Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-02-2023, 03:35 AM   #76
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,603
QuoteOriginally posted by jersey Quote
The issue with Pentax lineup is that it is a mix of current, outdated and OMG so old. With last two being majority. With weird choices on top of it.


DA* primes - 55 is outdated, same with 300, while 200 is removed. Ok, both 55 and 300 are not bad, but SDM makes them less then desirable. There are no 18, 24 and 35 DA* (equivalents to 28, 35 and 50 FF) so no "classical" prime focal lengths

DA* zooms - 11-18 and 16-50 are modern. 50-135 is outdated and maybe will be replaced, 60-250 is removed and there is no sign of replacement

DA Limiteds - looks ok, but only one lens can be considered modern digital lens: 20-40. Rest is ok optically, lacks in build (AF motor and AW/WR)

FA* primes - 50 and 85 so the longer end is covered, still no 28 and 35. If 35 shows you could say that most is covered here


FA* zooms - with only one FA* zoom there is no coverage


FA Limiteds - more or less same as with DA Ltd, only one lens can be called modern digital-era lens. 31, 43 and 77 should be on their way to museum.

I doubt Pentax is thinking in line-ups. Unless it is considering sensor sizes as line-up and even then it makes little sense if you have consumer level 15-30 and 24-70 standing proudly with star level 70-200. APS-C is little better, but here most lenses are either very old, removed from sales without same-level replacement. Again: 11-18 and 16-50 star accompanied by 55-300 DAL? Ever heard even craziest rumors about Pentax making FA* level UWA and standard zooms? Or long tele-zoom DA*? No? I thought so.

Even if Pentax is covering focal lengths, it is doing it in a way that is doing it's best to turn possible customers away from the brand.
Well, it has been stated in this thread that the DA *55 and 50-135 are done. I would have guessed there would be a replacement of the 50-135 at some point, but not the 55 (the DFA *50 is a better lens).

The challenge with replacing these sorts of lenses is that the price goes up. So, if the DA *55 MK II sells for 1100 dollars instead of 650 and the 50-135 PLM sold for 1500 instead of 1000, they wouldn't be widely purchased, even if they had considerably faster (and more reliable) autofocus.

03-02-2023, 03:49 AM   #77
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jersey's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: 3City agglomeration
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,021
Well, everything goes up the price, Pentax cameras too. Remember the ruckus here when K-3 Mk III price was announced?

I think top-of-the-line lens will sell. Maybe not to old pentaxians who are swimming in sea of lenses from several decades of gathering, but to new people interested in reflex cameras. Which are, in my not so humble opinion, clients that Pentax is aiming to attract. KF has pretty much complete line of consumer/beginner level of lenses of various grades. What it lacks is modern offer of high grade lenses for all types of photographers for K-3 Mk III and incoming K-1 Mk III.

---------- Post added 03-02-23 at 03:53 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Wasp Quote
I suppose that the kitchen was not big enough for both a 200/2.8 prime and a 70-200/2.8 zoom. One of them had to leave. Prime telephotos are so last century - get with the program and get a zoom!
Maybe. And frankly that is what Pentax lacks - information, even general, of direction they want to go.

For 3 cameras we have 6 lens lineups (*, Ltd, normal times 2 for APS-C and FF) and all of them are getting stuff in a way that looks a bit chaotic. It is my personal opinion, maybe Pentax has some plan but if customer does not know about it, it creates the famous "Pentax is doomed" line we hear each time they actually do something.
03-02-2023, 06:51 AM - 1 Like   #78
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,125
QuoteOriginally posted by jersey Quote
I ignored all consumer level lineups. FA zooms, and FA and DA primes too. There are good lenses, pretty complete lineup at least on DA side where all you actually expect is for the lens to work. But Pentax is removing from chart and hinting at production of star/limited lenses, not consumer ones. Which would correspond with general trend in industry of switching to high level/income customers and high level, high profit gear.


About turning you towards, I doubt it. You can say so because you know Pentax so you can pat yourself on the back and say: yeah, if I never heard about them I would choose them.

And who cares what is good for you? With all respect, but if Pentax wants to sell cameras and lenses outside of current Pentaxians, then putting low-level consumer grade lens in same line as highest-level pro lens like it is in case of 16-50 and 55-300 (after removal of 60-250) then all you can do is point your finger at them and laugh. Come one - you are potential customer for K-3 Mk III, go into shop, look at camera and ask for pro-level lenses and what you get? 11-18, nice. 16-50: great. Now please give me a telephoto for complete setup. Yes sir, here you are: 55-300 consumer level telephoto. No no no, give me a star. Sorry, we don't have any. We canceled what we had and never replaced it. Oh, thank you. You said Canon shop is on the other side of the street?
Actually, I expect the lens to work well {which it does}, and sell well. The importance Pentax puts on the “consumer” line was showed when they put out the KF. They could have just dropped the K-70 line …. but they didn’t. Yes, I would have preferred that they put out a truly new camera, but they didn’t have time to do that, but they did want to keep the line going; I’ll give them credit for that. They had worked and worked to solve the ‘solenoid issue’, which would have also been a reason for dropping that line, but they didn’t do that either. The lower-level tier does seem to be important to them - I’ll give them credit for that.
03-02-2023, 09:11 AM   #79
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jersey's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: 3City agglomeration
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,021
Well, I am one of those who praise Pentax for releasing KF so we agree at least here And as you noticed I said that Pentax low-level gear is pretty much complete. There is little to complain about and that is not the issue in my PoV. Issue is that Pentax is messing with high level gear in weird way.

But I suppose we never agreed on what and how Pentax is doing so let's agree that we disagree here. Again

03-02-2023, 12:02 PM   #80
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,125
QuoteOriginally posted by jersey Quote
Well, I am one of those who praise Pentax for releasing KF so we agree at least here And as you noticed I said that Pentax low-level gear is pretty much complete. There is little to complain about and that is not the issue in my PoV. Issue is that Pentax is messing with high level gear in weird way.

But I suppose we never agreed on what and how Pentax is doing so let's agree that we disagree here. Again
I’m glad to hear of your sending ‘bushel-barrels’ of money to Pentax for “professional grade lenses”, but since they don’t provide {at least, not here in the US} the other services a professional would expect - such as quick repairs - I’m not convinced that is the only impediment to better adoption by “pro’s”. I agree to disagree.
03-02-2023, 02:12 PM   #81
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 7,001
Seperating DFA f/2.8 and DFA* f/2.8 range feels a bit disingenous to me. You're perfecly aware that the intend is the same.
The Tamron rebrands didn't get the * because they're rebrands. Those aren't bad lenses at all either.

The 150-450 didn't get its * either because it has variable aperture. If if had been a Canon, it still would have got its L white clothes IMO.
03-02-2023, 11:07 PM   #82
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,379
QuoteOriginally posted by jersey Quote
The issue with Pentax lineup is that it is a mix of current, outdated and OMG so old. With last two being majority. With weird choices on top of it.


DA* primes - 55 is outdated, same with 300, while 200 is removed. Ok, both 55 and 300 are not bad, but SDM makes them less then desirable. There are no 18, 24 and 35 DA* (equivalents to 28, 35 and 50 FF) so no "classical" prime focal lengths

DA* zooms - 11-18 and 16-50 are modern. 50-135 is outdated and maybe will be replaced, 60-250 is removed and there is no sign of replacement

DA Limiteds

Even if Pentax is covering focal lengths, it is doing it in a way that is doing it's best to turn possible customers away from the brand.
This will not be their strategy.

There are many gaps…, but they fill them ok over time, but not tele lenses.

03-03-2023, 12:32 PM - 2 Likes   #83
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Buckinghamshire (UK) / Morbihan (FR)
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 470
QuoteOriginally posted by jersey Quote
[...]consumer level 15-30 and 24-70 standing proudly with star level 70-200.[...]
It seems the DFA 15-30 is pretty well regarded, and certainly not 'consumer level'. The DFA 24-70 might not be such a well regarded lens, but still WR and constant aperture - hardly 'consumer level'. I think RI would be better targeting their DFA* efforts at 35/1.4 and possibly 400/4.0.
03-03-2023, 01:31 PM   #84
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jersey's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: 3City agglomeration
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,021
Perception is everything. Out of 10 possible customers with enough money, if given choice, how many will choose DFA instead of DFA* or DFA Limited? If you have special sign attributed to lenses that are perceived as something better (or marketed as such) then you don't try to convince customer that this common lens there, no star, no nothing is just as good. They may start questioning if whole stare lineup is worth the extra money.


Or in other way - what Pentax or RI need star designation, if it makes non-star lenses to accompany star ones? If they go by same lineup as is on product list (so normal zoom/prime, wide zoom/prime, tele zoom/prime) why Limited, star and normal designations? Not to mention lots of DA lenses being FF ones by design and only marketed as APS-C. It is like every lens is designed as separate entity, no connection to anything else. Only Limiteds make some sense actually, and even there 20-40 is like sore thumb not fitting to anything else.
03-03-2023, 03:02 PM - 1 Like   #85
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
pschlute's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Surrey, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,114
QuoteOriginally posted by phoebus Quote
It seems the DFA 15-30 is pretty well regarded, and certainly not 'consumer level'
Agreed.

I use the 15-30 a lot..... it is as far from consumer-level as it is possible to get.
03-03-2023, 05:08 PM - 6 Likes   #86
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,603
QuoteOriginally posted by phoebus Quote
It seems the DFA 15-30 is pretty well regarded, and certainly not 'consumer level'. The DFA 24-70 might not be such a well regarded lens, but still WR and constant aperture - hardly 'consumer level'. I think RI would be better targeting their DFA* efforts at 35/1.4 and possibly 400/4.0.
I agree. The DFA 15-30 is very nice. Pentax would have a hard time improving it. The only thing, I suppose, would be a similar focal length, but have it be f4 and allow for circular polarizers. It would still be a good size lens, but it would be a little smaller.

The DFA 24-70 is one that I think would be nice to replace. The Tamron is fine. It is probably my most used lens, but I do think Pentax could get better performance with some effort. Their new 16-50 mm PLM is an example of what sort of optics they can bring to a standard zoom when they try hard.

A couple of DFA 15-30mm shots...





And a couple of DFA 24-70mm shots for good measure.



03-04-2023, 05:03 AM   #87
Pentaxian
jcdoss's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,682
QuoteOriginally posted by pschlute Quote
Agreed.

I use the 15-30 a lot..... it is as far from consumer-level as it is possible to get.
I'm sure this has been discussed elsewhere, but why did Pentax not give this lens a star designation?
03-04-2023, 05:08 AM - 1 Like   #88
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,603
QuoteOriginally posted by jcdoss Quote
I'm sure this has been discussed elsewhere, but why did Pentax not give this lens a star designation?
It's a Tamron design. I don't think other company's designs ever get a star designation, even if they are really good lenses.
03-05-2023, 01:13 AM   #89
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,379
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
It's a Tamron design. I don't think other company's designs ever get a star designation, even if they are really good lenses.
Too much Tamron inside, correct. The focus ring of the 15-30 rotates in Nikon direction not Pentax and there will be more details the deeper you dig that are not from Pentax.
You don’t want your best glass - * designation - to originate from a third party.
03-05-2023, 02:44 AM - 1 Like   #90
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,379
QuoteOriginally posted by jersey Quote
Or in other way - what Pentax or RI need star designation, if it makes non-star lenses to accompany star ones? If they go by same lineup as is on product list (so normal zoom/prime, wide zoom/prime, tele zoom/prime) why Limited, star and normal designations? Not to mention lots of DA lenses being FF ones by design and only marketed as APS-C. It is like every lens is designed as separate entity, no connection to anything else. Only Limiteds make some sense actually, and even there 20-40 is like sore thumb not fitting to anything else.
Show some good will and things lighten up. Pentax does not promote DA glass for full frame and different features make for different designations. The 20-40 zoom fits in the look and feel of the limiteds, it may look odd in line, but others call it a special team lens.
The DFA 21 nicely combines the FA limited features with modern AF and weather sealing. Clearly not a * design/feature lens. Add two or three more lenses and everything should become obvious. 2-3 lenses could means 2+ years though.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
apsc, cameras, canon, compromise, dfa*, f/2.8, fa, ff, frame, glass, iii, k-3, lens, lenses, line, macro, mk, nikon, opinion, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, pentax-d, price, sdm, smc, switch, tele
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
60-250mm f/4, 200mm f/2.8, 14mm f/2.8 and 100mm f/2.8 Macro WR discontinued? Mistral75 Pentax News and Rumors 246 01-19-2023 11:59 PM
Landscape Test of the DA* 60-250 mm f/4 ED @ f8, f/11, f/16, f/22, f/32 at 60 mm FL on K3 III. RICHARD L. Post Your Photos! 4 10-19-2022 08:01 AM
60-250mm/f4 to cover all needs between 100-250mm?? Opinions/advice welcome gda13 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 34 08-17-2016 06:01 PM
Bye-Bye Kodachrome Wheatfield Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras 59 06-26-2009 02:55 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:13 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top