Is there a DA* 30mm/1.0 in the works?

Torphoto · 05-16-2009, 02:03 PM

OK guys, for the last time, THERE IS NO 30mm F1.0 lens!!!!

There will be a 30mm F1.4 :P

Bophoto · 05-16-2009, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

I agree with this but why then does the display show F:1.0? If photoshopped, why? If theres something that can be done with a prototype, why?
Anyway, a fast standard lens is missing form the Pentax lineup. My guess is that the coming 30mm is such a lens with speed of at least 1.4 to make much sense. The 31/1.8 doesn't really count; it is not a DA lens, it is not weather sealed, does not have SDM and generally doesn't fit in. I suspect it won't be in production for much longer.

I think it´s possible with a f1 lens, but the picture of f1 on the display can be a
prototype lens of 55mm f1.
Pentax can make simple prototypes of 55mm or 30mm with f1, just to see how big it is and see how it works on K20/K7, perhaps how difficult it is to make it sharp too.
Before they decided that DA*55/1,4 was best for the market. And Pentax also want to have a opinion about such a lens from testphotographers too. These testers are not permitted to take a photo of the lens but of the display that show f1...

falconeye · 05-16-2009, 04:15 PM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

but that doesn't explain why it goes to F:1.0 if such lenses indeed are impossible...

Why shouldn't the scale go from 0.1 to 99.9? Everything else is artificially limited. You would have to dial in the aperture for a full manual lens, so why limit it?

So, the interesting question is not, if there is a new f/1.0 lens coming (there is not, of course). As somebody said, f/0.95, f/1.0, f/1.2 lenses are from the days where film needed them.

So, the interesting question is:

Why does Pentax allow to dial in a fully manual aperture? Is the K-7 now able to use this aperture, maybe in its new mode of metering?

falconeye · 05-16-2009, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by jay

Yeah, but that's full-frame. An APS-C-specific lens would have a proportionally smaller exit pupil.

Not much smaller. You're right, exit pupil is a function of aperture and image circle. But at a focal length of 50mm and 46mm registration distance, the image circle would play a much smaller role than the aperture. So, smaller yes. But not proportionally smaller. I guess a 50/1.1 lens would be possible for K mount APS-C.

ajuett · 05-16-2009, 04:21 PM

Originally posted by falconeye

So, the interesting question is:

Why does Pentax allow to dial in a fully manual aperture? Is the K-7 now able to use this aperture, maybe in its new mode of metering?

Maybe it's like digital ISO, software driven Apertures! The Horror! ;-)

jeffkrol · 05-16-2009, 04:25 PM

Originally posted by nixcamic

It also transmits MTF data on FA series and newer lenses, aperture is still controlled by the 6 other pins, try covering them with some tape

Also, in this modern price cutting age, why would they include those 6 other pins if they sent the aperture data over the 1 serial pin? (one does wonder why they don't send it that way)

Right in this modern price conscious age why have them at all? ONLY logical reason is for cameras w/ no serial com port or those that have no idea what to do w/ the data...
BTW: I tentatively agree that they are still needed for something. Personally that just shows an engineering/programming failure.
One thing, if I remember correctly, there is a Pentax lens or 2 that do not fit the LUT well and of course there is the changing aperture zoom thing,

**Pål Jensen** · 05-16-2009, 04:28 PM

Originally posted by falconeye

Why does Pentax allow to dial in a fully manual aperture? Is the K-7 now able to use this aperture, maybe in its new mode of metering?

You mean like "artificial" DOF mimicing the effect of F:1.0?

falconeye · 05-16-2009, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

You mean like "artificial" DOF mimicing the effect of F:1.0?

No, I speculate we are all thinking too contortedly ...

One of the most stupid explainations would be that you now can dial in f-stop so it shows up in EXIFs ...

**Digitalis** · 05-16-2009, 06:49 PM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

Have you seen the exit pupil of the A 50/1.2? It fill the whole lens mount!

actually it doesn't. and besides I got a cinematographer to measure the actual f-stop of my 50mm f/1.2 and it turns out in terms of f stops it's actually more like f/1.18 - so it wouldn't take much effort to get it down to f/1.0 - the exit pupil has an extra 4mm of diameter before it's up against the lens mount and there is still room for the aperture lever.

Exhibit A:

jay · 05-16-2009, 07:21 PM

Originally posted by jeffkrol

Right in this modern price conscious age why have them at all? ONLY logical reason is for cameras w/ no serial com port or those that have no idea what to do w/ the data...
BTW: I tentatively agree that they are still needed for something. Personally that just shows an engineering/programming failure.
One thing, if I remember correctly, there is a Pentax lens or 2 that do not fit the LUT well and of course there is the changing aperture zoom thing,

Why change something if it's not broken? Sticking six metal contacts a lens in different patterns to identify the max aperture of a lens seems like a perfectly decent idea -- especially since it maintains forward and backward compatibility with existing lenses. And it's a lot more rugged than a serial digital interface.

And, it's not keeping them from designing this mystical lens. Recall -- as I said earlier -- there are two UNUSED patterns. So if they introduced a 30/1.0 lens, they'd be able to implement it in the K-7; and I'm guessing older cameras could be updated with new firmware to support it.

And they wouldn't have to change the electro-mechanical spec.

And, everyone knows I'm a fan of APS-C + fast glass vs. full-frame + traditional glass.

So, here's hoping for some new designs!

lesmore49 · 05-16-2009, 07:58 PM

Don't know if anyone else has posted...but the Canon 1.0 is nothing...the Leica Noctilux F .95 is the fastest available lens I know of.

Leica Camera AG - Photography - NEW: LEICA NOCTILUX-M 50 mm f/0.95 ASPH.

I think a lens with 1.0 or less f stop is not really necessary unless someone's looking for bragging rights. I would say F 1.2 or F 1.4 is fast enough, especially considering how easy it is to change ISO now in 'mid-roll'

as it were.

The price alone , especially of the Leitz f.95 is astronomical ...you could probably buy a very good system for the price of one lens.

I don't think a 30 mm F1.0 would be my first lens need....how about a new Pentax 400-500 mm F 5.6....

I have an old Leica Rangefinder...wonderful camera and wonderful lens...but even so, I'm still a Pentaxian. Kind of like Ned B.....you can be a Pentaxian, but also love Leica Cameras.

lesmore49 · 05-16-2009, 08:03 PM

Originally posted by jeffkpotter

My secret sources tell me that this lens is indeed in the works!

(I think the K-7 rumor mill has officially gotten way out of hand.)

Finally someone with an actual picture of the Pentax K7 !!

jeffkrol · 05-16-2009, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by jay

Why change something if it's not broken? Sticking six metal contacts a lens in different patterns to identify the max aperture of a lens seems like a perfectly decent idea -- especially since it maintains forward and backward compatibility with existing lenses. And it's a lot more rugged than a serial digital interface.

And, it's not keeping them from designing this mystical lens. Recall -- as I said earlier -- there are two UNUSED patterns. So if they introduced a 30/1.0 lens, they'd be able to implement it in the K-7; and I'm guessing older cameras could be updated with new firmware to support it.

And they wouldn't have to change the electro-mechanical spec.

And, everyone knows I'm a fan of APS-C + fast glass vs. full-frame + traditional glass.

So, here's hoping for some new designs!

from the D on (in my mind) it would have taken only a few bytes to code the min/max/ in the on lens chip. only a few lines of code to query the chip, check for the data, and use it. If no data, check contacts, if not there, full manual. Piece of cake.
Yes you could still have contacts for "old" cameras" but the current cameras could easily do without it.
what your missing in what I said is that it could be a fall back of sorts. 2 ways of doing the same thing..

Problem was under powered digital communications.
The D has the ability to get the f stop of max MTF off the lens. Some of the other digital models do as well.. oddly some don't....
Pentax used (and still may do) to plan things 2 generations ahead...
There is more than it seems in those lens chips but for some reason it is not exploited as of yet fully it SEEMS... I may be wrong.
I usually like the way they do things but some stuff just seems odd...
Most of my criticism is just my inability to fathom what they were thinking.
BTW: As noted, the table is limited and even during the super program days, you needed workarounds w/ some lenses (notably TC's and Tamron Adaptall II's)
It was a good, though not perfect, system at the time but it really has outlived it's usefulness... It is going to be harder and harder for Pentax to compete AND keep the backward compatibility thing. I believe they realize this as well...

Ratmagiclady · 05-16-2009, 08:51 PM

Originally posted by jeffkrol

It was a good, though not perfect, system at the time but it really has outlived it's usefulness... It is going to be harder and harder for Pentax to compete AND keep the backward compatibility thing. I believe they realize this as well...

Actually, I'm just not seeing the difficulty, there. They've already 'crippled' the mount as regards metering with M-lenses, the rest is just electronics. I know some people critique camera systems as if a whole current lens line, and nothing but, just drops out of the sky, but that's not how it works. In fact, there's nothing about the K-mount that needs changing at this point: if they want some kind of new tech about it, they can just stick a plug in it of whatever new type and be good to go. No need to go out of their way to make bodies incompatible.

jeffkrol · 05-16-2009, 09:29 PM

Originally posted by Ratmagiclady

Actually, I'm just not seeing the difficulty, there. They've already 'crippled' the mount as regards metering with M-lenses, the rest is just electronics. I know some people critique camera systems as if a whole current lens line, and nothing but, just drops out of the sky, but that's not how it works. In fact, there's nothing about the K-mount that needs changing at this point: if they want some kind of new tech about it, they can just stick a plug in it of whatever new type and be good to go. No need to go out of their way to make bodies incompatible.

Hmmm... My only real point was the new bodies shouldn't have to rely solely on the old tech contacts. Keep both in fine, but min/max aperture could be easily coded into the chip (as is MTF, sliding f ratio ect.)..... there is no "hurdle" here to do that...
aperture ring less lenses are already unusable (except wide open) on old bodies.
USM only are another example since all the old digital bodies don't have the power coupling. Pentax is see/ sawing on the tech...
Crippled K mount, crippled aperture ring, crippled viewfinder metering for non-a lenses, crippled AF lenses.....
It's a tough spot and I applaud their efforts but.....

05-16-2009, 06:49 PM	#99
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by Pål Jensen Have you seen the exit pupil of the A 50/1.2? It fill the whole lens mount! actually it doesn't. and besides I got a cinematographer to measure the actual f-stop of my 50mm f/1.2 and it turns out in terms of f stops it's actually more like f/1.18 - so it wouldn't take much effort to get it down to f/1.0 - the exit pupil has an extra 4mm of diameter before it's up against the lens mount and there is still room for the aperture lever. Exhibit A: Last edited by Digitalis; 09-24-2009 at 01:47 AM.

05-16-2009, 07:58 PM	#101
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,344	Don't know if anyone else has posted...but the Canon 1.0 is nothing...the Leica Noctilux F .95 is the fastest available lens I know of. Leica Camera AG - Photography - NEW: LEICA NOCTILUX-M 50 mm f/0.95 ASPH. I think a lens with 1.0 or less f stop is not really necessary unless someone's looking for bragging rights. I would say F 1.2 or F 1.4 is fast enough, especially considering how easy it is to change ISO now in 'mid-roll' as it were. The price alone , especially of the Leitz f.95 is astronomical ...you could probably buy a very good system for the price of one lens. I don't think a 30 mm F1.0 would be my first lens need....how about a new Pentax 400-500 mm F 5.6.... I have an old Leica Rangefinder...wonderful camera and wonderful lens...but even so, I'm still a Pentaxian. Kind of like Ned B.....you can be a Pentaxian, but also love Leica Cameras. Last edited by lesmore49; 05-16-2009 at 08:06 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Architecture Wonder Works	Fl_Gulfer	Post Your Photos!	2	09-05-2010 01:58 PM
How AF works	wlachan	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	1	08-22-2010 10:09 PM
28 M works well?	Fonnyboy	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	04-07-2008 12:49 AM
sigma 30mm vs. pentax 30mm	jay legere	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	02-01-2008 04:15 PM
As Works!	almo	Post Your Photos!	1	01-18-2008 06:42 AM

05-16-2009, 02:03 PM	#91
Torphoto Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Trinidad W.I. Photos: Gallery Posts: 612	OK guys, for the last time, THERE IS NO 30mm F1.0 lens!!!! There will be a 30mm F1.4 :P

05-16-2009, 03:14 PM	#92
Bophoto Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 429	Originally posted by Pål Jensen I agree with this but why then does the display show F:1.0? If photoshopped, why? If theres something that can be done with a prototype, why? Anyway, a fast standard lens is missing form the Pentax lineup. My guess is that the coming 30mm is such a lens with speed of at least 1.4 to make much sense. The 31/1.8 doesn't really count; it is not a DA lens, it is not weather sealed, does not have SDM and generally doesn't fit in. I suspect it won't be in production for much longer. I think it´s possible with a f1 lens, but the picture of f1 on the display can be a prototype lens of 55mm f1. Pentax can make simple prototypes of 55mm or 30mm with f1, just to see how big it is and see how it works on K20/K7, perhaps how difficult it is to make it sharp too. Before they decided that DA*55/1,4 was best for the market. And Pentax also want to have a opinion about such a lens from testphotographers too. These testers are not permitted to take a photo of the lens but of the display that show f1...

05-16-2009, 04:15 PM	#93
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by Pål Jensen but that doesn't explain why it goes to F:1.0 if such lenses indeed are impossible... Why shouldn't the scale go from 0.1 to 99.9? Everything else is artificially limited. You would have to dial in the aperture for a full manual lens, so why limit it? So, the interesting question is not, if there is a new f/1.0 lens coming (there is not, of course). As somebody said, f/0.95, f/1.0, f/1.2 lenses are from the days where film needed them. So, the interesting question is: Why does Pentax allow to dial in a fully manual aperture? Is the K-7 now able to use this aperture, maybe in its new mode of metering?

05-16-2009, 04:19 PM	#94
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by jay Yeah, but that's full-frame. An APS-C-specific lens would have a proportionally smaller exit pupil. Not much smaller. You're right, exit pupil is a function of aperture and image circle. But at a focal length of 50mm and 46mm registration distance, the image circle would play a much smaller role than the aperture. So, smaller yes. But not proportionally smaller. I guess a 50/1.1 lens would be possible for K mount APS-C.

05-16-2009, 04:21 PM	#95
ajuett Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 1,100	Originally posted by falconeye So, the interesting question is: Why does Pentax allow to dial in a fully manual aperture? Is the K-7 now able to use this aperture, maybe in its new mode of metering? Maybe it's like digital ISO, software driven Apertures! The Horror! ;-)

05-16-2009, 04:25 PM	#96
jeffkrol Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Wisconsin USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,434	Originally posted by nixcamic It also transmits MTF data on FA series and newer lenses, aperture is still controlled by the 6 other pins, try covering them with some tape Also, in this modern price cutting age, why would they include those 6 other pins if they sent the aperture data over the 1 serial pin? (one does wonder why they don't send it that way) Right in this modern price conscious age why have them at all? ONLY logical reason is for cameras w/ no serial com port or those that have no idea what to do w/ the data... BTW: I tentatively agree that they are still needed for something. Personally that just shows an engineering/programming failure. One thing, if I remember correctly, there is a Pentax lens or 2 that do not fit the LUT well and of course there is the changing aperture zoom thing,

05-16-2009, 04:28 PM	#97
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371 Original Poster	Originally posted by falconeye Why does Pentax allow to dial in a fully manual aperture? Is the K-7 now able to use this aperture, maybe in its new mode of metering? You mean like "artificial" DOF mimicing the effect of F:1.0?

05-16-2009, 05:04 PM	#98
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by Pål Jensen You mean like "artificial" DOF mimicing the effect of F:1.0? No, I speculate we are all thinking too contortedly ... One of the most stupid explainations would be that you now can dial in f-stop so it shows up in EXIFs ...

05-16-2009, 07:21 PM	#100
jay Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA Posts: 65	Originally posted by jeffkrol Right in this modern price conscious age why have them at all? ONLY logical reason is for cameras w/ no serial com port or those that have no idea what to do w/ the data... BTW: I tentatively agree that they are still needed for something. Personally that just shows an engineering/programming failure. One thing, if I remember correctly, there is a Pentax lens or 2 that do not fit the LUT well and of course there is the changing aperture zoom thing, Why change something if it's not broken? Sticking six metal contacts a lens in different patterns to identify the max aperture of a lens seems like a perfectly decent idea -- especially since it maintains forward and backward compatibility with existing lenses. And it's a lot more rugged than a serial digital interface. And, it's not keeping them from designing this mystical lens. Recall -- as I said earlier -- there are two UNUSED patterns. So if they introduced a 30/1.0 lens, they'd be able to implement it in the K-7; and I'm guessing older cameras could be updated with new firmware to support it. And they wouldn't have to change the electro-mechanical spec. And, everyone knows I'm a fan of APS-C + fast glass vs. full-frame + traditional glass. So, here's hoping for some new designs!

05-16-2009, 08:03 PM	#102
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,344	Originally posted by jeffkpotter My secret sources tell me that this lens is indeed in the works! (I think the K-7 rumor mill has officially gotten way out of hand.) Finally someone with an actual picture of the Pentax K7 !!

05-16-2009, 08:09 PM	#103
jeffkrol Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Wisconsin USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,434	Originally posted by jay Why change something if it's not broken? Sticking six metal contacts a lens in different patterns to identify the max aperture of a lens seems like a perfectly decent idea -- especially since it maintains forward and backward compatibility with existing lenses. And it's a lot more rugged than a serial digital interface. And, it's not keeping them from designing this mystical lens. Recall -- as I said earlier -- there are two UNUSED patterns. So if they introduced a 30/1.0 lens, they'd be able to implement it in the K-7; and I'm guessing older cameras could be updated with new firmware to support it. And they wouldn't have to change the electro-mechanical spec. And, everyone knows I'm a fan of APS-C + fast glass vs. full-frame + traditional glass. So, here's hoping for some new designs! from the D on (in my mind) it would have taken only a few bytes to code the min/max/ in the on lens chip. only a few lines of code to query the chip, check for the data, and use it. If no data, check contacts, if not there, full manual. Piece of cake. Yes you could still have contacts for "old" cameras" but the current cameras could easily do without it. what your missing in what I said is that it could be a fall back of sorts. 2 ways of doing the same thing.. Problem was under powered digital communications. The D has the ability to get the f stop of max MTF off the lens. Some of the other digital models do as well.. oddly some don't.... Pentax used (and still may do) to plan things 2 generations ahead... There is more than it seems in those lens chips but for some reason it is not exploited as of yet fully it SEEMS... I may be wrong. I usually like the way they do things but some stuff just seems odd... Most of my criticism is just my inability to fathom what they were thinking. BTW: As noted, the table is limited and even during the super program days, you needed workarounds w/ some lenses (notably TC's and Tamron Adaptall II's) It was a good, though not perfect, system at the time but it really has outlived it's usefulness... It is going to be harder and harder for Pentax to compete AND keep the backward compatibility thing. I believe they realize this as well...

05-16-2009, 08:51 PM	#104
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Originally posted by jeffkrol It was a good, though not perfect, system at the time but it really has outlived it's usefulness... It is going to be harder and harder for Pentax to compete AND keep the backward compatibility thing. I believe they realize this as well... Actually, I'm just not seeing the difficulty, there. They've already 'crippled' the mount as regards metering with M-lenses, the rest is just electronics. I know some people critique camera systems as if a whole current lens line, and nothing but, just drops out of the sky, but that's not how it works. In fact, there's nothing about the K-mount that needs changing at this point: if they want some kind of new tech about it, they can just stick a plug in it of whatever new type and be good to go. No need to go out of their way to make bodies incompatible.

05-16-2009, 09:29 PM	#105
jeffkrol Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Wisconsin USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,434	Originally posted by Ratmagiclady Actually, I'm just not seeing the difficulty, there. They've already 'crippled' the mount as regards metering with M-lenses, the rest is just electronics. I know some people critique camera systems as if a whole current lens line, and nothing but, just drops out of the sky, but that's not how it works. In fact, there's nothing about the K-mount that needs changing at this point: if they want some kind of new tech about it, they can just stick a plug in it of whatever new type and be good to go. No need to go out of their way to make bodies incompatible. Hmmm... My only real point was the new bodies shouldn't have to rely solely on the old tech contacts. Keep both in fine, but min/max aperture could be easily coded into the chip (as is MTF, sliding f ratio ect.)..... there is no "hurdle" here to do that... aperture ring less lenses are already unusable (except wide open) on old bodies. USM only are another example since all the old digital bodies don't have the power coupling. Pentax is see/ sawing on the tech... Crippled K mount, crippled aperture ring, crippled viewfinder metering for non-a lenses, crippled AF lenses..... It's a tough spot and I applaud their efforts but.....