[Wheatfield]

you need to go to the black market and hope to find the lens you want.

Is it really that bad out there?

[Wheatfield]

Like I said many times you are entitled to whatever opinion you may want and anyway we have few hard facts to sort this debate out. But I feel some of your arguments are very weak and rather than spending all evening on this I guess it's better that we agree to disagree.

Radu

If you two are talking about the FA*200/4 Macro, I am one of the lucky owners. I came about this lens by absolute chance. I was at a photography clinic at Grandfather Mountain NC some years ago and was talking to a fellow Pentax user who had one. I was impressed by what I saw, and when I got home decided to see if they could still be gotten. Pentax Canada still listed it, so I was hopeful, but then disappointing, as they were no longer available.
But then, the phone call, telling me that one had been located. A Pentax rep in the USA (thank you if you are reading this) had one in his demo kit, and he was willing to let go of it. He sent it to Pentax Canada, who did a CLA on it and sent it on to my pusher.
Total cost to me was less than Can$2k
I figure I got one of the very last ones sold through a dealer in North America.

[Luin Gor]

Come on Pentax !!!

I wish I could buy modern versions of :

- 24mm / f2,
- 400mm / f5.6
- and a pancake 50 / f1.7...

It's been soooo long since we did not have really good news on the lenses side...

[zapp]

Almost none of these lenses make sense in APS-C land - unless you think there are too many APS-C lenses or the new lenses shall accompany a fullframe camera.
All the A* lenses will probably not live up to the digital days and are not ready for implementation of AF.

"without much of an issue..." did YOU ever design a lens???

As long as APS-C is the PEntax format other lenses are really missing. A larger apeture wide angle to go along with the 55SDM. A large apeture tele lens. Converters. As well as many other individual wishes. Only three primes have SDM focussing - first you should update all existing DA flass to SDM... I don't think Pentax will listen unless they already have some additional news for us.

[Alizarine]

New lenses... what's the newest lens in the Pentax lineup? The DA Limiteds?

I haven't bought any third-party lenses yet but may have to, one day... the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 is a useful range, I wish Pentax had that, or at least a f/2.8 or DA* version of the 17-70.

Reviving the FA line or at least the FA* line is a good idea, but production-wise... I agree that it may not be as easy as it seems. True, Pentax backward compatibility is the best in terms of systems (vs. C/N) but looking forward to a bigger market would mean more people looking for more lenses, and I'm afraid that if the Pentax SLR user base balloons with the Ricoh boost those used lenses will have skyrocketing prices in no time. Aside from new products they'd have to meet with increasing demand too...

[Fontan]

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?

Not so sure why they want to spend their dough in FF compatible lenses. They don't have FF camera, and I doubt they will have FF dslr in the near future. The next dslr will be aps-c. Their next lens will probably be DA ltds.

If they want to go FF mirrorless, it is a no brainier that they will have a new mount for this. So, D FA set up doesn't quite add up for me. I think that they thought seriously about FF dslr not too long ago. I wouldn't be surprised if K-5 at one point had a chance to go with FF, only to end up with again aps-c. I speculate this because they came out with DFA 100 macro WR, but no DFA since.

[ihasa]

Almost none of these lenses make sense in APS-C land - unless you think there are too many APS-C lenses or the new lenses shall accompany a fullframe camera.
All the A* lenses will probably not live up to the digital days and are not ready for implementation of AF.

"without much of an issue..." did YOU ever design a lens???

A lot of people are using these lenses on digital already. The last lens Pentax introduced WAS full frame, and was a straight rehash of the FA35. All they did was limit the aperture slightly to reduce PF. That wouldn't be necessary on many FA lenses.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

4. although I take your point about ELD lenses, how many of us use old lenses without much problem on digital. But I get your point.

My SMC 135/3.5 has a lot of CA and I bet this is about the same with the 135/2.5 as well. It's not necessarily a design flaw as much as it was a not so important part back then but the results show.

+1. Old lenses can be used without problems only after you find all their problems and you figure out how to avoid them. Exceptions are few. CZJ/Russian lenses are the most reliable old lenses that I found and they still have limitations (flare mostly). Japanese ones have all had significant CA issues. I cannot simply pick an old lens and use it, I have to remember what it can be used for and what situations I should avoid.

[Asahiflex]

+1. Old lenses can be used without problems only after you find all their problems and you figure out how to avoid them. Exceptions are few. CZJ/Russian lenses are the most reliable old lenses that I found and they still have limitations (flare mostly). Japanese ones have all had significant CA issues. I cannot simply pick an old lens and use it, I have to remember what it can be used for and what situations I should avoid.

Are you sure? I use old MF lenses on almost a daily basis, and CA issues are few and far between... My S-M-C Takumar 135mm f/2.5 is definitely not a CA machine, I really like it. Of course, there IS some CA present but only if you pixel peep. It's never very prominent though. The worst lenses in that regard that I owned were the Komura 85/1.4 and SMC Pentax-M 85mm f/2.

The 135/2.5 on full frame (5D):

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


8.



On my K-7:

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.


8.


9.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

Are you sure?

Yes.

I use old MF lenses on almost a daily basis, and CA issues are few and far between... My S-M-C Takumar 135mm f/2.5 is definitely not a CA machine, I really like it. Of course, there IS some CA present but only if you pixel peep. It's never very prominent though. The worst lenses in that regard that I owned were the Komura 85/1.4 and SMC Pentax-M 85mm f/2.

It might depend on what you shoot. Even your small samples show some CA - for example, in #5, green LoCA is clearly visible on the top of the tree against the sky.

For people, flowers, and low light, I find that old lenses work pretty well. But for insects, birds, or other things with complex surfaces or sharp edges, I run into issues very easily. And at closeup distances, CAs can ruin shots. 50mm lenses are probably the most reliable, although even they lose some contrast outdoors compared to their results indoors. Many of these issues may not be noticeable at the size at which you shared your images, but I expect my shots to hold up to closer scrutiny. How close? As close as possible - I had to provide you with this sample if you mentioned peeping .

I like my old lenses too, but I learned their limitations.

The 135/2.5 on full frame (5D):

You may get the best out of these lenses on full-frame, but APS-C cameras are really blowing out a piece of their image circle and can expose CA much more clearly than on FF - you can actually think of APS-C sensors as doing the pixel peeping automatically for you.

[bobmaxja]

Hey , that very interesthing photo with that Takumar 135 f2.5 . I have one that I am trying to sell locally. I thing you change my mind. I will try it tomorrow with my K-5

[Na Horuk]

Hey, Im a rather new member on this forum. But here is what I think about the lenses.

I would like the lenses to feature all the stuff that lenses used to. By that I mean distance scales, more aperture blades, things like that. If that is not possible, at least the camera body should allow automatic hyperfocal focusing, zone focusing, and a focus limiter for certain lenses (considering we dont have the option to do that manually). I also hope they stick to Optical Viewfinders. I would also like to see a wide angle lens with a very wide aperture, I think a lot of people would like a lens like that for indoor shooting (something like a 24mm f/1.2).

Basically, I don't like some of the trends I am seeing, like EVF's, poor bokeh, poor focusing options.. and this isn't even a Pentax thing, seems all brands are going down that route a hundred miles per hour, with only a couple offering expensive options to get slightly better quality equipment. I have a Pentax DSLR and love it, its the best in its price-range! I just wish I had a couple more options and Pentax used to be known for making high quality and versitale equipment accessible to everyone, for filling in the gaps and competing with the better-known companies, rather than just following expected consumer trends.

Thanks for reading.

[Alizarine]

I would also like to see a wide angle lens with a very wide aperture, I think a lot of people would like a lens like that for indoor shooting (something like a 24mm f/1.2).

Could be possible but that would be a really huge lens. Though the features you mentioned could be useful these days, sounds good to me too

[Fontan]

Let us say for the sake of argument that one gets minor CA. Is that so bad?

[eddie1960]

Could be possible but that would be a really huge lens. Though the features you mentioned could be useful these days, sounds good to me too

not that big but 1.4 should be enough
Nikon has the 24 14 it's 618 grams (and around 2 grand )