[gatorguy]

each forum has its own rules and I don't know much English .. it will be useful for another occasion. Thanks

You're correct about some sites allowing links while others do not, those using Disqus sometimes being an example. Here at Pentaxforums we're OK with legitimate links, especially from well-known and safe websites. We like our members to be informed.

[reh321]

FA 645 120 f/4.0 isn't internal focus.

About to the new macro, I really don't like the "fake" limited shape because... it isn't a Limited lens!
I don't like also the so simplistic operation to use the same barrel for the new top of the line macro: where is the focus limiter? Where is the AW certification?

Ah... it's only a DIY project done in the spare time

This was not an announcement!
We also don’t know what the exact name will be.
Be patient!
Of course, I’m helped by my having no use for the lens.
All will be revealed soon.

[gatorguy]

FA 645 120 f/4.0 isn't internal focus.

About to the new macro, I really don't like the "fake" limited shape because... it isn't a Limited lens!
I don't like also the so simplistic operation to use the same barrel for the new top of the line macro: where is the focus limiter? Where is the AW certification?

Ah... it's only a DIY project done in the spare time

I think you're getting ahead of yourself. I've only seen some rough images and basic information about the new macro, very likely the same general but unspecific stuff you've seen. Until it's officially announced I think complaining it's not what you want it to be is premature.

With regard to the "one engineer in his spare time" reference, the development of a newer macro was telegraphed 11 months ago. That would indicate to me it was already a planned redesign.

[Serkevan]

Until it's officially announced I think complaining it's not what you want it to be is premature.

No, no. Outrage and pitchforks first, "oohs"/"aaahs"/"huh that's a good lens actually" later.

[Rondec]

Let's not be casting stones.

(1) New ideas often begin with one individual, even if a team is involved with bringing a project to completion.

(2) Just because a product (lens/camera body/new type of tofu) isn't for you doesn't mean that it is worthless.

(3) There is no perfect lens. Generally speaking, the 100 macro WR was a well respected lens. This is an improvement on it. Keeping the size and hopefully the cost similar seems like a win.

(4) If a product is not for you, the best thing is probably simply to move on. Posting that a product doesn't work for you may make you feel better, but it isn't terribly helpful for anyone else.

(5) The big thing to me is that it is a sign of life from Pentax. It isn't a lens that I am terribly interested in, but it tells me that Pentax has engineers behind the scenes who are continuing to work on projects. That's the sort of message I like to receive.

[UncleVanya]

I have friends who shoot every brand. My Sony shooting friends vary but some are really snobbish about older glass. I shot this using a manual focus adapter and none of them said boo about how they think the Sony FE 90mm macro would perform better… they all stopped giving me crap about Pentax glass on my a7RIII after a few shots like this.

Locked by -vanya_42nd-

It ain’t easy being cheesy by -vanya_42nd-

The second shot above is actually from the A7rII not III.

The point being that this lens already delivers excellent results - any improvement is welcomed but it is already pretty stellar. Even at 42mp…

[robbiec]

Well… then you may hate my shots lately. I’ve used my Sony a7rIII and the monster adapter and plenty of Pentax glass.

I don't like it because it reduces the availability of nice Pentax optics to Pentax users. If you're a high end Sony user you should be chasing Sony G's and Zeiss glass 🤔😉

[pres589]

I don't like it because it reduces the availability of nice Pentax optics to Pentax users. If you're a high end Sony user you should be chasing Sony G's and Zeiss glass 🤔😉

Is this a serious position or a joke reply?

[reh321]

Is this a serious position or a joke reply?

Probably it is just honesty.
Every dollar that is spent on another brand is a dollar not received to advance Pentax.

[robbiec]

They updated the 50 in 2016. I'm surprised the FA50/1.4 is still being sold.

They did and it's a strong design, the FA is still being sold in SMC format, I had mistakenly thought that they updated it alongside the 35/2 when they changed its costings from SMC to HD.
I was referring to the DFA50/2.8 Macro which has been in the lineup since 2004. It badly needs a body refresh to something more akin to the 100 Macro and perhaps a DC or PLM motor. Resolution wise it is not far off the DFA*50/1.4 and can focus closer. Rebody with a new motor and it is a €750 - €1000 lens, Rebody + revised optical layout to remove purple fringing and some CA ala DFA* and it is a €1500 candidate with a * rating. The 50 macro is an unsung hero of the Pentax lens lineup.

[thibs]

Is this a serious position or a joke reply?

Look at the smileys....

[Wheatfield]

FA50/1.4 got an update in 2016 I think with new style of focusing ring and HD coatings in place of SMC IIRC, I was referring to the DFA50/2.8 Macro which has been in the lineup since 2004. It badly needs a body refresh to something more akin to the 100 Macro and perhaps a DC or PLM motor. Resolution wise it is not far off the DFA*50/1.4 and can focus closer. Rebody with a new motor and it is a €750 - €1000 lens, Rebody + revised optical layout to remove purple fringing and some CA ala DFA* and it is a €1500 candidate with a * rating. The 50 macro is an unsung hero of the Pentax lens lineup.

It's a nice little lens. I bought one for my granddaughter who has taken something of an interest in photography. I shot a few pictures with it just to make sure it worked, and was quite impressed with it. The body of it does leave much to be desired, something that was common for lenses from every manufacturer back then, but it's nice glass.

[pres589]

The FA 35 f2 became the HD FA 35 f2 with a more modern look, improved focus ring, and new lens hood along with updated coatings. The FA 50 f1.4 hasn't received the same treatment yet. I'm wondering if Ricoh is sitting on a pile of NOS FA 50's?


The smileys are extremely small to the point that I can't really tell if that second one shows a smile or not. Seems like reh321 also doesn't think it's in jest? In any case, nice for Ricoh to sell a lens to a Sony shooter than sell them nothing.

[robbiec]

Is this a serious position or a joke reply?

Serious enough. Its like replacing an Alfa V6 engine in a Alfetta GTV with a BMW straight 6 - BMW might be technically more capable but you're losing the soul ��

I doubt very much a MILC user would be buying a new Pentax lens even if some are really good value (35/2, 43/1.9, 50/2.8, 77/1.8? 100/2.8) but more worried about a high end MILC user chasing some of our unicorn glass A*85/1.4, A*135/1.8, A*200/4 and removing them from the Pentax Ecosystem.

[pres589]

Serious enough. Its like replacing an Alfa V6 engine in a Alfetta GTV with a BMW straight 6 - BMW might be technically more capable but you're losing the soul 🙂

Better to move a lens to a Sony user and maybe they'll even think about a Pentax body to use the glass natively at some point than to not sell glass at all. Plus, these are currently in-production lenses, so one more unit isn't exactly soaking up a limited quantity of glass. Better than someone hacking the stop-down lever off of a K 28 f2 or some other older and relatively rare Pentax lens.