Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-26-2009, 10:21 PM   #196
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,218
I has only some doubts about DFA*50/1.0 SDM....
But other lenses could be real.

DA35/2.8 is LIMITED, but not pancake.
To make compact 135/2.8 in metal body is not a problem.
DA won't be big. Minolta had compact 135 mm lens.

05-27-2009, 12:42 AM   #197
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
I has only some doubts about DFA*50/1.0 SDM....
But other lenses could be real.
ogl, you are so easy to excite

As my girlfriend keeps saying: "There is no True in the False"
05-27-2009, 12:46 AM   #198
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,218
It seems to me that parts of new roadmap is not fake...
Ask me - WHY?
I answer - BECAUSE.
I had a dream.

I hope that DA135/2.8 will be announced this year. With new camera - September-October.

Last edited by ogl; 05-27-2009 at 12:54 AM.
05-27-2009, 03:23 AM   #199
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 908
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
It seems to me that parts of new roadmap is not fake...
Ask me - WHY?
I answer - BECAUSE.
I had a dream.

I hope that DA135/2.8 will be announced this year. With new camera - September-October.
Ofcourse parts of it are not fake, it does list current lenses

05-27-2009, 04:17 AM   #200
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by tinyt187 Quote
Agreed... they need to be able to attract the canikon FF userbase (prestige) to make the switch. In a down economic climate, even the NFL photogs might give Pentax a second thought if they can get quality gear for half the price with the 400mm... as long as they don't care about FPS ;-)
Maybe they can entice some with such a product, but I think a lot of those NFL sideline photographers don't own the lenses they shoot with. I believe those are owned by the media outlets they working for, or maybe loaners from Canon/Nikon professional services.

I wonder if Pentax still intends to push through with the pro service they said they're working on in the past. That would really go a long way towards earning some faith from the pros who, understandably, are reluctant to shoot with a system that doesn't offer them pro services.
05-27-2009, 06:07 AM   #201
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,139
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
I has only some doubts about DFA*50/1.0 SDM....
But other lenses could be real..
Disagree. The D-FA645 25/2.8 is even more unreal than the 50/1.0. They would probably cost the same and be equally difficult to design. However, it is possible to make a case for a 50/1.0; far more diffucult to make a case for the extra cost, size and weight of the 25/2.8 for a lens that will be mostly used for landscapes.
05-27-2009, 06:18 AM   #202
Veteran Member
GoldenWreckedAngle's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Abilene, TX
Posts: 341
QuoteOriginally posted by vinzer Quote
Maybe they can entice some with such a product, but I think a lot of those NFL sideline photographers don't own the lenses they shoot with. I believe those are owned by the media outlets they working for, or maybe loaners from Canon/Nikon professional services.

I wonder if Pentax still intends to push through with the pro service they said they're working on in the past. That would really go a long way towards earning some faith from the pros who, understandably, are reluctant to shoot with a system that doesn't offer them pro services.
I wonder that myself. I'm not yet earning 51% of my income from photography (one of the requirements) but if I'm still shooting Pentax when I do I'll be very interested in that program.
05-27-2009, 09:19 AM   #203
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,329
QuoteOriginally posted by RawheaD Quote
(a) as I've said elsewhere, I'm 99.9% positive that it is physically impossible to make an f1.0 lens for PK mount;
Care to explain why? I don't see the relationship between lens mount and diaphragm size - and the size is dependant on focal length. What am I missing (besides the $$$ to buy such a beast)?

05-27-2009, 12:09 PM   #204
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by OregonJim Quote
Care to explain why? I don't see the relationship between lens mount and diaphragm size - and the size is dependant on focal length. What am I missing (besides the $$$ to buy such a beast)?
RawheaD recently explained this here:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/598686-post107.html

The argument lacks some considerations for tele and retro-focus designs. But as it turns out, as long as a lens' entrance and exit pupil are the same, RawheaD's argument still holds true. So, I agreed to RawheaD's statement.

I am not aware of any SLR lens which has unequal entrance and exit pupils.
05-27-2009, 02:22 PM   #205
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Copenhagen
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,845
QuoteOriginally posted by RawheaD Quote
Yeah, I can confirm that.
That it's a fake :-D For obvious reasons; (a) as I've said elsewhere, I'm 99.9% positive that it is physically impossible to make an f1.0 lens for PK mount;
Fast lenses for K-mount are easy to make.
The prototype 20/1.4 is the fastest in its wide-angle segment :
K 20/1.4 AL

The 300/2 is an exceptional fast tele lens :
K 300/2

The 8.4/2.8 birds-eye; is a uniquely fast super wide :
K 8.4/2.8 Bird's-Eye

The 50/1.2 is not a super big lens, in the Pentax system. It should not be all that difficult to make a faster f/1 lens.
Likewise, the 85/1.4, and 135/1.8 are easy to produce in the K mount. And they function fine.


Here are some even faster lenses for Nikon :
Rodenstock TV-Heligon 50 mm f/0.75 lens.
Repro-Nikkor 85 mm f/1
Rodenstock TV-Heligon 42 mm f/0.75.
Kowa 55 mm f/0.8.
Rodenstock XR-Heligon 75 mm f/1.1
MATI 86 mm f/1.2

"So, at least as an alternative, other visual approaches might be explored, and while doing so technical trade-offs should be accepted. My preferred choice is shooting with fast lenses at wide aperture settings. In fact, the wider the better and don't let the f/1 barrier hold you back....

Remember f-numbers are specified for infinity focus. Moreover, due to the various optical designs, even greater variability is introduced. Thus, when the pupil magnification (p) is factored into the equation, some of the seeming blindingly fast lenses fade into the not-so-extreme category. However, any of these lenses still are much faster than a Micro-Nikkor set to an equal magnification.

The advertised large-aperture value of fast lenses is valid only for infinity focus and when they cover their designated image format. Step way outside these parameters and the effective aperture may be significantly reduced (as shown in the Table above)."

Rodenstocks : 64 mm f/1.25, 95 mm f/1.4 and 100 mm f/1.5 lenses.
Need for Speed: Very Large Aperture Lenses


Some of these, could likely be used on Pentax as well.

And the Canon 50/1 lens, was 985 grams. 8,1 cm length, with USM.

A K-mount 50/1 lens would not be difficult to make. But they need to look at production cost, compared to how many would buy. I would much prefer that the 20/1.4 went into production instead. But some might like the large aperture 50/1, when used on crop cam.
And the variaty of special primes, are what set Pentax aside from other brands.

Last edited by Jonson PL; 05-30-2009 at 04:31 PM.
05-27-2009, 03:27 PM   #206
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Jonson PL Quote
The 50/1.2 is not a super big lens, in the Pentax system. It should not be all that difficult to make a faster f/1 lens.
You really should go back one post and read the post by RawheaD I had linked there.
05-27-2009, 03:45 PM   #207
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 5
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
RawheaD recently explained this here:

I am not aware of any SLR lens which has unequal entrance and exit pupils.
Hello, usually I dont' post because of my pooor english.
I'm curious about the statement above, perhaps I dont' understand
correctly, but isn't entrance pupil of 200/2.8=about71mm?
And so for 300/2.8=107mm, 85/1.4=60.7mm.
I haven't seen exit pupil of these lenses, but I think that it's of
smaller diameter than entrance pupil.
Or have I made wrong assumptions on what are entrance and exit
pupils?
05-28-2009, 10:57 AM   #208
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by muvideo Quote
Or have I made wrong assumptions on what are entrance and exit pupils?
The topic about entrance and exit pupils isn't very intuitive. Still, it is key to a proper understanding of optics. E.g., entrance and exit pupils not only have an aperture, they have a position along the optical axis too. And this position may be entirely outside of a lens ...

The entrance pupil determines the point of parallax-free rotaton (yes, it is NOT the nodal point!) and f-stop, the exit pupil determines DoF.

The ratio P = exit pupil diameter / entrance pupil diameter is called pupil magnification. So-called symmetrical lenses are defined by P=1.

As a matter of fact, a symmetrical lens with f/1.0 is impossible for the PK-mount. Period.

(Of course, asymmetrical lenses do exist (but are rare). The argument by RawheaD applies to symmetrical lenses.)

A good starting point for further reading isAddendum:
I found this statement:
QuoteQuote:
Wide angle lenses frequently have P>1
Such a lens has an exit pupil larger than the entrance pupil and therefore, possible apertures are even smaller.

An f/1.0 lens for PK mount would require P<1 and I don't know if such lenses do exist at all.

Last edited by falconeye; 05-28-2009 at 11:06 AM.
05-28-2009, 11:39 AM   #209
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 5
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
The topic about entrance and exit pupils isn't very intuitive.

...

An f/1.0 lens for PK mount would require P<1 and I don't know if such lenses do exist at all.
Thank you for explanation.
Fabio.
05-28-2009, 08:33 PM   #210
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,218
QuoteOriginally posted by Jonson PL Quote
Fast lenses for K-mount are easy to make.



Here are some even faster lenses for Nikon :
Rodenstock TV-Heligon 50 mm f/0.75 lens.
Repro-Nikkor 85 mm f/1
Rodenstock TV-Heligon 42 mm f/0.75.
Kowa 55 mm f/0.8.
Rodenstock XR-Heligon 75 mm f/1.1
MATI 86 mm f/1.2
Good post
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!
pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another SDM Failure - 16-50mm f/2.8 Donkeypunch Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 40 12-05-2011 05:09 PM
Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC with OS (~SDM) bc_the_path Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 10-12-2010 01:40 AM
DA 17-70mm SDM vs DA* 16-50mm SDM? shang Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 07-02-2010 06:09 AM
DA*16-50mm F2.8ED Al SDM john mood Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 12-17-2009 07:30 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:47 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