On the other hand, most DA* lenses will soon be!

HAHAHA. A very good one. Incidentally, I don't think my DA*50-135's AF works any more although I haven't tried it in a while.

Thanks for getting back to us. I believe the Zeiss will indeed render differently from the FA50. I wish I had one to compare to the K 50 1.2 I just wrote up over here. Or the FA 43mm Limited for that matter. Someone want to lend me a Zeiss?

As far as Zeiss making all the Pentax lenses... I know you've tried the Limiteds -- they are my benchmark.

I was gonna say I would loan it to you, but then you live in Ireland. My wife and I went to Ireland for our honeymoon. We also visited the north too. I love your country. People were so very nice to the point where I got suspicious at first!! Nice read about K50 1.2!

great capture there...!

Looks like the k mount version. Why not get the M42 mount ?

Thank you!!

You know, using this lens for one day . . . . I am hooked!!

You are right about M42 mount. I have a screw mount that came with my Takumar 17 fish eye, so yes I am going to have to look into that.

I want 85/1.4 now. Oh god.

[falconeye]

[rparmar]

I was gonna say I would loan it to you, but then you live in Ireland.

Yeah, it's a long way from Ireland to the fifth floor.

My wife and I went to Ireland for our honeymoon. We also visited the north too. I love your country. People were so very nice to the point where I got suspicious at first!!

People are very nice and have nothing to sell you. That is the magical combination. Unless of course you are trying to buy something. Which is why I live here but shop outside of Ireland.

But if you come back, bring the Zeiss. I am all out of money for lenses (have been for some time) but would love to try one. I shot with Zeiss a bit "back in the day" on a Contax. Let me just say I could blame the lens for absolutely none of my duds.

You know, falconeye being a physicist in Germany, and if he used anything other than Zeiss, I think he risks public humiliation before and after execution (also public).

So good move!!

[nulla]

It certainly would make sense, but in line with other offerings it would be slower than the existing DA* zooms, lighter, not weather-sealed and perhaps not much cheaper, (since it covers a wider range). The DA55-300 is an example of a high quality zoom of the same class as any possible DA18-135. My guess is that it would be no faster than f/4. If it was a constant aperture it would still be quite desirable.

Correct Robin

any faster and they would stop the need for either of the 2 DA*'s within or close to within that range

[Aristophanes]

15-85, like Canon's newest, but cheaper. WR, not SDM.

I don't think that I will ever buy another lens that would only work on APS-C sensor. Come to think of it, that is pretty short sighted. Going completely against the grain in terms of where this sensor business is heading. Say 5 years from now, do you guys think that you will be still stuck with APS-C?

Having said that, I have a question; is lensbaby FF compatible???

[rparmar]

I don't think that I will ever buy another lens that would only work on APS-C sensor. Come to think of it, that is pretty short sighted. Going completely against the grain in terms of where this sensor business is heading. Say 5 years from now, do you guys think that you will be still stuck with APS-C?

I do not believe I am "stuck" with APS-C now, so, no, I don't think I will be stuck in five years either. If I wanted full frame I could get a full-frame camera, ditto medium format etc. (Actually I do have an MF camera, just not digital.) APS-C works fine for what I need it for and has the benefit of size and weight. I wouldn't want a bigger camera body for day-to-day shots.

I do not believe I am "stuck" with APS-C now, so, no, I don't think I will be stuck in five years either. If I wanted full frame I could get a full-frame camera, ditto medium format etc. (Actually I do have an MF camera, just not digital.) APS-C works fine for what I need it for and has the benefit of size and weight. I wouldn't want a bigger camera body for day-to-day shots.

I hear you, but in few years I bet you that FF DSLR can be had in the same size as K-7, maybe even smaller. I am not sure how much improvement they can make on APS-C. Probably not a whole lot more. On the other hand, FF might still have some uncharted territory from the engineering point of view. Even if we are going in the direction where we are losing pentaprism, I think that eventually the sensors will be FF, not APS-C.

[rparmar]

And by the same token medium format digital will get cheaper, just as it is with the Pentax 645D. So I might ask why you want to stick yourself with the out-dated full-frame format, which was always a horrible compromise in the first place.

I think the way out of this problem is to decide if you want to compare today's technology with what else is available today. Or do you always want to be waiting for some future Utopian technology? I say this not because I think it won't be here, but because I am sure it will.

But forever waiting on the future means inertia in the present.

[RioRico]

Just trowing up another suggestion for a new lens I would really like: a Pentax equivalent to Canon's 17mm TS lens.

Yes, that would be nice. But since I'm not likely to be able to afford any new Pentax glass anytime soon, I don't really care much what Pentax's next lenses might be. IMHO the prices of nearly all new lenses are absurdly high. And bound-to-fail motors onboard make them even more so, turning them into overpriced short-lifetime crud. Disposable crud. Products of planned obsolescence.

Why the ongoing (and resurgent) interest in old manual glass? Because it lasts. Because it offers value for cost, survivability -- it's not so disposable. I bought a dSLR body that cost far more than any of my lenses (except one, which I was foolish to buy). I expect that body to serve me quite well for some more years, and then I expect that some newer body will offer such outstanding new features that replacement / upgrading becomes inevitable. But I expect my many lenses to last through several generations of bodies, as most already have. I have no confidence that any motorized lens would outlast the body. What has been the longevity of Canikon motorized lenses? What percentage of Pentax SDM lenses has already crapped out? Why should I risk buying a crapout lens?

Yes, a Pentax TS lens would be nice. No motor, please.

[RioRico]

I don't think that I will ever buy another lens that would only work on APS-C sensor. Come to think of it, that is pretty short sighted. Going completely against the grain in terms of where this sensor business is heading. Say 5 years from now, do you guys think that you will be still stuck with APS-C?

And that is why, of my 65+ lenses that I can mount on my K20D, exactly THREE are DA's. (Hey, does anyone here remember when DA referred to a hair style?) All the rest can also go on the ZX-M. The 40+ screwmounts can go on my several M42 bodies, and also on any of numerous cameras from other makers should I be fatally seduceded by another brand.

APS-C: based on a failed film format. A digital format for how long, about 6-7 years? That's 4 generations in Moore's Law terms. Will it even exist in new products in another 4 generations? Remember, what's impossibly expensive last year will be in WalMart next year. When phone.cam sensors hit 25mox, who's going to bother with APS-C?

Having said that, I have a question; is lensbaby FF compatible???

If not, there are plenty of plans around for brewing your own for a few bucks.

And by the same token medium format digital will get cheaper, just as it is with the Pentax 645D. So I might ask why you want to stick yourself with the out-dated full-frame format, which was always a horrible compromise in the first place.

I think the way out of this problem is to decide if you want to compare today's technology with what else is available today. Or do you always want to be waiting for some future Utopian technology? I say this not because I think it won't be here, but because I am sure it will.

But forever waiting on the future means inertia in the present.

You do have a point there. One day FF will perhaps be outdated too. But then, I wonder how APS-C sensors will be looked upon as. I hope it is not nostalgia.

But personally, I think that the next logical step is FF. To me it is a very natural progression that I feel comfortable with. Buying FF compatible lenses makes sense to me because it works BOTH for APS-C and FF. Because of your well taken point about 645D and sensor pricing, it makes even more sense buying MF lenses than APS-C only lenses. No??