Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-05-2012, 01:17 PM   #76
Veteran Member
disconnekt's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 504
I'd like to see them update their 17-70 f4 lens & replace it with a 16-70 f2.8 lens.

03-05-2012, 03:59 PM   #77
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
And send a deposit. "Hello PRIC, I want a xxx/yy lens and I'm willing to pay US$2k and here's my US$555 deposit, let me know when it's ready, OK?" A few thousand of those, and they'll get moving on it, eh?
Love this!
03-05-2012, 07:45 PM   #78
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
QuoteOriginally posted by disconnekt Quote
I'd like to see them update their 17-70 f4 lens & replace it with a 16-70 f2.8 lens.
There's a DA* lens on the roadmap covering this range (a bit further even). It's probably a 2.8 constant.
03-06-2012, 07:40 AM   #79
Veteran Member
eurostar's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albareto, Italy
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 816
I guess it's a F4, if it would be a f/2,8 it would cost 2500$ at the least...

03-06-2012, 07:54 AM   #80
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by eurostar Quote
I guess it's a F4, if it would be a f/2,8 it would cost 2500$ at the least...
It's a DA* not an FA*, since the 16-50 is under a grand i would guess this is more like 1200-1300 @ 2.8. at f4 i would expect it to fall a little below the 16-50 price
equivalent FF lenses would be the f4 lenses - canon 24-105 f4 is 1350 with built in IS a feature Pentax doesn't need and can save cost on
a 16-70 f2.8 is the apsc equivalent and should cost about the same to produce
03-06-2012, 11:49 AM   #81
Veteran Member
RXrenesis8's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Orlando, FL (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 523
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
a 16-70 f2.8 is the apsc equivalent and should cost about the same to produce
A 16-70 f/2.8 for a camera with a flange focal distance around 40mm would be either a revolution in optics unmatched by anyone in the world, or prohibitively large and expensive. It's not going to happen.
03-06-2012, 12:23 PM   #82
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by RXrenesis8 Quote
A 16-70 f/2.8 for a camera with a flange focal distance around 40mm would be either a revolution in optics unmatched by anyone in the world, or prohibitively large and expensive. It's not going to happen.
Sigma makes a variable zoom 17-70 that starts at 2.8-4 for cheap. making it a fixed requires a bigger front element. in fact the same front element size as the f 4 105 on FF
It is not that it requires a revolution in optics, it's that the other guys only build to that level for FF. Pentax not having FF can take advantage of the smaller image circle required to build the lens at a faster aperture (which is the same as an f4.0 lens on FF after all - exposure being the difference but other performance the same
03-16-2012, 06:53 AM   #83
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,039
Pentax makes APS-C cameras today - no film cameras. At least I assume they are still making cameras...

Kick out the old FA glass form the PEntax profile, provide more DA(*) glass. Add new designs, do not rely on outdated old fashioned and poitnless designs not optimized for APS-C unless you want to bring out a FF camera. Do not stick to 35mm days' focal lengths, but please add a couple high profile lenses. A redesigned large aperture wide angle lens. Some really fast tele lenses. A mainsream 2/135 or seomthing more delightful like a 2/200 or a 2.8/300 - and do not forget some TCs to go along with that.

03-16-2012, 07:01 AM   #84
Veteran Member
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,546
QuoteOriginally posted by zapp Quote
Pentax makes APS-C cameras today - no film cameras. At least I assume they are still making cameras...

Kick out the old FA glass form the PEntax profile, provide more DA(*) glass. Add new designs, do not rely on outdated old fashioned and poitnless designs not optimized for APS-C unless you want to bring out a FF camera. Do not stick to 35mm days' focal lengths, but please add a couple high profile lenses. A redesigned large aperture wide angle lens. Some really fast tele lenses. A mainsream 2/135 or seomthing more delightful like a 2/200 or a 2.8/300 - and do not forget some TCs to go along with that.
Sounds like you have a large list of things to do for Santa. It would be nice though, I have to agree.
03-16-2012, 07:16 AM   #85
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
QuoteOriginally posted by zapp Quote
Some really fast tele lenses. A mainsream 2/135 or seomthing more delightful like a 2/200 or a 2.8/300 - and do not forget some TCs to go along with that.
Well I also would like a DA*400mm/f4 (or f4.5, frontglas goes down from 100mm (f4) to 90mm (f4.5) making it much cheaper). A longer fast zoom DA*135-270mm/f2.8 would be great.

Looking at the new telelens 560mm/f5.6 with frontglas of probably 100mm, then this could be a new max frontglas, for wich some filters could be made. So 200mm/f2 (very expensive and low demand) uses that also as is 400mm/f4 and 135-270mm/f2.8.
03-16-2012, 08:03 AM   #86
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,148
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well I also would like a DA*400mm/f4 (or f4.5, frontglas goes down from 100mm (f4) to 90mm (f4.5) making it much cheaper). A longer fast zoom DA*135-270mm/f2.8 would be great..

Apart from the fact that no one would buy the latter as it would weight 2.5kg and cost $7000. And what need do you have for such a speed with its size/weight and cost penalties with todays ISO capabilities?
03-16-2012, 08:17 AM   #87
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
Apart from the fact that no one would buy the latter as it would weight 2.5kg and cost $7000. And what need do you have for such a speed with its size/weight and cost penalties with todays ISO capabilities?
I don't think a DA*135-270mm/f2.8 would be that enourmous. Maybe a little over 2 kg since the design of just a 2x zoom makes it smaller. I also don't think it would be that expensive, since I expect it twice the price of DA*60-250mm/f4.

So no new version of FA*80-200mm/f2.8 but completing the lensline of DA*zooms. At the bottomside it could need a DA*11-16mm/f2.8 completing the lensline from 11-270mm containing max aperture of f2.8. The combo of 4 lenses (11-16, 16-50, 50-135 and 135-270mm) would make a great pro-set.

Of course this would be a great lens for sports. This is probably also a good alternative to a prime DA*300mm/f2.8 since it is only 10 % shorter, but more versatile offering the 2x zoom. Combined with a 1,4x TC (189-378mm/f4) for sports and nature and with a 2x TC (270-540mm/f5.6) this would make a great lens for nature and birding.

On the other hand a different design of such a lens with a frontglass of 77mm would end up as 125-250mm/f2.8. Cheaper and less weight, but more traitoff to a real 300mm/f2.8.
03-16-2012, 08:21 AM   #88
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Prince George, BC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,342
@nanok - The Lensfun project and many of the raw developer applications which use it for image correction data will gladly accept user-determined lens corrections to its database. See here:

Adding new lenses to the database

Jack
03-16-2012, 08:24 AM   #89
Site Supporter
Douglas_of_Sweden's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockholm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,353
Just put back the FA135 and FA*200 macro in production as DFA 135mm f2.8 and DFA*200mm f4 macro 1:1 and I'd be happy. Well, I wouldn't mind a DFA*85 f1.4 either based on the FA*85.

Weather proving a wide angle, maybe even the DA14mm would also be clever, and then the DA limited serie is yet incomplete, we need one longer lens above the DA70ltd. A DA90ltd based on the very compact M85/2.0 aka super takumar 85/1.9 lens solution would be a good solution.
03-16-2012, 09:14 AM   #90
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
I don't think a DA*135-270mm/f2.8 would be that enourmous. Maybe a little over 2 kg since the design of just a 2x zoom makes it smaller. I also don't think it would be that expensive, since I expect it twice the price of DA*60-250mm/f4.

So no new version of FA*80-200mm/f2.8 but completing the lensline of DA*zooms. At the bottomside it could need a DA*11-16mm/f2.8 completing the lensline from 11-270mm containing max aperture of f2.8. The combo of 4 lenses (11-16, 16-50, 50-135 and 135-270mm) would make a great pro-set.

Of course this would be a great lens for sports. This is probably also a good alternative to a prime DA*300mm/f2.8 since it is only 10 % shorter, but more versatile offering the 2x zoom. Combined with a 1,4x TC (189-378mm/f4) for sports and nature and with a 2x TC (270-540mm/f5.6) this would make a great lens for nature and birding.

On the other hand a different design of such a lens with a frontglass of 77mm would end up as 125-250mm/f2.8. Cheaper and less weight, but more traitoff to a real 300mm/f2.8.
Well Sigma has managed to produce a 120-300 2.8 that is both weather sealed and has OS built in for $3200 give or take (which is still pending inpk mount despite the mount being announced a year back in the press release)

weight is 2.95kg and fron filter size is 105mm

MSRP is 4700 but bh sells the canon for 3200, and has the pk listed now at the same price but with the notify when available button only no pre order so who knows when it will be out

an 11-16 f2.8 could cost a bloody bomb certainly depending on build and whether it covered a FF circle. the apsc Tokina is 699, but build quality is no DA* but acceptable
the Nikon 14-24 g 2.8 is built as good or better than the best DA* lenses and covers ff - it sells for $2000

on a side note i sent a contact request to Sigma to see if the 3 lenses BH listed are actually going to come or if they have cancelled them (12-24,150macro,120-300)
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 05:46 AM. | 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