[clover]

Hope its true. But take a look at the last zero. its blurred a bit.

I really hope that such a lens is not far from coming out... ( and I heard once that it is really in study ) because I prefer the 100mm FA optical formula rather than the DFA, and there is no focus limiter on the DFA etc...

But this is just a fake picture made with photoshop or some software like it

[thibs]

Of course not, but the meaning is that the lens is made for film camera and also work on digital.

No it means, the lens covers 35mm circle. Nothing else.

Working on film cameras mean that you can fully use it with your film camera. If you have a MZS, you will not have any Av or M modes.

Yep, unfortunately.

FAJ are made for Crippled KAF2 ( meaning taht you need to control your aperture from the body )

Mount is absolutely the same as FA lenses. There's not a single difference but the 'A' contact being always ON (which means f/22 or f/32 permanently set when put on older bodies).
In fact FAJ were probably more trials for DA lenses than anything else.

I think that D-FA lenses will be only the 50 and the 100 macro that we already know. When Pentax will launch a FF DSLR, there will be a new "name"
You already mentionned FAJ, like the 18-35mm FAJ, made for the *ist D. Why such a lens like this 100mm macro will be name like D-FA...? It is a FAJ

Well, according to their own nomenclature, nothing prevents it.
If this new DFA100 macro is true or not, I dunno. But it wouldn't contradict their nomenclature a single bit.

All manufacturers dropped the aperture ring (that's bad, I know), why would anyone think Pentax will keep them when Pentax (D)SLRs have been design to handle 'no ring' for past 5 years at least.

The only 'late' SLRs which will be problematic would be (with introduction date in parenthesis): MZ-S(2001), MZ-5(n)(1996/1997), MZ-10(1996), MZ-3(1997).

That's 10 years ago (except MZ-S)....

[cousinsane]

With the Limited-style focus distance window, there is no way this lens can be weather resistant.

[thibs]

A strange thing is that it is labelled:
'SMC Pentax-DFA macro 100mm 1:2.8'

The 35 Limited is labelled:

'SMC Pentax-DA 35mm 1:2.8 Macro Limited'.

Macro before or after the focal length? Pentax always put it after, till now at least.

[thibs]

With the Limited-style focus distance window, there is no way this lens can be weather resistant.

More difficult at least.

[ogl]

It seems to me that it's real lens.

[Fogel70]

Btw wouldn't this lens be "DFA 100/2.8 Macro II" as Pentax already has a "DFA 100/2.8 Macro".

Edit: Of course the "WR" would make it a brand new version of the lens.

---

Last edited by Fogel70; 11-30-2009 at 12:25 PM.

[thibs]

Btw wouldn't this lens be "DFA 100/2.8 Macro II" as Pentax already has a "DFA 100/2.8 Macro".

Yep there's something unreadable in the far right.

[clover]

No it means, the lens covers 35mm circle. Nothing else.
Yep, unfortunately.
Mount is absolutely the same as FA lenses. There's not a single difference but the 'A' contact being always ON (which means f/22 or f/32 permanently set when put on older bodies).
In fact FAJ were probably more trials for DA lenses than anything else.
Well, according to their own nomenclature, nothing prevents it.
If this new DFA100 macro is true or not, I dunno. But it wouldn't contradict their nomenclature a single bit.
All manufacturers dropped the aperture ring (that's bad, I know), why would anyone think Pentax will keep them when Pentax (D)SLRs have been design to handle 'no ring' for past 5 years at least.
The only 'late' SLRs which will be problematic would be (with introduction date in parenthesis): MZ-S(2001), MZ-5(n)(1996/1997), MZ-10(1996), MZ-3(1997).
That's 10 years ago (except MZ-S)....

I am not claimin for the aperture ring. I Like it but I can go on without.

But if it is disappearing on this lens, then I do not think the name will be the same.

Much more that nomenclature, it is the way they are used to do.

Why Pentax will keep the name D-FA ? FA is "film camera" time ( like Hammer time, it is gone now )

The nomenclature change when there is a change. And loosing the aperture ring is a change.
If the 100mm is such as it is suppose to be, then the name have to change ( like Nikon, putting a "G" )
D-FA is like "FA" that really are good working on DSLR. FA...

FAJ is like FA without aperture ring...

This can be a DAJ or a DAF. No way it can be a D-FA. ( also D-FA have a grey color ring )

Let s find the name, but this is not a good one. That is one more point for saying that this is a fake picture, but the lens has to be change quickly and this is wh we think this is not a fake

[FotoPete]

Yep there's something unreadable in the far right.

It says "Look Canon 100L lovers, we've got a $1K sealed macro as well!"

[clover]

Also, a WR lens with such a system for showing the distances is very very weird

[thibs]

Let's take a look at 645 pictures floating around like this one (latest prototype):


What do you see? No aperture ring. But the lens is called DFA645.

And this one:


Of, an AF/MF switch. SDM on 645 ? Mmmm

http://www.pentax.jp/english/imaging/digital/lens/roadmap.pdf

Zoom on the DFA645 55/2.8... There's NO aperture lens. and it is called DFA645.

[clover]

Let's take a look at 645 pictures floating around like this one (latest prototype):

What do you see? No aperture ring. But the lens is called DFA645.
And this one:

Of, an AF/MF switch. SDM on 645 ? Mmmm
http://www.pentax.jp/english/imaging/digital/lens/roadmap.pdf
Zoom on the DFA645 55/2.8... There's NO aperture lens. and it is called DFA645.

And it is a tentative name... and there is no DFA on 645 lens system? Meaning that the lens has a new nomenclature for 645 system.

[roentarre]

The cosmetic appearance is more in keeping with A modern Zeiss look.

[clover]

I think I am understanding what you try to tell me.

You tell me that a 100mm Macro can be called DFA and having no aperture ring because it is not supposed to be needed. I get it !

But I think that will be very weird. Because of all the things I already said. ( and also, Why did Pentax make FAJ and FA then ? )

Of course, for Pentax, it will be easier and cheaper not to found a new name. So you might really be right at the end.