[reh321]

OK, sure. My impression was that a key reason the folks clamoring for a FF camera wanted one was to be able to use all their film era lenses. The only film era lens I have which I'd like to try is a 50mm f1.7, and I doubt that it's anything to write home about. I can't use it on any of my DSLRs, and I haven't even tested the film camera to see if it works since I bought the K200D.

I agree it would be nice to have something like a KAF4 version of the HDDA 16-85 which is KAF3. Even so, I'm curious what the actual functional difference would be, other than AFC in live view.
I have the HDDA*16-50 PLM and I have tried AFC with video, but I have a camcorder for video which is much more versatile. If the K3iii had the video capabilities of a Fuji XT4, then KAF4 might be more important. If I wanted an EVIL camera, I would've bought one (and nearly did).

Honestly, the main advantage of an affordable KAF4 standard lens would be to get people to stop talking about that blasted solenoid.
I believe Pentax has finally got it as reliable as could be expected of a sub $1000 camera body, but with an affordable KAF4 18~55mm and the {KAF4} 55-300mm PLM, no lens needed for a K-70 level camera would need the solenoid. End of Story.

---

Last edited by reh321; 05-24-2022 at 07:00 PM.

[RobG]

Honestly, the main advantage of an affordable KAF4 standard lens would be to get people to stop talking about that blasted solenoid.
I believe Pentax has finally got it as reliable as could be expected of a sub $1000 camera body, but with an affordable KAF4 18~55mm and the {KAF4} 55-300mm PLM, no lens needed for a K-70 level camera would need the solenoid. End of Story.

Ah, yes. Good point. As it happens, my HDDA 16-85 had an issue with the return spring and the aperture stopped working - a fault in the lens, not the camera, which KAF4 would also eliminate.

[jersey]

I think they can all use the new AF. All the lenses from FA to DA to DFA, whatever.

You might mean how many can do AF-C in Live View.

No, I meant that no other lens then PLM ones, at least from those I tried (be it screwdrive, Pentax DC or Sigma HSM) was able to keep up with AF-C on fast moving objects. There was always some shots that were not focused properly - camera was trying to focus, but lens was not up to speed. That is why I am saying that to utilize new AF system in 100% K-3 Mk III needs fast focusing lenses, something that is currently very limited in Pentax lineup. Otherwise there is little reason to have such good AF system with such impressive AF-C capabilities.

[Smolk]

No, I meant that no other lens then PLM ones, at least from those I tried (be it screwdrive, Pentax DC or Sigma HSM) was able to keep up with AF-C on fast moving objects. There was always some shots that were not focused properly - camera was trying to focus, but lens was not up to speed. That is why I am saying that to utilize new AF system in 100% K-3 Mk III needs fast focusing lenses, something that is currently very limited in Pentax lineup. Otherwise there is little reason to have such good AF system with such impressive AF-C capabilities.

The DFA* 1.4/50mm on my K-3 III appears to function very well (but admittedly I haven't tested it on moving subjects), it has a KAF4-mount and an SDM-motor.

[jersey]

I am talking about moving subjects. Fast moving. For everything else even screwdrivers are more then enough. And if new AF is a selling point of K-3 Mk III then it should have also lenses that are able to fully ustilise all aspects of said AF.


I would not mind if it were DFA lenses, heck, I think it would be best if Pentax unified DA and DFA lens lineups and made only or mostly FF lenses as long as those can be as small and light as possible to make use of smaller APS-C bodies.

[reh321]

OK, sure. My impression was that a key reason the folks clamoring for a FF camera wanted one was to be able to use all their film era lenses. The only film era lens I have which I'd like to try is a 50mm f1.7, and I doubt that it's anything to write home about. I can't use it on any of my DSLRs, and I haven't even tested the film camera to see if it works since I bought the K200D.

Yes, the original reason for developing the K-1 was “allowing my 50mm lens to act like a 50mm lens”. When I first got my K-30, I used it with the Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7 I had used on my “Super Program” - and I discovered that it was sharper than film had ever shown, but users discovered that lenses had made a lot of progress lately. If I had a K-1, I would use it with my old film-era lenses, but I may be an exception - I won’t say ‘the exception’, because Kerrowdown makes heavy use of film lenses, but in general I hear lots of complaints from users who have discovered how much progress has been made - especially with in-lens motors - and feel left out. I wouldn’t benefit from new “DFA” lenses, but ‘I feel their pain’.

[MMVIII]

Yes, the original reason for developing the K-1 was “allowing my 50mm lens to act like a 50mm lens”. When I first got my K-30, I used it with the Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7 I had used on my “Super Program” - and I discovered that it was sharper than film had ever shown, but users discovered that lenses had made a lot of progress lately. If I had a K-1, I would use it with my old film-era lenses, but I may be an exception - I won’t say ‘the exception’, because Kerrowdown makes heavy use of film lenses, but in general I hear lots of complaints from users who have discovered how much progress has been made - especially with in-lens motors - and feel left out. I wouldn’t benefit from new “DFA” lenses, but ‘I feel their pain’.

Well, modern APS-C lenses that can live up to the expectations of the new K-3III AF are for sure a necessary line in the system. Seeing the new DA* 16-50 f2.8 PLM being one of them the most welcome addition would be the rumoured DA* 50-135 f2.8 as a PLM-version and I would see this done. I don't think longer focal lengths need to be specifically restraint to APS-C, the size difference might be marginal. But this is not my genre anyway, what do I know.

[RobA_Oz]

Well, modern APS-C lenses that can live up to the expectations of the new K-3III AF are for sure a necessary line in the system. Seeing the new DA* 16-50 f2.8 PLM being one of them the most welcome addition would be the rumoured DA* 50-135 f2.8 as a PLM-version and I would see this done. I don't think longer focal lengths need to be specifically restraint to APS-C, the size difference might be marginal. But this is not my genre anyway, what do I know.

As I understand it, this is the case for the longer focal length lenses, where the ray paths are generally closer to paraxial, and require less correction, as the DA*300, DA*200 and DA560 in particular have demonstrated. It seems to require more work and more glass when it comes to shorter focal lengths, as a comparison between the DA21 and DFA21 seems to indicate.

Nonetheless, I don’t think the capabilities of the K-3iii for wildlife and action photography can be fully exploited until longer focal lengths like the DA560 can be reinstated. That lens was discontinued, presumably, because it wasn’t selling in sufficient numbers, and price may well have been a factor in that when it was introduced, but there wasn’t really a Pentax body that could help it appeal to many people shooting in those genres, particularly at a time when Pentax marketing was emphasising the outdoor appeal of its rugged bodies and weather-sealing. Ricoh may have to stick their corporate neck out to get back in that game.

[RobG]

Well, modern APS-C lenses that can live up to the expectations of the new K-3III AF are for sure a necessary line in the system.

And to the expectations of the presumed successor to the K1ii (presumably a K1iii) which leverages the technology in the K3iii. Not that I am personally interested in a FF, because the wildlife photography I do works better with APSC. The only reason I mention this is because my main lens is the DFA 150-450, which is a FF lens, so future KAF4 DFA lenses can still be good for APSC.

[BryantCP]

No, I meant that no other lens then PLM ones, at least from those I tried (be it screwdrive, Pentax DC or Sigma HSM) was able to keep up with AF-C on fast moving objects. There was always some shots that were not focused properly - camera was trying to focus, but lens was not up to speed. That is why I am saying that to utilize new AF system in 100% K-3 Mk III needs fast focusing lenses, something that is currently very limited in Pentax lineup. Otherwise there is little reason to have such good AF system with such impressive AF-C capabilities.

While the PLM lens are the best option to use with a K-3 III, at a recent dog show I was pleasantly surprised by the DA 18-135 DC both for AF-c stills, and for video. I wasn't expecting it to do continuous video autofocus at all - but it actually was very decent. The dogs & their handlers were running at a slow pace for confirmation trials. AF-C for continuous (M) produced many more "keepers" than either my K-3 or KP ever did.

[jersey]

Yes, K-3 Mk III autofocus works surprisingly well, no matter what lens motor you have. Even screwdrivers feel faster. Dunno about how SDM felt on older bodies, but on K-3/3 is surprisingly snappy. Still to get 100% out of it you need PLM or something equally fast.

[Grokh]

... a k1III still appears premature...

I heard at the Pentax office today that the K-1 III may be announced in the relatively near future.

---------- Post added 4th Jun 2022 at 00:23 ----------

...like the DA560 can be reinstated. That lens was discontinued, presumably, because it wasn’t selling in sufficient numbers...

For example, only six lenses of this type were sold throughout Russia.