[house]

Pentax is like...

They both are. Make sure to compare the numbers. The graphs are scaled differently. Pentax y axis being more compressed..

[Serkevan]

They both are. Make sure to compare the numbers. The graphs are scaled differently. Pentax y axis being more compressed..

In fact, the MTF for the Samyang is sharper in the center, but it's basically picking out flavours of perfection - both show incredibly high MTFs. I did a very crude overlay:

[Batman_]

People should be aware that camera and lens prices have escalated across all manufacturers. Not only Ricoh.

Look at the price of the Olympus E-M5 III. This is m43 and costs US$1,199 or over $1,500 Australian dollars.

The Fujifilm XF 50-140mm F2.8 is US$1,299 on sale or $1,700+ Australian dollars for an APS-C only lens.

You cannot compare prices from a few years back as those prices generally no longer apply. Camera and Lens manufacturers have gradually been increasing prices over the last few years.

Just these two examples illustrate to some degree the escalation in camera equipment pricing and this is for equipment for sensors smaller than full frame.

This isn't a get out of jail card for Ricoh but more to demonstrate that higher prices isn't only a Ricoh thing.

[bedisaab]

People should be aware that camera and lens prices have escalated across all manufacturers. Not only Ricoh.

Look at the price of the Olympus E-M5 III. This is m43 and costs US$1,199 or over $1,500 Australian dollars.

The Fujifilm XF 50-140mm F2.8 is US$1,299 on sale or $1,700+ Australian dollars for an APS-C only lens.

You cannot compare prices from a few years back as those prices generally no longer apply. Camera and Lens manufacturers have gradually been increasing prices over the last few years.

Just these two examples illustrate to some degree the escalation in camera equipment pricing and this is for equipment for sensors smaller than full frame.

This isn't a get out of jail card for Ricoh but more to demonstrate that higher prices isn't only a Ricoh thing.

I don’t think it’s that expensive as some people are trying to make out.

Leica Q2 is $5,000. That’s what I’d call an expensive hobby. This one a squeeze for few weeks.

[clackers]

In fact, the MTF for the Samyang is sharper in the center, but it's basically picking out flavours of perfection - both show incredibly high MTFs. I did a very crude overlay:

Pretty good, that Samyang! Has more divergence in the last third of the frame, so probably more chromatic aberration and busier bokeh.

[Batman_]

I don’t think it’s that expensive as some people are trying to make out.

I agree with you.

I was just trying to put things in context for some people who seem to think the price is extreme.

If the MTF charts are accurate and the AF on the K1 or K3 III (when it comes out) is good, I personally think it's a fair price. Not cheap but fair. Quality counts plus its a full frame lens as well NOT Aps-c or M43's.

[bedisaab]

I agree with you.

I was just trying to put things in context for some people who seem to think the price is extreme.

If the MTF charts are accurate and the AF on the K1 or K3 III (when it comes out) is good, I personally think it's a fair price. Not cheap but fair. Quality counts plus its a full frame lens as well NOT Aps-c or M43's.

Absolutely! I am going to start saving from July & should be able to buy by Christmas. If lucky then probably around $1600-$1700. Costly but doable.

[Fontan]

It’s a costly hobby, but let me tell you that Pentaxians have it good, as I also shoot Leica.

The price of this lens, with apparently quality of it, sounds like a dream.

I am not sure if I’ll be buying this lens. I have a Zeiss ZK 85/1.4, and also A* 85/1.4. Yes neither has AF but I manual focus so that wouldn’t be a good enough reason to buy it for me.

I’m however interested in a comparison between DFA 85 and A* 85, which I think is my all time favorite Pentax lens.

Newest technology in coatings I am anxious to find out how much advantages it offers.

[Serkevan]

I don’t think it’s that expensive as some people are trying to make out.

Leica Q2 is $5,000. That’s what I’d call an expensive hobby. This one a squeeze for few weeks.

It's more than a month of the average salary in a lot of countries. Photography (at least if you are buying gear new) *is* a hobby for affluent people.

[BarryE]

Want a heavy lens? Well you are gonna have to pay more:-) That's the way it's going. (I do understand the physics behind size and weight for the specs.)

After all the negative comments about fringing of the 77 I checked my shots, none showed any for *my* style/usage. Then I checked the size & weight of the new 85. I knew it would be heavy, but it's some beast - it's even heavier than 15-30. The thought of trying to take portraits, moving around a subject tethered via cable with a lens of that size would, I think, be problematic for me. Also, the size of the 85 to the subject may make it more intimidating, though they might also think it looks more professional.

I hope the lens is very successful for Ricoh and it's good to see them committing to such a precision lens, but I hope they don't altogether forget the smaller, quality, but slower, lenses in the future.

[Rondec]

Want a heavy lens? Well you are gonna have to pay more:-) That's the way it's going. (I do understand the physics behind size and weight for the specs.)

After all the negative comments about fringing of the 77 I checked my shots, none showed any for *my* style/usage. Then I checked the size & weight of the new 85. I knew it would be heavy, but it's some beast - it's even heavier than 15-30. The thought of trying to take portraits, moving around a subject tethered via cable with a lens of that size would, I think, be problematic for me. Also, the size of the 85 to the subject may make it more intimidating, though they might also think it looks more professional.

I hope the lens is very successful for Ricoh and it's good to see them committing to such a precision lens, but I hope they don't altogether forget the smaller, quality, but slower, lenses in the future.

I think they have a pretty good line up of slowish lenses already.

I remember during the Hoya years the constant complaint was that Pentax had given up on fast lenses. The DA limiteds were slow. The FA limiteds were a little faster, but they didn't have any f1.4 lenses in the line up for a long time except for the FA 50, which was hardly usable at f1.4. Currently Pentax has the DA limiteds, the DA 50, DA 50, and DFA 35 HD in the line up, which all seem to qualify as slower lenses. And they have announced the DFA 21 limited which seems likely to be in the f2 to f2.8 range, so I wouldn't say they are abandoning slow lenses.

If you don't see fringing with the FA 77 then you're in good shape. But that was one of the reasons why I moved from the DA *200 (which is a very nice lens otherwise) to the DFA *70-200.

---------- Post added 06-03-20 at 05:33 AM ----------

It's more than a month of the average salary in a lot of countries. Photography (at least if you are buying gear new) *is* a hobby for affluent people.

It is. I think we can compare our lenses to more expensive ones and say "Well, compared to Leica..." but they are still expensive.

At the same time, I am glad that Pentax has a variety of lenses available at different price points. From the DA 50/35 plastic mounts and the DA zooms to the upper end DFA lenses, you can find something that is in most price ranges that will offer the ability to take good images.

[house]

These new expensive lenses leave Canon and Nikon users with the option of using the vast catalogue of older dslr glass (new or used) or buying into milc for the new stuff. Pentax is in a different position as the FF catalogue is pretty slim, and for used gear very old. Our old FF glass is basically from the nineties at best. This upmarket move leaves Pentax users with less choice because of the long hold on FF glass whilst waiting for the K-1.

[Rondec]

These new expensive lenses leave Canon and Nikon users with the option of using the vast catalogue of older dslr glass (new or used) or buying into milc for the new stuff. Pentax is in a different position as the FF catalogue is pretty slim, and for used gear very old. Our old FF glass is basically from the nineties at best. This upmarket move leaves Pentax users with less choice because of the long hold on FF glass whilst waiting for the K-1.

There are tons of FA lenses out there. Yes, they are from the 90s, but they are reasonably priced, except for the * lenses. Acting as though Nikon and Canon have a "vast catalog of glass" and Pentax has nothing is silly. Just because a lens was designed in the 90s doesn't make it chopped liver. They are still very nice lenses and many prefer a lens like the FA *200 to the DA *200 because of the lack of SDM.

And if you have looked at pricing on Z mount lenses, they make even the most recent Pentax lenses look very reasonable in comparison.

[Serkevan]

I think they have a pretty good line up of slowish lenses already.

I remember during the Hoya years the constant complaint was that Pentax had given up on fast lenses. The DA limiteds were slow. The FA limiteds were a little faster, but they didn't have any f1.4 lenses in the line up for a long time except for the FA 50, which was hardly usable at f1.4. Currently Pentax has the DA limiteds, the DA 50, DA 50, and DFA 35 HD in the line up, which all seem to qualify as slower lenses. And they have announced the DFA 21 limited which seems likely to be in the f2 to f2.8 range, so I wouldn't say they are abandoning slow lenses.

If you don't see fringing with the FA 77 then you're in good shape. But that was one of the reasons why I moved from the DA *200 (which is a very nice lens otherwise) to the DFA *70-200.

---------- Post added 06-03-20 at 05:33 AM ----------



It is. I think we can compare our lenses to more expensive ones and say "Well, compared to Leica..." but they are still expensive.

At the same time, I am glad that Pentax has a variety of lenses available at different price points. From the DA 50/35 plastic mounts and the DA zooms to the upper end DFA lenses, you can find something that is in most price ranges that will offer the ability to take good images.

Yeah, personally I think that a couple of extra "plastic fantastics", say 24/2.8 and 85/2* with AF and decent IQ would solve all the "affordable prime" concerns. FF UWA lenses aren't cheap (unless they reissue the M20/4, but then they'll get crucified in reviews because "but my corner sharpness") so going under 24 isn't really feasible for budget lenses.


Truth be told the missing full-frame FLs aren't that many - we only need an UWA prime (which is coming), maybe a medium tele compact prime à la M/A/F 135/2.8 or M150 (that sounds like a job for another Limited!) and... we're mostly set for the vast majority of glaring needs. Sure, there's nothing under 15mm but Irix has us covered there for now (and there's the Laowa 12mm right?), and you can always grab the 10-17 Fish-eye.


As for zooms, we have the 28-105 which is excellent, a 70-300/variable aperture (FF redesign of the 55-300 PLM?) is coming... and there's the PLM which still works wonders. The Star glass -or, rather, lack thereof...- was the main weakness of the system; no truly ultra-pro-grade-super-premium lenses.


*Although I guess the 100/2.8 Macro WR would overlap a bit, it isn't too heavy and isn't *that* expensive.

[house]

And if you have looked at pricing on Z mount lenses, they make even the most recent Pentax lenses look very reasonable in comparison.

That was part of my point.

There are tons of FA lenses out there. Yes, they are from the 90s, but they are reasonably priced, except for the * lenses. Acting as though Nikon and Canon have a "vast catalog of glass" and Pentax has nothing is silly. Just because a lens was designed in the 90s doesn't make it chopped liver. They are still very nice lenses and many prefer a lens like the FA *200 to the DA *200 because of the lack of SDM.

There is a significant difference in old ff lineup. It makes no sense playing this down. They sell/sold an awful lot more gear, had more products and crucially came out with ff glass during the whole period of the last 20 years.

The switch to milc puts all that glass in a different market. That space is very sparsely populated in pentax land.

This might be good for Pentax but could squeeze pentaxians.