[dnaseigel]

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.

From a retailer's perspective a Pentax 18-135 would need to be no faster than an f/3.5-5.6 with a built in focusing motor. It would be great to see it on a build and quality par as the DA 55-300 which I would take the Pepsi Challenge with against Canon's 70-300 IS USM or Nikon's 70-300VR. If Pentax could put their 18-135 out at $400 to $450 USD retail, it would be an extremely attractive piece.

Great comparison to another killer/affordable Pentax lens like the 55-300; I like how you are thinking here.

You do know you are obligated to show us shots with that as soon as you can?

It's written down somewhere as the "bragging about great purchases" clause.

You know, it got here very quickly.

I wish Zeiss made all the lens for Pentax. I thought FA 50 was pretty good. Wow.

[ghelary]

You know, it got here very quickly.

I wish Zeiss made all the lens for Pentax. I thought FA 50 was pretty good. Wow.

Which lenses are not made for Pentax ? (and are made for Canon or Nikon)

Which lenses are not made for Pentax ? (and are made for Canon or Nikon)

What I meant was that I wish Zeiss would manufacture the entire line up of lenses for Pentax, primes and zooms and all (not gonna happen, I know). I believe ZK line up for Zeiss is pretty much the same as the other mount. Although you are right in that the Zeiss line up is pretty good as is. I guess what I meant was that I wish Pentax has what Sony has.

That Zeiss looks great, waiting for the photographic evidence. It's manual focus, right?

That Zeiss looks great, waiting for the photographic evidence. It's manual focus, right?

Yes I whipped it out this morning, and few trial shots to see if I can demonstrate this lens' rendition a bit.

Here is one of them. This is at wide open (K-7: f/1.4, 1/5000, 0 ev, ISO 200). A tad out of focus, as she was swinging a bit. But certainly sharp enough for me, but may not be for some of you. Very dreamy bokeh. My FA 50 didn't render it like that.

Thanks. It's an "A" lens, right? And is it very difficult to focus?

Thanks. It's an "A" lens, right? And is it very difficult to focus?

Indeed it is an "A" lens. If you are used to manual focusing, you would love the feel of it as you roll the barrel. Just heavy enough that gives you such a fine control, but not too much that bothers you. I also have an older Planar T* 50/1.4 for Contax (YK mount, I guess), and it feels much better.

I wish our Limited lenses are manual focus only. I know that will piss of many of you though....

I wish our Limited lenses are manual focus only. I know that will piss of many of you though....

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

[jct us101]

A lot of the time, Canon and Nikon people will look for lenses that have had the longest cycle without being updated, but it's usually just in their EF lenses and the Nikon professional grade (is that G?) lenses. I'm curious if we did this with Pentax though which lens has gone the longest without an upgrade. Maybe we can expect a new version of it?

[rparmar]

Here is one of them. This is at wide open (K-7: f/1.4, 1/5000, 0 ev, ISO 200). A tad out of focus, as she was swinging a bit. But certainly sharp enough for me, but may not be for some of you. Very dreamy bokeh. My FA 50 didn't render it like that.

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.

[tokyoso]

You know, it got here very quickly.

I wish Zeiss made all the lens for Pentax. I thought FA 50 was pretty good. Wow.

great capture there...!

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

[Mike L]

If I was putting money on what the next lens Pentax would come out with and not necessarily what people want to see, I would be putting a lazy $20 on the 17-70mm or the 55-300mm getting the WR treatment. Personally, I'm holding off upgrading my kit lens in the hope that there will be a 17-70 WR (with no SDM issues).

If the super tele foreshadowed in the last road map even eventuates I think it will be a 400mm f5.6.

[ghelary]

What I meant was that I wish Zeiss would manufacture the entire line up of lenses for Pentax, primes and zooms and all (not gonna happen, I know). I believe ZK line up for Zeiss is pretty much the same as the other mount. Although you are right in that the Zeiss line up is pretty good as is. I guess what I meant was that I wish Pentax has what Sony has.

Getting the zoom lineup from Sony/Minolta mount is not gonna happen as it is equivalent for Sony to L range for Canon.

A lot of very intersting lenses have been produced for Leica M-mount, but given the shorter registration length, adapting those lenses is not possible.

That leave it to the Harblei/Zeiss range, which is available in K-mount but not in 645 mount (it's available on other MF mounts) and their Cinema lenses that have just been announced on Canon and Nikon mount. Both ranges are specialities and should be intersting a very very small subset of users.

[Ishpuini]

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

Wim