[UncleVanya]

I’ve used the Sony 90mm macro which has an internal lens motor. It’s not fast. The screw drive itself isn’t by itself the main issue with focusing speed. A focus limited even without charging from screw drive will help dramatically. I loved the f100 macro focus limited as it really cut down the missed shots due to overshooting the mark. Most of my macro work is done in live view sometimes manual focus, sometimes autofocus. My wish for improved autofocus isn’t about macro use; it’s about focusing when the lens is used as a general telephoto lens for non-macro subjects.

[photogem]

Very small motors for lenses do exist. I also own Samsung NX camera's with the pancakes 20 and 30 mm as well as a 20-50mm zoom and they all have motors inside. I do not doubt that Ricoh will be able to incorporate a splendid miniaturized motor in a new 100mm, if that is the plan. On this forum you will notice the need for silent focusing for various styles of photography and Ricoh promised to listen to the "fan" base, did not they?

Because of the nature of a macro-lens and more so of a 100mm/f2,8 such a lens has a long focus-throw. This means more mass to be moved.
If the new 100mm macro lens is going to be similar in size, I daubt it will be with a miniature-motor because those will have difficulties to move that focus-throw.

[house]

The screw drive itself isn’t by itself the main issue with focusing speed.

It is noisy though! For my use the speed of screw drive is a non issue. The noise however is really quite annoying and does make the whole experience feel a bit iffy. I've heard many argue that focus accuracy can be better with motors, particularly when using tracking af.

How bad screw drive lenses sound does vary quite a lot. It would be quite cool if Pentax made a real effort at silencing their screw drive af. Would be interesting to see what they could achieve.

[gatorguy]

I posted in another thread, but I'll put it in this dedicated thread too because it's highly relevant.

During the presentation on Sunday, they showed this comparison of the old/new lenss to illustrate the improved resistance to purple fringing.

That's really helpful!

An additional observation is that the new 100 will apparently resolve better. There's more subtle detail in the image on the left, and we already know how wonderful detail is on the current version. All in all it looks like a worthy upgrade.

[house]

Those that claim that they don't see much pf with dfa100 must be photographing some rather limited and controlled scenes. Their views on any lens should be taken with a grain of salt from now on. Pentax own material is now clear evidence that reeds on the ground is enough for a festival of purple.

[gatorguy]

Those that claim that they don't see much pf with dfa100 must be photographing some rather limited and controlled scenes. Their views on any lens should be taken with a grain of salt from now on. Pentax own material is now clear evidence that reeds on the ground is enough for a festival of purple.

From what I remember in posts here no one has ever claimed the 100Macro doesn't ever suffer from chromatic aberration in certain lighting and contrast situations. Heck, that's been mentioned hundreds of times, and part and parcel of the lens reviews. Obviously not every photo sufferers it so I suppose it's possible some particular user may have never seen it for themselves, but don't know of anyone who has denied it. It's a common thing across lens brands, and not generally anything tough to remove with a click in software either.

In any event it appears Pentax is rectifying it with the new design. So rather than complain about what it was I say kudos Pentax for what it will be! Surprise lens updates aren't refused.

[AfterPentax Mark II]

Because of the nature of a macro-lens and more so of a 100mm/f2,8 such a lens has a long focus-throw. This means more mass to be moved.
If the new 100mm macro lens is going to be similar in size, I daubt it will be with a miniature-motor because those will have difficulties to move that focus-throw.

We'll know when the lens sees the light and in the meantime: it is easier to come up with problems than with....

[brofkand]

I am glad to see this, I hope Pentax continues to refresh their older designs and make optimizations where possible!

[borisII]

Good news, but it could be close to USD1000....Ricoh goes way of expensive lenses for FF....

[Kunzite]

Good news, but it could be close to USD1000....Ricoh goes way of expensive lenses for FF....

Well... the Nikkor Z MC 105mm f/2.8 macro is $1046.95, the Canon RF 100mm f/2.8 L macro is $1299, and the Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 macro G is $1098 - B&H (street) prices.

[wadge22]

Those that claim that they don't see much pf with dfa100 must be photographing some rather limited and controlled scenes. Their views on any lens should be taken with a grain of salt from now on.

I wouldn't go that far. They may always be stopping way down when using it primarily as a macro lens. Also, in real world shooting PF isn't as big of an issue as it sometimes seems to be when shooting subjects selected to create/detect the problem, such as those reeds in harsh sunlight, or powerlines against a bright sky.

[UncleVanya]

Those that claim that they don't see much pf with dfa100 must be photographing some rather limited and controlled scenes. Their views on any lens should be taken with a grain of salt from now on. Pentax own material is now clear evidence that reeds on the ground is enough for a festival of purple.

I have rarely seen it. That doesn’t mean that I don’t know squat. It does mean that Pentax found a good torture test image to show off their improvements.

[RobA_Oz]

Those that claim that they don't see much pf with dfa100 must be photographing some rather limited and controlled scenes. Their views on any lens should be taken with a grain of salt from now on. Pentax own material is now clear evidence that reeds on the ground is enough for a festival of purple.

Something of a stretch, there.

I have rarely seen it. That doesn’t mean that I don’t know squat. It does mean that Pentax found a good torture test image to show off their improvements.

Unless the Japanese text accompanying the photos tells us otherwise, we can probably assume the comparison shots were taken at maximum aperture.

Obviously, any optical improvement is to be welcomed, especially if it isn’t accompanied by a large increase in price.

[bladerunner6]

If it has a focus motor I am very interested. I guess I need to just wait and see what they do.

Lots of speculation here but only a few lines of facts.

[house]

It's incredible to continue seeing people downplaying this even after Pentax shows samples like that.

Any lens aberration or quality is only relevant in certain circumstances. You can shoot any lens and avoid the flaws. A good lens will perform well in most situations, or be exceptionally great at some niche.

Someone who shoots low contrast scenes and understands purple fringing would know that their personal experience of the aberrations is of no value. Same as someone who places the subject in the center have little useful input on barrel distortion. The person always shooting with the light behind them on flare. Or someone shooting interiors commenting on super tele lenses.

Just imagine someone insisting "flare is not a problem with this lens" and you find out that person *always* shoots with the light behind them.

A macro needs to be able to do shiny, glossy things to make product photography possible. All lenses should be able to photograph glittering water without a purple explosion. Not handling such scenarios are a huge downside to the lens. Limiting it's use.

Now the dfa100 has many great qualities. It's sharp, has good colours and nice bokeh. Still it fringes like few other lenses and that's an issue. An issue that Pentax is spending it rare resources resolving!