[asdf]

Err, our friends remark in this thread, then another post in this thread, a few posts in the other forum and a few emails I received privately from people who have bought it.

There are many reports of UFOs, ghosts and Nessie, also. I should have asked for negative reviews done by competent photographers, not Internet doofuses.

EDIT: Also, your "friend" here never used the lens in question. He believed the incompetent review on digitalcamerareviews.com and ranted about it on his blog.

EDIT2:

Ofcourse it's range and constant f4 make it very usefull and therefore desirable.

Your response makes no sense, given what I posted.

---

Last edited by asdf; 04-28-2009 at 03:28 AM.

[filorp]

Someone tried to compare 17-70 to 24-105L.... Did you ever guys compare 17-70 & k20d with 24-105 attached to FF?

[janneman]

There are many reports of UFOs, ghosts and Nessie, also. I should have asked for negative reviews done by competent photographers, not Internet doofuses.

I politely request you to apologise to a few people whom I had messages from...
They are NOT doofuses, in fact they are quite knowledgeable. What is more, at least two of them are true Pentax "fanboys" eager to defend Pentax whenever possible.

[asdf]

I politely request you to apologise to a few people whom I had messages from...

Give me their names and home addresses: I'm already tirelessly writing a lengthy retraction of my callous characterization.

[Prognathous]

I am sorry to dissapoint you Rice, but I am quite sure it was me... I have been annoying the people of that other forum about Pentax needing more sealed lenses :-)

Actually, I think it was me

- Re: Why only DA* weather sealed lenses?: News Discussion Forum: Digital Photography Review
- Weather seals strategy of Olympus and Pentax: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Prog.

[RiceHigh]

Actually, I think it was me

- Re: Why only DA* weather sealed lenses?: News Discussion Forum: Digital Photography Review
- Weather seals strategy of Olympus and Pentax: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Prog.

So, Pentax/Hoya have listened to all of us, then!

[jeffkrol]

So, Pentax/Hoya have listened to all of us, then!

Pretty sure it was just common sense (or marketing sense) from Hoya/Pentax... Please calm down and stop taking yourself so seriously. It's embarrasing...
and for a company to pay attention to it's customers is a bit common (first they use words, then money), though some are a bit slow on the uptake, as in the Canon spotmeter....

[farfisa]

Don't disappoint us!

Yes, I will.

That was awesome.

[thibs]

That was awesome.

Indeed

[gazonk]

Pretty sure it was just common sense (or marketing sense) from Hoya/Pentax...

I think they've learned from the K200D. The K200D's strongest selling point compared to the competition was its weather resistance, but that would have made more sense to first time users if they got a WR lens to begin with. So the K200D ended up being a little larger and heavier than some of its competitors without any real advantage.

I hope they will sell the new lens separately for a reasonable price, then I think I'll buy it for my K10D, then. I bought my K10D with the 16-45, but for walking around/biking/skiing a lighter lens which could stand some rain would really be great.

[jeffkrol]

I think they've learned from the K200D. The K200D's strongest selling point compared to the competition was its weather resistance, but that would have made more sense to first time users if they got a WR lens to begin with. So the K200D ended up being a little larger and heavier than some of its competitors without any real advantage.

I hope they will sell the new lens separately for a reasonable price, then I think I'll buy it for my K10D, then. I bought my K10D with the 16-45, but for walking around/biking/skiing a lighter lens which could stand some rain would really be great.

Funny thing. They made expensive weather sealed lenses.. the 16-50 f2.8 being the kit equivalent. Obviously Pentax needed a cheap weather sealed lens.. funny
A $900 lens vs a $100-$200 dollar lens... but they should be the same?
Let's face it WE (yes as in I) are just cheap!!!!

[gazonk]

Funny thing. They made expensive weather sealed lenses.. the 16-50 f2.8 being the kit equivalent. Obviously Pentax needed a cheap weather sealed lens.. funny
A $900 lens vs a $100-$200 dollar lens... but they should be the same?
Let's face it WE (yes as in I) are just cheap!!!!

Well, regardless of its price and not considering its Q&A issues and somewhat underwhelming performance wide open, I don't think the 16-50 is that attractive for outdoor use, I already think the 16-45 is a bit too bulky and heavy.

[whatever7]

If this is true then this is DUMB.

Why would anyone spend $1500 on a camera body willing to put up with the IQ of the kit lens? Its image circle doesn't even cover APS-C properly.

OK beside the two hours you give the K-7 to you family to shoot then it make sense to put the "WR" kit lens on it.

Why not make a 17-70mm II and add weather seal to it. Its seals are already better than other non-* lenses,

[HermanLee]

Don't disappoint us!

:-)
Yes, I will.

That was awesome.

Ok, RH need clarification here:
are you saying: "Yes, I will disappoint you."
OR
"No, I will not disappoint you."

Here in US if you said "Yes, I will." when somebody said "Don't disappoint us!" means that you will disappoint us.
Maybe it's different over there in HK

[Torphoto]

Actually it makes sense that a reworked 18-55 with seals is the new kit lens, especially if they improve on the optics a bit as well. Tho 90% of us on the forum will opt for body only a cheap kit lens isn't just for the K-7 but all other sealed dslrs present and future and finally we will have a fully sealed system with out having to spend for DA* glass.