D-FA 50mm f/1.0 SDM

opiszon · 05-25-2009, 08:43 AM

New pictures form the same pentax.org.pl user, that submitted previous one (from jaad's post)

fake
or not :ugh:

illdefined · 05-25-2009, 08:55 AM

new DFA* non-645 lenses? that can only mean ..

cyg · 05-25-2009, 09:04 AM

Originally posted by chefours

ah ah ah, FF may be (why not ?), but APS ?

That's exactly what makes no sense. D-FA should cover 35mm.

Unless they decide to change the lens naming scheme now that everybody is getting a bit too used to DA's.

thibs · 05-25-2009, 09:10 AM

Originally posted by cyg

That's exactly what makes no sense. D-FA should cover 35mm.

Unless they decide to change the lens naming scheme now that everybody is getting a bit too used to DA's.

There would be no sense on the same roadmap to put a DA400 and a DFA28.
Seems clear to me, if anywhere near true.

mutedphotos · 05-25-2009, 09:12 AM

Hm...real or not I couldn't afford a single one of those lenses.

New DFA lenses would seem to suggest they're prepping a lens lineup for a future FF model, but a 20/2.8 and 50/1.0 seem like an odd place to start, especially since they already have the 50mm covered with the f/1.4. If they're really prepping the lineup wouldn't they start by covering standard ranges they don't already have?

And FWIW, wouldn't a 25/2.8 645 lens (if even possible) be in the neighborhood of $8000?

gazonk · 05-25-2009, 09:13 AM

Yay! FF lenses, ultra-wide 645, 1.0, 400mm, 135mm limited, this is going to cause serious LBA if it's true!

soalle · 05-25-2009, 09:20 AM

If it is true I'm already drooling on the 135mm limited...

ogl · 05-25-2009, 09:24 AM

It was the photo of DFA645 55/2.8 below DFA*50/1.0 SDM.

Is it time to sell FA135/2.8? I want DA135 LIMITED

leadbelly · 05-25-2009, 09:27 AM

I'm saving up either for the K-7 or the newly announced Voigtlander 50/1.1 in M-mount... if this is true, the 50/1.0, THIS would screw up my financial plans for the next year! hahaha... if ever, I hope they follow Voigtlander's lead selling their 50/1.1 way below people's expectations ($1.3k)... still steep, but for a 1.0-ish lens, sweet...

Jaleel · 05-25-2009, 09:37 AM

If its true all I can say is...
WOW

RMabo · 05-25-2009, 09:37 AM

DA Star 400 f/4 is very likely and could be the "super telephoto" mentioned in earlier roadmaps. Pentax has been working on a 400 for quite some time now.

DA 135 f/2.8 is also quite possible, and would make a nice roundup at the top of the Limiteds.

However, D FA Star lenses???

Asahiflex · 05-25-2009, 09:38 AM

Wow, if true then Pentax/Hoya wants to make a statement here. Is Pentax on the way back? Either way, I find the DA* 400mm f/4 believable because I think they want to keep the longer lenses in the same "family". Why a DA* 200/2.8 and DA* 300/4 and suddenly a DFA* 400/4? So this is a perfectly plausible explanation to have it under the DA* family.

And about the DFA* 50/1.0: that would be quite an engineering feat and likely to be impossible. Unless there are new glass types and/or optical solutions to make lenses faster even with smaller bayonets? Not impossible with Hoya (most important glass maker) as the mother company...

Talk about putting Pentax back on the map...

jaad75 · 05-25-2009, 09:48 AM

It is DA*400mm f/4 actually.
And our source says, that 2 of those lenses are almost done and the rest of them in testing... One is a prototype and has a high priority (I guess a "prestige") status...

ogl · 05-25-2009, 09:51 AM

I think we can see only 3 levels of cameras - simply -
K-1 FF 24 MP pro
K-7 APS-C 14.6 MP semi-pro
K-m (?) APS-C low-end

and 645D

)))

ogl · 05-25-2009, 09:53 AM

Originally posted by Asahiflex

Wow, if true then Pentax/Hoya wants to make a statement here. Is Pentax on the way back? Either way, I find the DA 400mm f/4 believable because I think they want to keep the longer lenses in the same "family". Why a DA* 200/2.8 and DA* 300/4 and suddenly a DFA* 400/4? So this is a perfectly plausible explanation to have it under the DA* family.

I don't see anything unreal...

DFA645 25/2.8
DFA645 55/2.8

DFA*50/1.0 SDM
DA135/2.8 LIMITED
DFA*20/2.8 SDM
DA*400/4 ED (IF) SDM

05-25-2009, 08:55 AM	#47
illdefined Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: NYC Posts: 929	new DFA* non-645 lenses? that can only mean .. Last edited by illdefined; 05-25-2009 at 09:04 AM.

05-25-2009, 09:38 AM	#57
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	Wow, if true then Pentax/Hoya wants to make a statement here. Is Pentax on the way back? Either way, I find the DA* 400mm f/4 believable because I think they want to keep the longer lenses in the same "family". Why a DA* 200/2.8 and DA* 300/4 and suddenly a DFA* 400/4? So this is a perfectly plausible explanation to have it under the DA* family. And about the DFA* 50/1.0: that would be quite an engineering feat and likely to be impossible. Unless there are new glass types and/or optical solutions to make lenses faster even with smaller bayonets? Not impossible with Hoya (most important glass maker) as the mother company... Talk about putting Pentax back on the map... Last edited by Asahiflex; 05-25-2009 at 09:52 AM. Reason: Forgot to add a star to the DA 400/4*

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

05-25-2009, 08:43 AM	#46
opiszon Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Poznań, miasto doznań Posts: 80	New pictures form the same pentax.org.pl user, that submitted previous one (from jaad's post) fake or not :ugh:

05-25-2009, 09:04 AM	#48
cyg Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Ottawa, ON Posts: 134	Originally posted by chefours ah ah ah, FF may be (why not ?), but APS ? That's exactly what makes no sense. D-FA should cover 35mm. Unless they decide to change the lens naming scheme now that everybody is getting a bit too used to DA's.

05-25-2009, 09:10 AM	#49
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by cyg That's exactly what makes no sense. D-FA should cover 35mm. Unless they decide to change the lens naming scheme now that everybody is getting a bit too used to DA's. There would be no sense on the same roadmap to put a DA400 and a DFA28. Seems clear to me, if anywhere near true.

05-25-2009, 09:12 AM	#50
mutedphotos Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Virginia Beach, VA Posts: 149	Hm...real or not I couldn't afford a single one of those lenses. New DFA lenses would seem to suggest they're prepping a lens lineup for a future FF model, but a 20/2.8 and 50/1.0 seem like an odd place to start, especially since they already have the 50mm covered with the f/1.4. If they're really prepping the lineup wouldn't they start by covering standard ranges they don't already have? And FWIW, wouldn't a 25/2.8 645 lens (if even possible) be in the neighborhood of $8000?

05-25-2009, 09:13 AM	#51
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Yay! FF lenses, ultra-wide 645, 1.0, 400mm, 135mm limited, this is going to cause serious LBA if it's true!

05-25-2009, 09:20 AM	#52
soalle Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Italy -> Canada -> Belgium -> Switzerland Photos: Gallery Posts: 233	If it is true I'm already drooling on the 135mm limited...

05-25-2009, 09:24 AM	#53
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	It was the photo of DFA645 55/2.8 below DFA*50/1.0 SDM. Is it time to sell FA135/2.8? I want DA135 LIMITED

05-25-2009, 09:27 AM	#54
leadbelly Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 597	I'm saving up either for the K-7 or the newly announced Voigtlander 50/1.1 in M-mount... if this is true, the 50/1.0, THIS would screw up my financial plans for the next year! hahaha... if ever, I hope they follow Voigtlander's lead selling their 50/1.1 way below people's expectations ($1.3k)... still steep, but for a 1.0-ish lens, sweet...

05-25-2009, 09:37 AM	#55
Jaleel Forum Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Moscow, Russia Photos: Gallery Posts: 73	If its true all I can say is... WOW

05-25-2009, 09:37 AM	#56
RMabo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 845	DA Star 400 f/4 is very likely and could be the "super telephoto" mentioned in earlier roadmaps. Pentax has been working on a 400 for quite some time now. DA 135 f/2.8 is also quite possible, and would make a nice roundup at the top of the Limiteds. However, D FA Star lenses???

05-25-2009, 09:48 AM	#58
jaad75 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Cracow Posts: 457 Original Poster	It is DA*400mm f/4 actually. And our source says, that 2 of those lenses are almost done and the rest of them in testing... One is a prototype and has a high priority (I guess a "prestige") status...

05-25-2009, 09:51 AM	#59
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	I think we can see only 3 levels of cameras - simply - K-1 FF 24 MP pro K-7 APS-C 14.6 MP semi-pro K-m (?) APS-C low-end and 645D )))

05-25-2009, 09:53 AM	#60
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Asahiflex Wow, if true then Pentax/Hoya wants to make a statement here. Is Pentax on the way back? Either way, I find the DA 400mm f/4 believable because I think they want to keep the longer lenses in the same "family". Why a DA* 200/2.8 and DA* 300/4 and suddenly a DFA* 400/4? So this is a perfectly plausible explanation to have it under the DA* family. I don't see anything unreal... DFA645 25/2.8 DFA645 55/2.8 DFA50/1.0 SDM DA135/2.8 LIMITED DFA20/2.8 SDM DA*400/4 ED (IF) SDM