[Sagitta]

Don't know how many "Moneypants" people you know, but most are quite a lot more thoughtful with how they spend their money. Which is a big part of the reason they have it. The "rich and stupid" crowd is actually very small, although most of them are also famous so it makes it seem rich folk are all vapid.

Perhaps I was being a it dramatic in my explanation, but for Ricoh/Pentax to NOT include a kit lens with their camera would be one of the most irresponsibly stupid marketing decisions I can think of. A lot of people are going to jump right to FF if the choice is there, and to not have a lens with the camera when they buy it will be an instant no-sale for most of them.

Ricoh may as well just tell people to go over to any of the competition instead.

---

Last edited by Sagitta; 02-07-2015 at 04:55 PM.

[jonby]

My thoughts are that Pentax really does need an appropriate standard zoom at launch. It's a glaring omission in the lineup at present and if there isn't one it's be mentioned as a negative if every review when it comes out. Canon's 24-105 L has acted as the kit lens for the 5D series and has been very popular in this guise because it's a superb all-round lens of excellent optical quality (speaking from experience here). My preference would be for a 24-80 or 90 f4 of similar optical quality so that the size could be reduced a little - size being my only gripe with the 24-105.

Steps necessary to being taken seriously again in the DSLR market include: 1) Releasing a FF DSLR: check; 2) raising their game in terms of lens optical quality (and breadth of the lineup).

[Nicolas06]

That's funny here. If it is not prime or f/2.8 constant zoom, this is something for the hisper/wanabe.

It is like the only interrest for an FF is for the extremely shallow deph of field or ultimate low ligth shooting.

There are people out there that like to shoot landscape/cityscape. There are people out there that go on vacation from time to time and may not want to have to go with 10 prime or 2 f/2.8 zoom (for 4000$+ on top of the body). They may want a single lense solution, at least at the start or in some circonstances and it is better if it is WR.

Even if you know nothing of FF/APSC etc and it will be your first camera, you have the right to choose an expensive camera if you have the money (nothing wrong with that) and you want a brain free experience with a lense included... Only when you'd have learned all the basic of photography would you need eventually try new lenses... If the one you have doesn't satisfy you. If you are not that rich and want to go FF slowly, you may want to frist buy the body... then 1-2 innexpensive lense before rebuilding a budget for your hooby. Would be stupid to make them have to go for Sigma/Tamron to fill the need.

Looking at what a 24-105 f/4 does on Canikon land or even the cheaper 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 that both get good reviews, I'd see no reason for Pentax to not have an equivalent lense available.

If I were them I would concentrate on a cheap version (more likely the f/3.5-5.6) that perform quite well optically and is WR. I would cover the landcsape basics and I would cover all the guy that maybe can throw 2500$ on a camera + lense but not $4000 up front (likely most of their client for the FF anyway). I would have also a 24-70 f/2.8 ready for those that want the best. In addition to the 2 zooms anounced offially already and the lenses that officially support FF (FA31, FA35, FA43, DFA50, FA50, FA77, DFA100) that's would not a be bad start.

Of course you'd want to have a 24 and 135mm prime at least and a UWA zoom + a cheap tele (something like a DFA 70-300 f/3.5-5.6) but you have more time to get this done I think.

[Wired]

everyones thinking of what they want, not what will sell.

yes, a trinity of WA, Standard, telephoto zooms will be required at launch, at the very least the 24-70 and 70-200 at minimum with a f2.8 aperture. BUT if they were to do a kit package, I seriously doubt they would include a $1000+ lens as a kit lens.

I see it going one of three ways, a refreshed FA 50mm f1.4, maybe as a D-FA 50mm f1.8 to make it more cost effective ($250ish). a 24-105mm f4 (probably would retail $850ish), something they will probably make anyways as it is a pretty decent focal length range and f4 will be enough for most hobbyist/amateurs. Finally, and most likely, a 28-80 f3.5-5.6 that would retail lens only around $550. The Nikon variant has proven to be quite good optically for it's price point and a good stepping stone.

The thing about this camera is that any pro that buys it will buy it body only and build their own kit. Anybody else that buys it, who is just enamored with the 35mm format will want a kit, and probably would once again only buy one or two lenses.


What I think is MOST likely is:
1: pro spec'd 35mm release in late in 2015, body only. 36mp sensor
2: semi-pro spec'd 35mm release in early 2015, body only and kit options availabe. 24mp sensor

Think of it as a D810/610 competitor lineup.


my hopes are that within the next few years we will see a lineup of lenses:

16-35mm f4
16-24mm f2.8
24-70 f2.8
24-105 f4
70-200 f2.8
70-200 f4 (edit: Could also be the 60-250mm f4?)
150-450 f4.5-5.6

24mm f2.8 TS DA*
24mm f1.4 DA*
28mm f1.4 DA*
28mm f1.8
31mm f1.8 Limited HD
43mm f1.9 Limited HD
50mm f1.8 DA
50mm f2.8 Macro
55mm f1.4 DA*
77mm f1.8 Limited HD
85mm f1.4 DA*
85mm f1.8
100mm f2.8 Macro
135mm f2.0 DA*
200mm f2.8 DA*
300mm f2.8 DA*

---

Last edited by Wired; 02-09-2015 at 10:44 AM.

[kooks]

If is a kit lens it should be a short zoom ( 24 - something ) .. i really really reaaaaaaally doubt that they will release a prime lens as a kit lens.. not now.. perhaps in the old days this was usual but now short zooms are they way. Is the same as APS-C kit lenses ( 18 - 55 f3.5 ) you dont see any APS-C with a 30mm prime as a kit lens, impossible..

[Wired]

If is a kit lens it should be a short zoom ( 24 - something ) .. i really really reaaaaaaally doubt that they will release a prime lens as a kit lens.. not now.. perhaps in the old days this was usual but now short zooms are they way. Is the same as APS-C kit lenses ( 18 - 55 f3.5 ) you dont see any APS-C with a 30mm prime as a kit lens, impossible..

agreed. but I don't see a kit lens realistically being a 2.8 aperture. variable or fixed f4

[konraDarnok]

A new viewfinder with 1.2x magnification to make the 43mm limited look normal would be a real market standout.

[kooks]

agreed. but I don't see a kit lens realistically being a 2.8 aperture. variable or fixed f4

agree with that too.. perhaps something aroudn 3.5 or 4... im really looking for a f2.8 but mmmm i doubt that it will be release as a kit lens, perhaps as an alternative so it match the new 70-200 f2.8 zoom.

[Wired]

agree with that too.. perhaps something aroudn 3.5 or 4... im really looking for a f2.8 but mmmm i doubt that it will be release as a kit lens, perhaps as an alternative so it match the new 70-200 f2.8 zoom.

without a doubt we would see a f2.8 normal zoom be released right around FF release time.

Pentax just don't have the 3rd party support to not offer the basics at launch.

I'd bet on the FA 35/50 be re-released with new coatings and DC focus motors too.

[Nicolas06]

If is a kit lens it should be a short zoom ( 24 - something ) .. i really really reaaaaaaally doubt that they will release a prime lens as a kit lens.. not now.. perhaps in the old days this was usual but now short zooms are they way. Is the same as APS-C kit lenses ( 18 - 55 f3.5 ) you dont see any APS-C with a 30mm prime as a kit lens, impossible..

Except the K3 was available in kit with the DA50 f/1.8 and the K01 was available in kit with the 40XS. I suppose they did do that for one reason !

I agree that's not the most common use and a zoom kit including something quite unexpensive is really important but prime kits do exist.

[Jean Poitiers]

definitely the fa31. Ff + fa31 for $999. Who could ask for anything more?

lmao ...

[Nicolas06]

everyones thinking of what they want, not what will sell.

yes, a trinity of WA, Standard, telephoto zooms will be required at launch, at the very least the 24-70 and 70-200 at minimum with a f2.8 aperture. BUT if they were to do a kit package, I seriously doubt they would include a $1000+ lens as a kit lens.

I see it going one of three ways, a refreshed FA 50mm f1.4, maybe as a D-FA 50mm f1.8 to make it more cost effective ($250ish). a 24-105mm f4 (probably would retail $850ish), something they will probably make anyways as it is a pretty decent focal length range and f4 will be enough for most hobbyist/amateurs. Finally, and most likely, a 28-80 f3.5-5.6 that would retail lens only around $550. The Nikon variant has proven to be quite good optically for it's price point and a good stepping stone.

The thing about this camera is that any pro that buys it will buy it body only and build their own kit. Anybody else that buys it, who is just enamored with the 35mm format will want a kit, and probably would once again only buy one or two lenses.


What I think is MOST likely is:
1: pro spec'd 35mm release in late in 2015, body only. 36mp sensor
2: semi-pro spec'd 35mm release in early 2015, body only and kit options availabe. 24mp sensor

Think of it as a D810/610 competitor lineup.


my hopes are that within the next few years we will see a lineup of lenses:

16-35mm f4
16-24mm f2.8
24-70 f2.8
24-105 f4
70-200 f2.8
70-200 f4 (edit: Could also be the 60-250mm f4?)
150-450 f4.5-5.6

24mm f2.8 TS DA*
24mm f1.4 DA*
28mm f1.4 DA*
28mm f1.8
31mm f1.8 Limited HD
43mm f1.9 Limited HD
50mm f1.8 DA
50mm f2.8 Macro
55mm f1.4 DA*
77mm f1.8 Limited HD
85mm f1.4 DA*
85mm f1.8
100mm f2.8 Macro
135mm f2.0 DA*
200mm f2.8 DA*
300mm f2.8 DA*

Not clear for me why you concentrate mostly on new APSC only prime (DA* instead of DFA*) and include things that are already available (50mm f/2.8 macro; DA 50 f/1.8, 200mm DA* f/2.8, FA ltd except the HD coating).

Also the line up you show here look like it concentrate on one kind of needs only. I don't see any entre level tele (70-300 f/3.5-5.6) or entry level transtandard (24-85 f/3.5-5.6, 28-200 f/3.5-5.6) that typically get many many sales. There now 150-600 neither a type of lenses many are willing to pay for.

Arround the primes, only 3 are supposed to be affordable but I highly doubt a 28mm f/1.8 would. And honestly there are far too many on the same area (2 24mm, 2 28mm 1 31mm on wide angle) without even having 1 single prime UWA. Also thinking Pentax would want to provide a cheap 85mm f/1.8 while their FA77 f/1.8 represent the high end seems a little bit stretched. Much more likely for it to be an f/2.4.

For 135mm, a cheap version is also much more needed than now, so an 135mm DFA f/2.8 would make more sense, at least at the begining.

For tele prime, while there is a 300mm f/2.8, there no prime past 300mm while this is much more important on FF than APSC. Quite strange to me to not think of a 400mm and update of the 560mm.

[Wired]

Not clear for me why you concentrate mostly on new APSC only prime (DA* instead of DFA*) and include things that are already available (50mm f/2.8 macro; DA 50 f/1.8, 200mm DA* f/2.8, FA ltd except the HD coating).

All lenses listed are FF compatible either in production or should be in production. Sorry, should have put down DFA*. It's a general idea of what should be available from my perspective.

Also the line up you show here look like it concentrate on one kind of needs only. I don't see any entre level tele (70-300 f/3.5-5.6) or entry level transtandard (24-85 f/3.5-5.6, 28-200 f/3.5-5.6) that typically get many many sales. There now 150-600 neither a type of lenses many are willing to pay for.

Fair enough, a lens of that kind would be very helpful.

Arround the primes, only 3 are supposed to be affordable but I highly doubt a 28mm f/1.8 would. And honestly there are far too many on the same area (2 24mm, 2 28mm 1 31mm on wide angle) without even having 1 single prime UWA. Also thinking Pentax would want to provide a cheap 85mm f/1.8 while their FA77 f/1.8 represent the high end seems a little bit stretched. Much more likely for it to be an f/2.4.

The 24mm is considered by many professional landscape shooters to be THE Landscape lens, and prefer it over the 28. The 28 is often seen as the street shooters lens of the film era. The 31 is already available and it will remain as such or updated with HD coatings in my opinion. An UWA is missing from my primes wish list yes. Why would a budget 85mm f1.8 be scaled back to a 2.4? Nikon's own 85mm f1.8 is $500, and a very good performer at that.

For 135mm, a cheap version is also much more needed than now, so an 135mm DFA f/2.8 would make more sense, at least at the begining.

I don't think you would need 2 different variants of a 135mm lens. I doubt the average consumer will buy a "budget" 135, they mostly wouldn't know what to do with it and confuse it with the 85 which is the "be all end all" for portraits. But if one were to come out a "Limited' or "DA*" 135mm for around $1100 with an f2.0 to go after the Nikon/Canon alternatives that would be a decent seller to those that know about it. Granted it would probably move less than a 400mm+ prime (you mention below) due to many Pentaxians being more of the nature shooter variety. I'm not sure about Canon, but Nikon only offer the one 135mm lens, and it's a beautiful lens.... whole reason I bought a D800 actually.

For tele prime, while there is a 300mm f/2.8, there no prime past 300mm while this is much more important on FF than APSC. Quite strange to me to not think of a 400mm and update of the 560mm.

Price. I don't think within the next 2 years anything above 300 would be offered or considered. I do agree its more valuable on 35mm than APSC, but I do think it would cost a small fortune and Pentax would want to see the demand first.

[monochrome]

How does the D810 come? There are several kits; a 24~70 zoom kit; a filmaker's kit; a 3-prime kit; and they're all top quality to Pro-Grade lenses.

$4,000 - $4700 for these kits. My guess is that's where this Pentax FF is aiming.

[Nicolas06]

The 24mm is considered by many professional landscape shooters to be THE Landscape lens, and prefer it over the 28. The 28 is often seen as the street shooters lens of the film era. The 31 is already available and it will remain as such or updated with HD coatings in my opinion. An UWA is missing from my primes wish list yes. Why would a budget 85mm f1.8 be scaled back to a 2.4? Nikon's own 85mm f1.8 is $500, and a very good performer at that.

85mm f/1.8 => Because there already an FA77 having a "cheap" FA85 f/1.8 would hurt the sales. I don't see enough reasons to buy an FA ltd if there a cheap reasonably sized 85mm f/1.8 available while today many took the FA77 for the max apperture alone. A very cheap 85mm f/2.4 plastic wonder like (<300€) and a very expensive and big 85mm f/1.4 (1000$+) would make more sense to me if you don't want to discontinue the FA ltd.