


My guess is that since almost all recent lenses by all the major manufacturers have electronic aperture coupling that this is quite reliable.

[RobA_Oz]

After seeing this photo, I'd be scared even more. Tiny little fragile thin and subtle. That's the essence of today's innovation, I know.
In case of, let's say, a mobile phone, who cares. Anyway, there will be another new generation next year. But when it comes to an (expensive) lens, I simply expect something long-time-reliable, fully functional and durable. But it's only me...

Wristwatch mechanisms fit into that “tiny little fragile thin and subtle” description, too: in particular, ladies’ mechanical wristwatches. I’m wearing my father’s Omega Seamaster watch from the 1960s, which used to keep excellent time until the band broke a couple of years ago and it hit the (tiled) floor. The impact broke nothing but the balance staff, which is now unobtainable. Fortunately, my regular watchmaker (one of the last still practising in our city of 190,000) was sufficiently skilled and equipped to fashion a replacement, but it now needs occasional re-regulation. It used to keep excellent time, but now it keeps time well-enough, though not reliably so.

We sometimes console ourselves with the thought that anything mechanical can be repaired if it wears out or breaks, and it can, but always at a price that rises steeply as replacement parts have to be re-manufactured. As with my wristwatch, I’m sure any fine mechanical component in a camera body or lens can be re-made accurately with the original specification and precision workshop equipment, but I’m not sure everyone would be willing to pay the price, or even put up with the variability in performance that would come with a lesser repair.

On the other hand, small electric motors and their drive electronics can be made highly durable, particularly if their duty is light, as is the case with aperture control drives. The original Pentax SDM AF motor is a counter-example, but one with a much heavier duty and which could be repaired with a suitable replacement. We hope they learned the lesson from that, nonetheless.

[thibs]

plus DA55-300PLM.

Is it? Crap. Fortunately I dont have one. It ruines it all IMO. A pity.

Thanks for the correction

[thibs]

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

Yep, but:
* in dev since so much time it was probable designed as KAF3 anyway.
* since its market is APS, it seems logical to me

[acoufap]

Is it? Crap. Fortunately I dont have one. It ruines it all IMO. A pity.

Thanks for the correction

What do you mean using the words „it all“?

[Mistral75]

(...) It's backwards compatibility I'm asking for. (And hey, that has been Pentax benefit for decades...) (...)

For the Asahi Optical of the mid-70s, backward compatibility meant that older, M42 mount Takumar lenses could still be used with newer K-mount cameras. Not the other way around.

Same with the lenses without aperture ring (can't be used on older cameras), with the KAF3 lenses, now the KAF4 lenses.

On the other hand, one can still use one's Asahi Kogaku Takumar 50mm f/3.5 from 1952 on one's K-1 Mark II from 2018 the way one used it on one's Asahiflex in 1952, with a few added benefits such as eye-level viewfinder, instant return mirror, TTL exposure metering and more.

[Wheatfield]

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....)



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.)

You have backwards compatibility. You can use any old Pentax lens you want on any new Pentax body, though there is the issue of the green button kludge for metering..
What you are asking for is forward compatibility where you can use any old Pentax body on any new Pentax lens. That went away when they started removing aperture rings from lenses in 2003 with the FAJ 28-80 kit lens.

I've had numerous problems over the years with the mechanical parts on Pentax cameras and lenses. I had one LX with sticky mirror and both aperture cam follower and ISO resistor failure, and decided to try to future proof myself by sending all three of my LX bodies in for preventative maintenance to cure one and make sure none of the others developed the problems since Pentax did eventually start using materials that didn't turn into goo. I've had lenses develop lazy aperture and I've had lenses shed their electronic contacts because of mechanical failure inside the lens (the retainers broke).

I think the insistence that electronics will always fail and mechanical parts never will is quite a stretch of believability.

Mechanical parts are prone to wear and tear, and they are far more prone to going out of adjustment (hence the zombies on certain other forums harping about "flappy mirrors" when they are sermonizing about the advantages of mirrorless cameras.
Pentax tried to address some of this, and what we got for their trouble was aperture block failure, another kludge that didn't work quite as planned.

I'm quite content with the direction Pentax is going. Yes, it's too bad that they have removed forwards compatibility, but you still have the backwards compatibility that you find important, and if, as you say, camera bodies are disposable commodities, it really shouldn't be a big deal to just buy a newer camera body that can take advantage of the new lenses.

---------- Post added Mar 26th, 2020 at 04:06 PM ----------

Bigger than FA* 85 f/1.4? Come on... The difference in price would not be that dramatic (I guess).



After seeing this photo, I'd be scared even more. Tiny little fragile thin and subtle. That's the essence of today's innovation, I know.
In case of, let's say, a mobile phone, who cares. Anyway, there will be another new generation next year. But when it comes to an (expensive) lens, I simply expect something long-time-reliable, fully functional and durable. But it's only me...

What evidence do you have that the KAF4 lenses will be anything other than long time functional and durable?