[Kunzite]

That's an interesting point. Can't say I've ever noticed CA how I use my 77. Wonder if I'm not looking close enough?

If I'm not mistaken - I studied these things a while ago, before deciding to go with the DA 77 (but a main factor was QSF and being cheaper) - it has a bit of LoCA, normal for a film lens and some crazy fringing (if the conditions are right).

[BruceBanner]

Anyone care to suggest why the lens might better the FA 77mm Limited, especially for portraits - on FF?

I'm not in anyway trying to stir things up, but I'm curious. Of course any comments are subjective and apart from facts are just opinions. So why?

It will be heavier. It is faster. It will likely be sharper across frame, though whether this is and advantage or disadvantage is a moot point. It will probably have better flare resistance. It will be quieter. It may focus quicker, though my 77 is plenty fast enough for the moving portraits I tend to use it for. It will be a lot more expensive. It will look like a new lens. None of these, for me, seem like they will persuade me it is a sufficiently "better" lens than the 77. I find it an odd decision to build this focal length, when perhaps a wide lens seems more necessary for the range. Maybe someone will fill in what I'm missing.

Really I'm just curious ...

It's a different kind of portrait lens, I would expect clinical perfection and what I mean by that is;

- no CA
- low to zero distortion
- low to zero vignette
- sharp wide open across the entire frame
- AW/WR (shoot portraits in the rain)
- Silent AF (good for being discreet such as wedding ceremonies, except the sound of the cameras shutter makes this point actually moot, trust me...)
- Expected to have better AF performance, more optimised.

vs FA77 which is;

- having CA
- has distortion
- vignettes strongly
- sharp wide open but not across the entire frame
- noisey AF

That aside and physics (85 with 1.4 can do subject isolation that 77 with 1.8 just can't), the FA77 is a 'charismatic' lens, yer supposed to embrace the flaws and it produces wonderful images. The DFA 85 is going in the other direction. Which is the right lens for you depends on what you do, what sector you're in and how deep your pockets are.
Your thinking is not flawed, it does semi compete with the FA77. As a wedding shooter I need compact primes, not large heavy ones which this DFA 85 most certainly will be. I've never once had a client complain about CA in a portrait, and in most cases one click in LR can clean it up, and in the instances it does not I am skilled enough in PP to tidy it up. I'd prefer a DFA 50 for the WR/AW perspective for weddings as that focal length will be more versatile in that setting (capture more of the scene). I'd love to have the 85, but I feel its a very strong niche product at this price point. It would work well in studio but I don't think that many serious Pentax professional studios exist (the ones I know use a 645Z), heck we only recently had a lifeline tossed to us courtesy of Godox...
I'd rebuy the Samyang 85 again before getting the DFA 85, I have since switched out my focal screen to a canon S type and find MF easier now;



At the price of the Samyang I'd just risk it in the wet, I could buy like 8 of them for the price of a DFA 85 (jks of course... would not actually do that!)

Even the 77mm would be wasted on me, but here's one reason: well controlled CA. The development team talks about CA impacting skin tones.

I'm sure that would not be the case.

That's an interesting point. Can't say I've ever noticed CA how I use my 77. Wonder if I'm not looking close enough?

Happens under certain high contrast areas. It gets better the more stopped down you are. You can just see some coming through here on this image where the woman's black bag strap is sitting on her shoulder (visit the image in flickr to inspect further);

Actually, my post (in this thread at least) made no reference to you at all.

Ha! Ok whatever mr passive aggressive

There is no lens for which everyone waits.

If I look at my own polling, I'd guess 65% of Pentax shooters won't even prefer the images to the FA* 85 1.4 or 77 1.8. Appreciation of these types of lenses really require that you know what to look for (out of focus areas and transitions) with not so much attention payed to subkject resolution. The vast majority of shooters think subject sharpness is all that matters. It's possible even my 18-135 will match this lens for subject sharpness, once you get into CA control, transitions and the smoothness of the out of focus areas, you will see differences. But, many do not look at those things.

When the DFA* 50 came out I bought an on sale DA*55 1.4. I could see the difference, it wasn't important to me. But I don't shoot portraits and rarely shoot under ƒ5.6. SO for me the extra money for the 50 was a no go. And there are lots of lenses for people like me. What is with all these people who think every new lens released should be for them?

There are a lot of people who just don't seem to understand, their shooting style doesn't require premium lenses. That's not a slight or anything, it's just an observation.

This is a professional portrait lens. Not a professional portrait photographer or studio product photographer? Then it's probably overkill for what you shoot. And there's nothing wrong with that.

Pretty much, and hence ties in with my original thoughts, who's buying this lens in quantities that matter enough to make it a profitable venture for Pentax? That's my concern. I just wonder if the price tag was lower, then more of us 'enthusiasts' would get it.


5x $2k = $10k

15x $1.2k = $18k

etc.

Heck... if it is the best 85mm on the market right now (and probably is), if it were a bit lower then maybe other professional brand shooters might actually grab one with a used K-1 for just those 85mm shots! But a new K-1ii+this 85mm, $5kAUD, oof...

[normhead]

Heck... if it is the best 85mm on the market right now (and probably is), if it were a bit lower then maybe other professional brand shooters might actually grab one with a used K-1 for just those 85mm shots! But a new K-1ii+this 85mm, $5kAUD, oof...

My cousin used to make $5000 in a single wedding and that was 1980 money. I guess it depends on what type of wedding photographer you are.

[robbiec]

If you're thinking of getting the 85 to use as you say in a professional capacity (wedding photographer) , can't you just write it off as a business expense tax wise? Even more of a reason to buy in I would have thought

[RobA_Oz]

My cousin used to make $5000 in a single wedding and that was 1980 money. I guess it depends on what type of wedding photographer you are.

1980 was before the mobile phone era, not to mention digital photography, when your uncle might have had an SLR, but most other people felt constrained about taking a camera into a wedding (and most weddings were still in churches), except perhaps for the bride and groom emerging from the venue.

Now that we seem to have stop piling onto Eddy, every such question that arises about the pricing of new Pentax lenses is, I think, really about Ricoh’s overall marketing strategy, and particularly about who and where their target buyers are for the Star lenses. You could include the D FA150-450 in that, too, but only because it’s a specialised lens with a high price.

If we really knew the answer to that, we’d be under an NDA, so we’re just guessing. Saying that Pentax is being moved into the premium segment is fairly obvious, but not helpful in answering the “who and where” question.

Then again, even twelve months ago I wouldn’t have thought myself to be a buyer for the D FA*50, but it turns out I was, and it turns out that Ricoh’s marketing people were probably smarter than many of us gave them credit for. I watch the Australian dealer’s website, which shows the changing number of those lenses in stock and sold after each new batch arrives, and that confirms it.

[Wheatfield]

Quality used to come from Japan. Do not think that Ricoh is doing the right thing: They do not give you what you want, but the customer gives Ricoh what they want, money. "When I was young" Pentax was the camera that was more affordable than any other brand. Ricoh/Pentax is not that affordable anymore, although I can afford it now. It seems that I have to use up the equipment I now have and either look elsewhere or just find another pastime with or without good company.

I think quality still comes from Japan, it just costs more now.
Let's finish that thought. Pentax was the "affordable" company.
And then Pentax found out the hard way that being the "affordable" company only worked when they were selling K1000 camera bodies by the thousands to film students who were told to go out and buy a cheap manual camera to learn on, and then buy a real camera later.
Doing "the right thing" didn't give them sufficient capital for R&D when the the industry went a different direction and autofocus cameras came along, meaning they were always a generation of more behind the performance curve.
Doing "the right thing" didn't allow Pentax to jump into digital in a meaningful way until something like 5 years after DSLRs were mainstream because they lacked the capital to do it.
Admittedly the fiasco with the Philips sensor didn't help, they lacked the capital to weather that storm as well.
Doing "the right thing" put Pentax as a stand alone company into bankruptcy.
I don't think Ricoh is interested in repeating the mistake of "doing the right thing".

[Serkevan]

I guess it depends on what type of wedding photographer you are.

And were you are located - lenses don't change price but weddings do. AFAIK anything over 2000€ in Germany is in the realm of "very expensive" for a wedding photographer. Ditto for Spain, it's mostly under 1000€ over there, but then again a $20000 wedding would be considered preposterous .

[angerdan]

They just need one UWA prime(wider than 21) to get the astro stuff also

UWA starts at 23mm downwards.
The Crop Factor Unmasked - Articles and Tips | PentaxForums.com

It's now the most 'new' expensive 85/1.4 on any modern brand?

Yet can only be used on a 2016 FF K-1, not a recent FF offering like how the other brands release.

Patience only goes so far, I hope they start really smashing things out, because at the pace they're moving is a little worrying;
2016= K-1
2018/19 = DFA 50
2020 = DFA 85
2021 = DFA 21
2022 = DFA 24
2023 = K-2?

It's just the second most expensive 85/1.4 modern brand lens.

It can be used on every Pentax APS-C camera as well as on the K-1 and the 2018 K-1 II.

Your list is kind of incomplete and lacks all zooms, some primes and several bodies. I do count thre times more lenses than you in the last decade:
2009 - D FA 100 WR
2013 - DA 560
2015 - D FA 24-70
2015 - D FA 150-450
2016 - K-1
2016 - D FA 15-30
2016 - D FA 28-105
2016 - D FA* 70-200
2017 - KP
2018 - K-1 II
2018 - D FA* 50
2019 - FA 35
2020 - D FA 70-210
2020 - D FA* 85
2021 - D FA 21
2021 - APS-C Flagship
2022 - D FA 24
2023 - K-2 ?

[reh321]

1980 was before the mobile phone era, not to mention digital photography, when your uncle might have had an SLR, but most other people felt constrained about taking a camera into a wedding (and most weddings were still in churches), except perhaps for the bride and groom emerging from the venue.

Most of you were constrained. I took the following picture from my seat in 1979 - with the kit 50mm attached to the Pentax ME/SE I had purchased about a month earlier.

[bertwert]

And were you are located - lenses don't change price but weddings do. AFAIK anything over 2000€ in Germany is in the realm of "very expensive" for a wedding photographer. Ditto for Spain, it's mostly under 1000€ over there, but then again a $20000 wedding would be considered preposterous .

Weddings can get expensive. Don't get married, then you can afford the 85...

[bertwert]

It can be used on every Pentax APS-C camera as well as on the K-1 and the 2018 K-1 II.

Incorrect actually. It's a KAF4 mount so can only be used on K-3/K-50 and newer.

[Wheatfield]

Yeah, it could, which is worrying.

I'm a little worried for Pentax in some ways. Whilst we're happy progress and production is happening I am a little concerned over their strategy direction.

Let's all be honest about Pentax for a minute. Pentax is not marketed for Professionals, yet look at some of these recent price tags. Before you all go crazy and shout at me, hear me out. If I grab 100 professional event shooters (weddings etc), I guarantee Pentax will be right at the bottom in terms of amount of users. A large proportion of those shooters will be Canikonyji. The fact that Canon and Nikon offer professional membership/service in case you are needing equipment in a hurry due to failure shows how much these brands can support their customer base. If my K-1 dies the day before an event I can't even go into a store nearby for a replacement (let alone be part of a service that will replace my camera then and there with another model to use whilst mine is being repaired etc).
Pentax don't market towards that arena, you won't see any of their marketing content geared towards wedding shooters.
They don' do sport or action, which again is dominated by Canikony. They are not strong in photo journalism either (when's the last time you saw a paparazzi with a Pentax?).

So Pentax don't compete or try to in three major professional revenues;

- Events/Weddings
- Sport/Action
- Photojournalism

Now, I'm not finished yet, so hold your hatred and breath just for a second...

Where the K-1 has been marketed often is the landscape realm, no doubt about it, when the K-1 was released in 2016 they produced a really impressive landscape FF camera. You will see landscape images mostly associated with the Pentax brand in what little marketing material they produce.

Wildlife, yeah ok, a little, but many wildlife togs have left Pentax and went Canikony for AF/Buffer issues. The K-new is exciting because it does suggest an improvement in those areas and a comeback to the wildlife genre.

At the end of the day I see the Pentax brand as being heavily geared towards landscapers, which is fair enough. Sadly however, they are little used in the landscape realm. You won't find many (to any!) users shooting a K-1 in the 'Easy Way Photograhy group or the Nightscape Photographers Australia group. It's quite saddening, even when we get a newbie asking for suggestions, K-1 is never mentioned. When I bring it up many users are surprised by the spec sheet and it's the first time they have even heard of the camera...
For some that are aware of the K-1, the points they bring up is lack of Astro suitable lenses. Now I'm not an expert in this genre, but when chatting with these chaps they seem to understand the Pentax landscape lenses on offer (15-30, Samyang options etc) but are still adamant that certain key focal lengths are omitted which prompted their own decisions to not buy into Pentax. They brought up the point that really after the K-1 they needed to concentrate all their efforts on UWA FF lenses and push for dominance in the landscape/astro genre, but they didn't. Again, not saying this is my opinion, just those I have heard from others who are really into this genre.
Always when I hear of a Canikony coming across to the Pentax platform with great enthusiasm, it's for landscape use (some are still pleased so it seems). Always those that leave Pentax and go to Canikony is typically due to AF/fps/buffer issues and are professionals in studio, weddings, photojournalism etc. Eventually they have enough... the market moves forward and more choices are available to them.

So here we have Pentax, still alive and kicking, but a small market share and an even smaller professional market share (users whom use Pentax and generate a solid living from JUST Pentax products). I'm not saying it isn't done, always there are exceptions. Please don't spam me with Pentax studio, sport, weddings or whatever sample shots, I get it..., I'm just saying how things are in the industry in general.

So if Pentax are not appealing heavily to professionals, then they must be appealing to enthusiasts.

So, here's the point. What enthusiast is gonna pay **2000quid for a portrait lens? How well did the DFA 50/1.4 sell? Who bought that lens? Two pretty expensive primes there... Are only rich loyal Pentaxians their market interest now? Maybe it is! Maybe it will work, maybe they become the Leica of Japan... I just dunno.
A lot of chitchat about this lens currently but not many people saying they will jump on it. When reading comments from other non Pentaxians they droll over the lens but then sigh what would be connected to the other end of it lol.

I'm not getting into the FF vs Mirrorless thing, it just feels about their pace in moving alongside other brands. Now if this 85/1.4 was released with a new FF (K-2) that had made significant improvements, that might actually have been really compelling and entice some ex Pentaxians to come back. Honestly... I just dunno whose gonna buy this lens, with that price tag, not because its not a justified price tag, the lens will be probably be the best 85/1.4 in the market period, but whose buying it?

Please note this is not a Pentax is doomed piece, just curious to hear your thoughts.

Bruce, the thing is, the low end market is pretty much dead in the water. A couple of more broadsides from the good ship Smartphone and the bottom of the market is going to sink deeper than the Bismarck. There is no point in going after a market that effectively no longer exists. The midrange market is being bought and paid for by Sony, though I do wonder how long they are going to be willing to throw money at the wall when it stops sticking, Nikon and Canon are now in a perpetual game of playing catch up.
The midrange is almost as dependant on volume sales as the low end market, and let's face it, Pentax doesn't have, and never will have, the volume required to be profitable in that market.

That leave the high end market. It's a small volume niche market suited to a small volume company. It's an expensive market to get into, and the quality absolutely has to be there. This is where Pentax is going. The D FA* 50/1.4 is pretty close to flawless, the D FA* 85/1.4 appears to be close to perfection.

In a way, Ricoh is going right back to the roots of the Pentax way. Pentax glass has always been very good, at one time it was well nigh impossible to buy a better lens than what Pentax was producing.
We are seeing a return to that Golden Age when Pentax was the standard that everyone chased.
They aren't going for volume, they aren't going for the Pro, they are going for the discerning amateur. They are going for the customer who wants the very best and who is willing to pay a premium for it.

They are going after the same customer that kept Leica in business for so many decades when they were completely out of step making rangefinders in an SLR world.
I believe, in a few years, that we are going to see three lens lines from Pentax, there will always be the cheap and cheerful zooms, they aren't going anywhere, and I anticipate they are going to be co-brands and rebrands, such as we are seeing with the new 70-210.

There will be the Limiteds, quirky little lenses with odd maximum apertures and very unique and pleasing imaging character. The just teased 21mm lens being the first of a new generation of Limited lenses for the digital age. Expect the 31, 43 and 77 to be revisited, with redesigns keeping what we love about those lenses intact while minimizing the weaknesses that are inherent to their pre digital designs.

And finally, there will be the D FA* lenses. These will be the optical beasts. No compromises. Lenses that are what they have to be to be as close to perfect as a lens can be. Big, heavy, expensive and exquisite. Once in a lifetime lenses that can and will be appreciated by advanced photographic aficionados.

Ricoh knows that they are in a market unto themselves. I'm quite certain that they have people on staff who can read English and can translate the idiocy that is DPReview into something meaningful.
Well, maybe not, that is a pretty tall order, but they have to know that they aren't going to get any respect from the mass market morons that post on websites such as that.

They are going to market to people that actually have lives, that aren't trolls living in their parent's basement who sneak upstairs and fire up mommies computer to throw shade at whomever they have decided the bandwagon is telling them to.

They are, as Pentax has always done, marketing to real photographers who appreciate the benefits of the very best lenses money can buy.

[RobA_Oz]

Most of you were constrained. I took the following picture from my seat in 1979 - with the kit 50mm attached to the Pentax ME/SE I had purchased about a month earlier.

Most of us were constrained. Let’s not be unnecessarily exclusive here. I see that you and I were both “someone’s uncle with an SLR”.

[normhead]

1980 was before the mobile phone era, not to mention digital photography, when your uncle might have had an SLR, but most other people felt constrained about taking a camera into a wedding (and most weddings were still in churches), except perhaps for the bride and groom emerging from the venue.

My cousin, not my uncle had two Hasselblads for the main images, and couple of Nikons for his assistant for crowd snapshots. I'm not sure anyone shot weddings with 35mm, at least not any credible ones.

[bobmaxja]

Let's see analogy with Car Market
Sony= Tesla= new kid on the block=great product=expensive
Nikon=Toyota= dependable=everybody know the name= great buy
Canon= Chrysler,Ford, Renault=big name in many market , many many models= not intuitive but same body with different limited feature
Pentax= Subaru, Land Rover=very rugged=renewal of product slow=Fanboy of the brand
Fuji=BMW, Volks=performance= Expensive=quality
Panasonic, Olympus=Nissan, GM, Peugeot=good product=boring long term