[Adam]

Same as with the K-3?

The same as the K-3 and all other Pentax DSLRs.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[WPRESTO]

With the dearth of Pentax-brand FF zoom lenses, it might have helped stem the tide of migration to 3rd party glass, giving Pentax a chance to catch up a bit.

An what third part offers almost all their most interesting zooms in K-mount? Seems to me both Tamron and Sigma have been cutting back on their K-mount offerings, discontinuing K-mount in some existing lenses, and not including K-mount in new offerings. The lack of K-mount in the three 150~600mm zooms was a major disappointment for me. Also, no K-mount ever for the 150mm and 180mm f2.8 Sigma macros. But, I think we have four after-market options for a 70~300mm - or is it only three from Sigma now?

[Wolfeye]

I wasn't making any argument, I was wondering if having full M support might have a benefit, to Pentax, that hadn't been considered. All else was conjecture on my part. I'm glad there are more options than I had known, lens options for those of you who buy the K-1, other than old M or K lenses. My worst lens is a Pentax zoom, a 35-70 kit lens. I'd certainly never dream of using it on a K-1 unless I had to.

Again, I won't be buying, not at the introductory price, but I might when the price comes down; and the deciding factor was the lack of M lens support. I'm sure Pentax will survive without my money.

[clackers]

I'm sure Pentax will survive without my money.

I know they're not the Red Cross, Wolfeye, but have you seen the state of the camera industry post 2012? 😀

[pathdoc]

My worst lens is a Pentax zoom, a 35-70 kit lens. I'd certainly never dream of using it on a K-1 unless I had to.

Oh for Pete's sake, get a grip. You're putting a lens on a camera; it's not as if you're impugning the virtue of Her Majesty the Queen or the Virgin Mary or what-have-you. I have a mostly-plastic FA 28-90mm zoom, the focal-length range of which makes it just perfect as a general use full-frame AF zoom lens, especially in bright daylight. Provided the screwdrive motor on the K-1 doesn't tear it apart in the first few seconds (a definite possibility given the way it torques on the K-5), I'm going to have no qualms about slapping that sucker on for casual trips to the playground with my kids.

That being said, I also have better, finer glass to put on it for less casual applications - and some of it was even made by Ricoh themselves back in the day. I will have no hesitation about wearing out the green button if that's what it takes.

[Rico]

Green button. I was hoping Pentax had created some mechanism to use them natively, as they work on film bodies.

Pentax has always provided mechanical live metering with M lenses through depth of field preview.

[reh321]

With the dearth of Pentax-brand FF zoom lenses, it might have helped stem the tide of migration to 3rd party glass, giving Pentax a chance to catch up a bit.

I don't see how this affects Pentax in either case. Either you don't buy Pentax now but use old glass {which someone bought in the past from Pentax or Ricoh, or Tamron, or Sigma, or Vivitar} or you don't buy Pentax now but buy {from very limited catalog} new glass from some other company. In neither case is money flowing to Pentax affected, and if you're satisfied with your new purchase, your possibility of buying new glass from Pentax "once they've caught up" is low in either case.

I should point our that the Green Button {which I adopted as my avatar when people started complaining this time} affects only lenses built 1975-83. All other lenses {m42-mount, KA-mount, KAF mount, KAF2-mount, KAF3-mount} can be used normally on the K-1.

---

Last edited by reh321; 03-10-2016 at 05:42 PM.

[Tan68]

Dearth? And that is just the F series, I've never bothered to take a portrait of the FA series.

Those are not some of the prettiest lens body designs I have seen.

[clackers]

Those are not some of the prettiest lens body designs I have seen.

There's a lot of grey plastic there ...

[GeneV]

The crippled K mount has been a topic for as long as I have been a member of this forum, which is since I bought a brand new K10d. I've gotten over it long ago.Manual focus makes a big difference. Green button metering--not so much difference. MF or not, my 40 year old SMC K135/2.5 is still a favorite both on the K3 and the A7R. I'm sure it will see action on the K1 regardless of the green button.

[jatrax]

Those are not some of the prettiest lens body designs I have seen.

There's a lot of grey plastic there ...

You guys just don't appreciate the fine points of classical industrial design. Come on, you really want to fit in with the all black lens crowd? Dare to be different!! Go gray!!

[clackers]

You guys just don't appreciate the fine points of classical industrial design. Come on, you really want to fit in with the all black lens crowd? Dare to be different!! Go gray!!

I have an FA 35-70 on my shelf but the other lenses don't talk to it, make it do all the housecleaning, won't let it go to the ball ...

[reh321]

Dearth? And that is just the F series, I've never bothered to take a portrait of the FA series.

Those are not some of the prettiest lens body designs I have seen.

There's a lot of grey plastic there ...

As I said in another thread on this general topic {there certainly are a lot of them!} it was lenses like this that caused me in 1995 to
leave Pentax and get a Canon Elan. I have no problem with the color gray; I have no problem with plastic {the lens kitten with my Elan was mostly plastic, including the mount}.
However, the lenses just didn't feel as well-built and as precise as the Canon USM lenses were. I came back to Pentax because of the bodies {despite the lenses}.
These days I actually own an FA 28-70; I guess I need to get some experience with it before I have a valid opinion of it, but if I did have a K-1 {with my budget, not likely soon}
then I would be willing to use the FA lens on it, because I'm quite sure that it it give me a problem, the problem would be the sort that I would notice immediately.
And, unlike Sony, Pentax has come out with a series of serious lenses if one can afford both the camera and the lenses at the same time.

To tie this back into the original title of this thread, I will simply observe again that lots of m42-mount, KA-mount, KAF-mount, KAF2-mount, and KAF3-mount lenses are available;
someone can buy a K-1 with absolute confidence of finding needed lenses even apart from those requiring use of the dreaded Green Button {not that the Green Button is that scary!}

[jatrax]

However, the lenses just didn't feel as well-built and as precise as the Canon USM lenses were.

My Lens collections:
Takumars = finely machined, hand tuned pieces of mechanical engineering built when attention to details was still valued and weight simply meant glass and metal
Pentax-A = well built and more refined examples of optical engineering that valued small size but introduced some compromises in construction
Pentax-F = Military / industrial styling and build that often seems rather crude compared to earlier lenses. A period of rapid advancement and change with little polish put on the product
Pentax-FA = PLASTIC! Light and smooth and slick. A style that today mostly says 'cheap' but was at the time polished and stylish
Pentax-DA = a gradual return to attention to construction, though early introductions had issues. Finer attention to fit and finish, tighter tolerances. Use of advanced engineered plastics
Pentax DFA = no nonsense build and quality. Styling less ornamental and more industrial, perhaps even 'professional'. More attention to details, more advanced optics and materials

Just MHO, of course But it is fascinating to look at the lens collection side by side and the dramatic and distinctive styling that each series had. Viewed alone there is no sense of the transformation you see when they are viewed together.

[pathdoc]

Pentax-FA = PLASTIC! Light and smooth and slick. A style that today mostly says 'cheap' but was at the time polished and stylish
Pentax-DA = a gradual return to attention to construction, though early introductions had issues. Finer attention to fit and finish, tighter tolerances. Use of advanced engineered plastics

Yep. Good summary.

Mind you, my FA 135/2.8 feels anything but plasticky, and the same thing could be said about the 28 and the 50/1.4, but the 28-90 zoom (shudders)... The DA50, plastic though it is, feels streets ahead of that abomination (but it's a useful abomination, light and handy with a good FF focal range).

Looking at my relatively tiny 35mm/3.5 Super Takumar, such a thing today would almost be regarded as a Limited lens - all metal and glass, small, slowish, great optical quality... the only things missing are the open aperture metering and the screw drive AF.