[gazonk]

[*]weight: 1,255g

What? And I thought the 820g Sony was heavy. It even out-weighs the Sigma Art!

My son, a student, uses a Sony for concert photography (well, did, before the recent mess ), and went for the Sony 1.8. Much more affordable for a student, but also quite a bit less bulky to work with (he has borrowed and tried the 1.4, so he knows what he's missing).

I appreciate that this lens probably is the pinnacle of 85mm perfection. And as a star lens it should be. But I realise now that it might not be the right thing for me to save up money for. So... should I aim for upgrading from DA70 to FA77 instead? (The DA70 is surprisingly good on the K-1 - most of the time you need a lens of that focal length you don't care much about corner sharpness anyway)

[Rondec]

I'd love to feel that way too, but after the old Sudden Death Motor fiasco in DA* zooms (and also, their not great optical performance), the * glass reputation isn't as it once was. DPR's video on DA* 11-18 didn't help much in this regard, either.

I'm pretty sure this 85 will not disappoint those that can afford it, though.

Optically, the DA * lenses (excluding the 16-50) are pretty special. I don't feel as though DP Review is a trustworthy source on the 11-18 and certainly I have seen significantly better results on the Forum, including from Sandy Hancock.

I have owned or currently own the DA *55, 16-50, 50-135, 200, and DFA *70-200 and I thought all of them were worth owning, even the 16-50, although it certainly has its weaknesses.

[Kunzite]

What? And I thought the 820g Sony was heavy. It even out-weighs the Sigma Art!

Sony, hmm... yes, it's lighter...
Uncorrected distortion, heavy vignetting, non-uniform resolution, high LoCA...
Sony FE 85mm f/1.4 GM - Review / Test Report - Analysis

[gazonk]

Sony, hmm... yes, it's lighter...
Uncorrected distortion, heavy vignetting, non-uniform resolution, high LoCA...
Sony FE 85mm f/1.4 GM - Review / Test Report - Analysis

Indeed, the 85mm f/1.8 is optically actually better ("an epic lens" says Klaus and gives it better scores ). And not only in tests, I'm really amazed by what my son shows me from that lens.

[house]

Optically, the DA * lenses (excluding the 16-50) are pretty special. I don't feel as though DP Review is a trustworthy source on the 11-18 and certainly I have seen significantly better results on the Forum, including from Sandy Hancock.

Those were my initial thoughts regarding the da 11-18 as well but when I looked again at the pentaxforum review I realised that the dpreview samples could well be representative. See those photographs of metal things and most reviews show that the pf is more than the competiton.

Images from that lens have great colour and contrast but I no longer think that the dpreview copy was flawed.

[sculptormic]

[/COLOR]

But he's right. What's "everything in their power"? Paying Sigma to keep adding K-mounts so it's profitable for... Sigma?

The third parties are not aboard because it's not worth the extra expense. The extra expense is not worth it because there aren't enough Pentaxians buying third party lenses. The only thing Ricoh can do is... sell more cameras to Pentaxians so they can (maybe) make the decision to buy third party lenses.

Olympus has third-party support (if there aren't millions of Chinese M43 lenses...) and keeps bleeding money. Third party support is only important when it's part of the decision to enter into the system or not.

Diplomacy my friend. How expensive could it be for Sigma and Tamron to put another mount on it. They are used to it. They could have sold thousands of lenses and Pentax would have sold far more K-1's. A system will not mature this way if you don't open it up for third partys if you don't have the means to build them yourself, and create more Pentaxians and sell more camera's so you can make more lenses. Pentaxians, it start to sound like a religious sect where you can only enter with a special licence. Actually I am one myself with the 645Z, K1 and GRIII, they make great camera's, but that doesn't mean I do have to agree with their camera and lens policy. Now we have to pay top prices for the old Zeiss K and VC lenses because they are so rare. The rebranded Tamron 15-30 is far more expensive then the original. Even Samyang is pulling out, what's happening? I don't understand what good is it all for the customer besides having the honour to pay extra for being a member of the sect. The K-1 was actually a rather cheap camera for what it is. I'd rather had payed more for it if there were more lenses available. This all will not happen, certainly not in these hard times, so we remain in a vicious circle. The smartest company at the moment is Fuji. They must have far more recources, i don't know.


M4/3 is a dead end street because of the small sensor. There hay-days were at the start of digital when they were the most advanced, I had a few myself. Panasonic made a smart move to start with full frame..

[Serkevan]

Sony, hmm... yes, it's lighter...
Uncorrected distortion, heavy vignetting, non-uniform resolution, high LoCA...
Sony FE 85mm f/1.4 GM - Review / Test Report - Analysis

One could argue that in such a lens you're worried more about amazing subject resolution in the center of the frame (or whereabouts), but then again, that's why the 77 exists, innit?


I fully expect the D FA* to be the best 85/1.4 around. At 1.2 kg it's up there with the Otus in weight, with the front element being slightly smaller (82 vs 86 mm). It's gonna blow the competition out of the park, but that's of course gonna come with some cons attached - namely size and price.


So for the absolute optical peak (and probably still pixie dust) we'll have the Star, for the magical rendering in a small and light package we'll have the 77. A budget-y option like an AF, plastic-fantastic remake of the M85/2 would be great but I'm not holding my breath for that.

---------- Post added 05-27-20 at 04:09 AM ----------

Diplomacy my friend. How expensive could it be for Sigma and Tamron to put another mount on it. They are used to it. They could have sold thousands of lenses and Pentax would have sold far more K-1's. A system will not mature this way if you don't open it up for third partys if you don't have the means to build them yourself, and create more Pentaxians and sell more camera's so you can make more lenses. Pentaxians, it start to sound like a religious sect where you can only enter with a special licence. Actually I am one myself with the 645Z, K1 and GRIII, they make great camera's, but that doesn't mean I do have to agree with their camera and lens policy. Now we have to pay top prices for the old Zeiss K and VC lenses because they are so rare. The rebranded Tamron 15-30 is far more expensive then the original. Even Samyang is pulling out, what's happening? I don't understand what good is it all for the customer besides having the honour to pay extra for being a member of the sect. The K-1 was actually a rather cheap camera for what it is. I'd rather had payed more for it if there were more lenses available. This all will not happen, certainly not in these hard times, so we remain in a vicious circle. The smartest company at the moment is Fuji. They must have far more recources, i don't know.


M4/3 is a dead end street because of the small sensor. There hay-days were at the start of digital when they were the most advanced, I had a few myself. Panasonic made a smart move to start with full frame..

Well, clearly too expensive for them to consider it. "Diplomacy" by itself is an empty world. What specific actions could Ricoh take? Pay Sigma/Tamron? Ask politely?
It's not about being an exclusive club - one of my most used lenses is a Tokina tele that isn't anything out of this world, but it's light and focuses fast as lightning with its old screwdrive.

Obviously it isn't good for the customers to not have third party lenses, but the entire thing is a vicious circle...

[cport]

I'd love to feel that way too, but after the old Sudden Death Motor fiasco in DA* zooms (and also, their not great optical performance), the * glass reputation isn't as it once was. DPR's video on DA* 11-18 didn't help much in this regard, either.

I'm pretty sure this 85 will not disappoint those that can afford it, though.

There are not many reviews of DA* 11-18/2,8 and usually they are in accordance and very positive. What is wrong with DPR review of this lens? Personally, I would welcome the review to be written.

[clackers]

I don't understand what good is it all for the customer besides having the honour to pay extra for being a member of the sect. The K-1 was actually a rather cheap camera for what it is. I'd rather had payed more for it if there were more lenses available ... The smartest company at the moment is Fuji.

? Very few third party lenses are made for Fuji, what are you talking about?

The closed K-mount system has way more available new and old than the closed X mount system. Which is also a dead end, no full frame available!

[ThorSanchez]

? Very few third party lenses are made for Fuji, what are you talking about?

The closed K-mount system has way more available new and old than the closed X mount system. Which is also a dead end, no full frame available!

In April Fuji announced that they're opening up the X mount to third party vendors.

[Kunzite]

One could argue that in such a lens you're worried more about amazing subject resolution in the center of the frame (or whereabouts), but then again, that's why the 77 exists, innit?

Yes, I expect some people would argue in a specific way to make the Sony as the "better" lens. And at the same time the 77mm would be "not good enough"

Well, clearly too expensive for them to consider it. "Diplomacy" by itself is an empty world. What specific actions could Ricoh take? Pay Sigma/Tamron? Ask politely?

Good question, I asked the same in the past.
Of course, the answer is obvious - but people are still dreaming at a magical "please".

[Wheatfield]

Diplomacy my friend. How expensive could it be for Sigma and Tamron to put another mount on it. They are used to it. They could have sold thousands of lenses and Pentax would have sold far more K-1's. A system will not mature this way if you don't open it up for third partys if you don't have the means to build them yourself, and create more Pentaxians and sell more camera's so you can make more lenses. Pentaxians, it start to sound like a religious sect where you can only enter with a special licence. Actually I am one myself with the 645Z, K1 and GRIII, they make great camera's, but that doesn't mean I do have to agree with their camera and lens policy. Now we have to pay top prices for the old Zeiss K and VC lenses because they are so rare. The rebranded Tamron 15-30 is far more expensive then the original. Even Samyang is pulling out, what's happening? I don't understand what good is it all for the customer besides having the honour to pay extra for being a member of the sect. The K-1 was actually a rather cheap camera for what it is. I'd rather had payed more for it if there were more lenses available. This all will not happen, certainly not in these hard times, so we remain in a vicious circle. The smartest company at the moment is Fuji. They must have far more recources, i don't know.


M4/3 is a dead end street because of the small sensor. There hay-days were at the start of digital when they were the most advanced, I had a few myself. Panasonic made a smart move to start with full frame..

Just an FYI: The K mount is an open source mount. Anyone can build K mount lenses without paying royalties.
If the third party manufacturers aren't making K mount lenses it's because they have made a business decision not to, not because Ricoh isn't letting them do it.

[Serkevan]

Yes, I expect some people would argue in a specific way to make the Sony as the "better" lens. And at the same time the 77mm would be "not good enough"

Nah, the Sony is the better lens. As long as you let them have the baked-in distortion correction, vignetting lifting, purple fringing removal and additional makeup artistry.

P.S. Remember to bash the accelerator.

The answer is obvious

And multiple: D FA 15-30/2.8, 24-70/2.8 and 70-210/4

[Kunzite]

And multiple: D FA 15-30/2.8, 24-70/2.8 and 70-210/4

Precisely. The only way is to order those lenses from the 3rd-party.

Edit: The only legal way. Perhaps bribing would work, too...

[BarneyL]

Just an FYI: The K mount is an open source mount. Anyone can build K mount lenses without paying royalties.
If the third party manufacturers aren't making K mount lenses it's because they have made a business decision not to, not because Ricoh isn't letting them do it.

AFAIK this only applies to the earliest version of the mount.