Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-10-2009, 10:11 AM   #31
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,337
Nikon made 4 manual focus versions of 200mm f2: 1977 thru 2005

Here's my favorite nikon lens data website for you Ken:

1959-2009

Nikon Lenses


QuoteOriginally posted by kenyee Quote
aggghh....must resisttttt....
I didn't know they made a MF version of that 200/2. Thanks, Lindy


04-10-2009, 12:21 PM   #32
Veteran Member
PePe's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 464
QuoteOriginally posted by nanok Quote
isn't that overstating it a bit? i am not saying "size doesn't matter", but really, how many people are now shooting "full frame digital" (considering there have been now "affordable" options to do so on the market for a year or so), and how much of a difference does it really make to the end result? i think you will find most of dslr owners own aps-c (i would guess well beyond 90%). it is just more practical from so many points of view.
calling it a "miscalculation of strategic proportions" on the part of pentax seems strange at best.
well, we are in the digital days now, and pentax, unlike _any_ other, gives you precisely that option: a 70-200/2.8 equivalent for your digital camera: the da* 50-135/2.8. just get that one. and there is also the great 16-50/2.8. am i missing something here?
APS-C bodies have of course been a necessity so far, and they still dominate the market by far. And the format sure will continue to exist for quite a while. FF bodies have been prohibitively expensive and their market share has therefore remained small. But this is about to change over a period of time.
People do have different priorities. Some of us prioritise image quality, and in this respect FF does have an advantage. FF body prices will continue to come down, and their market share will definitely increase within a couple of years.
I sure do hope Pentax will be able to take this step together with the other manufacturers. They are currently struggling to get their previously announced lenses out to the market. Introducing both a new FF frame concept and a completely new lens range is going to be a massive challenge. Having an existing FF lens range would of course relieve much of this burden. Therefore updating and reintroducing some of the FA*´s might be a smart move to circumvent the obvious resource bottlenecks of a small company.

The DA*50-135/2,8 and 16-50/2,8 are both very nice lenses. I have them both, and like them very much. Hovewer, they are part of the same dilemma: for FF they are useless.
04-10-2009, 04:47 PM   #33
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 975
QuoteOriginally posted by PePe Quote
APS-C bodies have of course been a necessity so far, and they still dominate the market by far. And the format sure will continue to exist for quite a while. FF bodies have been prohibitively expensive and their market share has therefore remained small. But this is about to change over a period of time.
People do have different priorities. Some of us prioritise image quality, and in this respect FF does have an advantage. FF body prices will continue to come down, and their market share will definitely increase within a couple of years.
most probably, i do not deny this. i was just a bit amazed by calling it a "miscalculation of strategic proportions", the fact that things change is obvious, and has always been true. i find the statement about image quality arguable at best: if the priority is image quality, as you said, you would be shooting 4x5in view cameras, not digital. but there are other factors. price is one, but not the only one, it just happens that, for now, the aps-c format is pretty much perfect, and for most intents and purposes it is "close enough" to "full frame", and getting closer.

QuoteQuote:
I sure do hope Pentax will be able to take this step together with the other manufacturers. They are currently struggling to get their previously announced lenses out to the market. Introducing both a new FF frame concept and a completely new lens range is going to be a massive challenge. Having an existing FF lens range would of course relieve much of this burden. Therefore updating and reintroducing some of the FA*´s might be a smart move to circumvent the obvious resource bottlenecks of a small company.
we will see. small companies have strange ways . on the other hand pentax is not exactly small anymore, let's hope that won't change them much (read: they will stay as weird and unreasonably customer-oriented as we came to know them)

QuoteQuote:
The DA*50-135/2,8 and 16-50/2,8 are both very nice lenses. I have them both, and like them very much. Hovewer, they are part of the same dilemma: for FF they are useless.

of course. but you are shooting them on aps-c, so they do an excellent job for what they were designed to do. i wonder why there was never such dillema between 35mm and medium format (the area ratio is about the same iirc?), i never heard someone wonder "hmm, this new 35mm lens will be worthless on my 6x4.5, was it worth buying?"

ps: okay, maybe not the same ratio, but close enough to be worth discussing the point:
(very roughly)

(24*36)/(25.1*16.7)
2.06121621299234200920
(56*42)/(24*36)
2.72222222222222222222

Last edited by nanok; 04-10-2009 at 04:48 PM. Reason: tags
04-11-2009, 06:47 AM   #34
Veteran Member
ManuH's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,209
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You conclusion is far from logical. The price you cite is less than the lens costed close to ten years ago when it was certainly sold at a loss.
Sold at a loss ? I have a hard time to believe this. If anything these kind of lenses are often sold with a huge mark up IMO.

04-11-2009, 08:30 AM   #35
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
Hey, I just want a return to the glory days of the DA Limited lenses. Read all about it in my Dear Pentax post.
04-13-2009, 08:34 PM   #36
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northern California
Posts: 475
Lead is the Issue

QuoteOriginally posted by offertonhatter Quote
Rather than putting an add on to the Dear Pentax thread, I have created a new thread.

Now its solely to do with Lenses.

Whilst I applaud Pentax for bringing out lenses in DA*, which mimic the FA* lenses to an extent, and providing a smaller lens (DA*50-135mm being and EFOV of a 75-200mm and the DA*55mm being the "digital" replacement for the mighty FA*85mm) It would be great if Pentax could reproduce the fine FA* lenses, and maybe some other primes, to suit both Film and APS-C.

So, Pentax, Please Please Please, can you recreate the mighty FA* range that will create a so called DFA* SDM range, that will fit both film (with the screw AF) and digital (with the SDM)

This of course could include many of the fine primes to be built too. You still have the blueprints for the optics (the most expensive bit of a lens) and can incorporate a wider body to have the SDM included. They can also include the latest SMC coatings, to reduce any CA and flare reduction as well, due to part of the build this coating can be applied as with all other lenses.

Now I can already think of a number of lenses, that can be built to a new DFA* spec without much of an issue, such as:-

FA* 85mm F1.4
Takumar 135mm F2.5
FA* 300mm F2.8
FA* 600mm F4
FA* 24mm F2
K 8.4mm F2.8
FA 35mm F2
FA 50mm F1.4
A 50mm F1.2
FA* 28-70mm F2.8
A* 135mm F1.8

So Pentax, how about it?
I have always lusted after some of the Pentax classics in the FA* line, but making them again really is not as simple as it might seem.

The glass used in older lenses contained lead, which makes it particularly good at certain things that are useful in lens making:

Lead glass - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Look most closely at the Properties area for some clues as to why lead was used in the older lens designs.

Lead in products such as this has been banned in most of Europe for a few years now.

So, in order to re-make these classics, Pentax would have to completely rework the optical forumlas, which impacts the rest of the design. One things leads to another, and at the end of the day, Pentax would have to re-design almost everything about the FA* lenses of the good old days.

Since Pentax has no FF or film cameras in production, and there are no signs that they will have any such bodies in production any time soon, what sense would it make to spend money on such a project?


Ray
04-13-2009, 09:27 PM   #37
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,260
QuoteOriginally posted by Ray Pulley Quote
So, in order to re-make these classics, Pentax would have to completely rework the optical forumlas, which impacts the rest of the design. One things leads to another, and at the end of the day, Pentax would have to re-design almost everything about the FA* lenses of the good old days.
Ray
Was it on prupose ?
04-13-2009, 09:39 PM   #38
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Grand Junction Colorado
Posts: 212
I think Pentax is doing the right thing with their lenses. I once considered jumping ship but the latest primes kept me on board.

The C/N/S/O mobs and snobs live by their zooms. I have the 16-45 that I bought with my K10 and found myself using old SMC Pentax 55mm/f1.8 and 28mm/f3.5 (my standard) much more.

Now, with the K20D, my primary lenses are the DA21, FA35 and DFA 50 macro. If I need to go longer, I have older Pentax primes that can take me up to 400mm. I only use them on special occasions and I can.t see me buying any lenses - with the exception of the new 15 and 55.

04-14-2009, 09:21 PM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northern California
Posts: 475
Ha Funny

QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Was it on prupose ?
I wish I was that clever and funny...
11-12-2011, 09:37 AM   #40
New Member
SteveEveritt's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10
(Warning) I am relatively new to DSLR shooting so forgive me if I'm totally wrong but, it appears to me that Pentax have a plethora of short lenses 15, 21, 31, 43, etc but nothing over 300mm. I wonder how many lenses between 300 & 500 Sigma have sold to Pentax users and I'm pretty sure most would have bought Pentax glass if they could!
11-12-2011, 09:45 AM   #41
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: 5th floor
Posts: 1,328
I am switching to Leica. Waited long enough.
11-12-2011, 10:41 AM   #42
Pentaxian
traderdrew's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 570
QuoteOriginally posted by SteveEveritt Quote
(Warning) I am relatively new to DSLR shooting so forgive me if I'm totally wrong but, it appears to me that Pentax have a plethora of short lenses 15, 21, 31, 43, etc but nothing over 300mm. I wonder how many lenses between 300 & 500 Sigma have sold to Pentax users and I'm pretty sure most would have bought Pentax glass if they could!
I have the Sigma 500mm F/4.5 and they make it for Pentax.

Flickr: Andrew's Wildlife's Photostream
11-12-2011, 11:13 AM   #43
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by SteveEveritt Quote
(Warning) I am relatively new to DSLR shooting so forgive me if I'm totally wrong but, it appears to me that Pentax have a plethora of short lenses 15, 21, 31, 43, etc but nothing over 300mm. I wonder how many lenses between 300 & 500 Sigma have sold to Pentax users and I'm pretty sure most would have bought Pentax glass if they could!
Simple solution: Ricoh can buy Sigma.
11-12-2011, 12:37 PM   #44
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Madison, Wis., USA
Posts: 1,510
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
Simple solution: Ricoh can buy Sigma.
Then flog the camera unit around until someone wants to buy the unit in its entirety and/or the Foveon intellectual property. But I can't see that either would have great value.

A purchase like that, unlikely as it is, would give Ricoh manufacturing capability in Japan as well as the non-Japanese sites they have now. Some companies are beginning to see value in geo-diversity, aren't they?
11-12-2011, 12:40 PM   #45
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Madison, Wis., USA
Posts: 1,510
QuoteOriginally posted by ManuH Quote
Sold at a loss ? I have a hard time to believe this. If anything these kind of lenses are often sold with a huge mark up IMO.
There's no reason a manufactured product cannot be sold at a very high gross margin and still lose money overall. I think that's the entire point of this discussion. But perhaps I'm not getting what you mean by "mark up"?
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!
135mm, 50mm, f1.4, f2, f2.8, fa, fa*, lenses, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, sdm
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Dear Pentax anomaly Photographic Industry and Professionals 1300 11-04-2016 07:04 PM
Misc Oh dear, oh dear, oh deer... Rense Post Your Photos! 5 11-05-2010 07:41 PM
dear pentax please be more careful anepo Photographic Technique 2 06-08-2010 11:43 AM
dear Pentax....... nathancombs Post Your Photos! 5 01-04-2008 11:17 PM
My Dear, Dear Friends: Don't Do This. Mike Cash Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 54 12-07-2007 11:08 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:22 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