[lytrytyr]

You're kind of making my point.

"Kind of" as in "not at all".

I avoid the SomeDontMove lenses like the plague,

You need to realize that "SDM" in the new Tamron-made lenses
is not the old Pentax SDM that you've been discussing in your later posts.

and m42 is a step worse than my oldest film lenses. What I'd like are modern lenses.

The Zeiss M42 lenses include very modern designs like the 15/2.8, 18/2.8, 25/2.0, 35/1.4, and 135/2.0.

[FilmORbitz]

"Kind of" as in "not at all".


You need to realize that "SDM" in the new Tamron-made lenses
is not the old Pentax SDM that you've been discussing in your later posts.


The Zeiss M42 lenses include very modern designs like the 15/2.8, 18/2.8, 25/2.0, 35/1.4, and 135/2.0.

I've decided that I answered the OP's question incorrectly. I should have replied "No, not dead. Everything is fine."

[GrantFS]

frankly - most photographer's needs are already more-than-covered by existing Pentax lenses alone.

I bought the K-1 a year ago for a specific use and it's been really great. However, lenses are definitely an issue. I'd like 24 and 28 prime and modern. I don't particularly need fast, just high quality with good AF. There's nothing.

Software is also an issue.

[BigMackCam]

I bought the K-1 a year ago for a specific use and it's been really great. However, lenses are definitely an issue. I'd like 24 and 28 prime and modern. I don't particularly need fast, just high quality with good AF. There's nothing.

Understood - however, there's a big difference between want and need, IMHO. Those focal lengths are already covered by fast, pro-quality, modern Pentax zooms with excellent IQ. I don't doubt that many people would like specific focal lengths in a smaller prime, but it's not as if they can't get what they need from the zooms. Primes, I'm sure, will come along in good time

[clackers]

I bought the K-1 a year ago for a specific use and it's been really great. However, lenses are definitely an issue. I'd like 24 and 28 prime and modern. .

I have the Sigma 24mm f1.8, Grant, its screwdrive AF is nice and quick.

Software is also an issue.

All the software brands handle the Pentax DNG files, Grant. A couple can even do the Pixel Shift ones, AFAIK.

Lightroom tethering's there, as is the ImageSync remote control app which is just like the Canon, Samsung and Sony apps I use.

[GrantFS]

however, there's a big difference between want and need, IMHO. Those focal lengths are already covered by fast, pro-quality, modern Pentax zooms with excellent IQ.

Well ... if that was really the case, every camera company would only offer 3 or 4 lenses.

A camera like the K-1, with its excellent image quality, requires lenses of the highest resolving power to give its best. As I have established for myself with Nikon glass and the D800E, yesterdays top of the line lenses, just don't cut it with todays top of the line sensors. You are simply missing out on a mass of resolved detail. I'm sure that the recent Pentax zooms are up to the job, but again, they aren't as up to it as primes and they're bulky and heavy. Bulky and heavy are not just an inconvenience. They actually matter when working. IMHO.

[BigMackCam]

Well ... if that was really the case, every camera company would only offer 3 or 4 lenses.

A lot of lenses offered by the camera companies are those that people want rather than need. My point was that the IQ of professional-level modern zoom lenses is more than good enough to fulfill the majority of roles that dedicated primes would at any given focal length. Modern zoom lenses can perform almost as well as good primes in many respects (if test data is anything to go by) and they're certainly good enough to satisfy most photographers' needs until dedicated primes become available. So it is with the K-1 and the current lens line-up.

A camera like the K-1, with its excellent image quality, requires lenses of the highest resolving power to give its best.
...
yesterdays top of the line lenses, just don't cut it with todays top of the line sensors. You are simply missing out on a mass of resolved detail.

Resolving power isn't everything with image quality; in fact, I'd go so far as to say it's a secondary concern in many applications (within reasonable limits of course), unless you're reproducing images at large sizes for viewing at very close distances. It may be important in your specific application(s), but I think it's a much over-rated measurement

Bulky and heavy are not just an inconvenience. They actually matter when working. IMHO.

Of course, and I agree to some extent. However, if bulky and heavy were that much of an issue, we'd all stick to APS-C format. When I'm looking for compact and fairly light weight, I pack my K-3 and DA Limited lenses

---

Last edited by BigMackCam; 05-31-2017 at 05:57 AM.

[clackers]

Well ... if that was really the case, every camera company would only offer 3 or 4 lenses.

A camera like the K-1, with its excellent image quality, requires lenses of the highest resolving power to give its best. As I have established for myself with Nikon glass and the D800E, yesterdays top of the line lenses, just don't cut it with todays top of the line sensors. .

This is highly unlikely, Grant ... the pixels on the D800/K-1 are the same pixel dimensions as the K-30 or K-50.

[pinholecam]

Well ... if that was really the case, every camera company would only offer 3 or 4 lenses.

A camera like the K-1, with its excellent image quality, requires lenses of the highest resolving power to give its best. As I have established for myself with Nikon glass and the D800E, yesterdays top of the line lenses, just don't cut it with todays top of the line sensors. You are simply missing out on a mass of resolved detail. I'm sure that the recent Pentax zooms are up to the job, but again, they aren't as up to it as primes and they're bulky and heavy. Bulky and heavy are not just an inconvenience. They actually matter when working. IMHO.

The resolving power of legacy lenses are actually very good for stopped down use.
Certainly not "missing out on a mass of resolved detail" as you have mentioned.

So far, from my own usage, only old wides/UWA don't do as well on the off center in terms of sharpness on a FF sensor.
Then again, there is the K28/3.5, which is really excellent still.

Yes, modern lenses, often can do better on the off center on larger apertures nowadays, but if we shoot landscapes/macros (ie. DOF needed), thats not as relevant as what manufacturers want ppl to believe.
Such modern lenses also come at the cost of size, weight and $$.


I've left many full sized samples here.
The latter ones with a link to a full sized images on Google Drive.
The Pixel Shift Diaries

[zapp]

The resolving power of legacy lenses are actually very good for stopped down use.
Certainly not "missing out on a mass of resolved detail" as you have mentioned.

So far, from my own usage, only old wides/UWA don't do as well on the off center in terms of sharpness on a FF sensor.
Then again, there is the K28/3.5, which is really excellent still.

Yes, modern lenses, often can do better on the off center on larger apertures nowadays, but if we shoot landscapes/macros (ie. DOF needed), thats not as relevant as what manufacturers want ppl to believe.
Such modern lenses also come at the cost of size, weight and $$.


I've left many full sized samples here.
The latter ones with a link to a full sized images on Google Drive.
The Pixel Shift Diaries

Pentax will sell zero lenses if all of us would happilly choose legacy glass. Pentax is not a camera only manufacturer, lenses are the salt in the soup.
It is nice to be able to go back but it is even nicer to look into a realistic future. Future is still Ltd.

[pinholecam]

Pentax will sell zero lenses if all of us would happilly choose legacy glass. Pentax is not a camera only manufacturer, lenses are the salt in the soup.
It is nice to be able to go back but it is even nicer to look into a realistic future. Future is still Ltd.

Well... better than the whining and the doom and gloom and Pentax is a loser attitude that is so pervasive in its user base, right?

There are both markets.
Legacy lens users also buy new lenses and vice versa.


That said, I am do prefer smallish primes, so that determines what I buy /use, more than absolute sharpness wide open, or lenses moderness

[biz-engineer]

Have I brought into a dead Eco System

You'll see in 2023 is Ricoh will revive the system or not.

[normhead]

Well... better than the whining and the doom and gloom and Pentax is a loser attitude that is so pervasive in its user base, right?

There are both markets.
Legacy lens users also buy new lenses and vice versa.


That said, I am do prefer smallish primes, so that determines what I buy /use, more than absolute sharpness wide open, or lenses moderness

The artistic/ technical value of expensive modern primes, tends to be vastly overrated by people who don't do their own testing. They tell you they need the best, but they won't say why.

My prime that gets the most use in wide angle, my Sigma 24mm ultra wide II, because it's in the bag when I need it. It's never on the camera while hiking, that would be the DFA 28-105, but as an auxiliary lens I can pull it out and use it when necessary. A lens like the DFA 21 ltd. wouldn't even be in the bag.

There are two classes of photographer. Image makers, and gear collectors. The guys who can take the image and talk about the image, and the guys who take the image and brag about what lens they used.

[VictorDA]

If this 2017 thread can suddenly revive, so can Pentax

[normhead]

If this 2017 thread can suddenly revive, so can Pentax

And people still read Moby DIck. It's a saga, with anxious folks providing all the drama. As I used to say 10 years ago "People say Pentax will fail, but they won't say when." The ones saying Pentax was doomed 10 years ago, at this point have all been proven wrong. That claim is way past its expiry date, as is the dead ecosystem. Simple fact, every lens in my cupboard still works, every camera in my cupboard still works. A few lenses still come out every year or so. Nothing ever seems to change. the Pentax "wall" is what it is. The crazy thing is all the people who come to Pentax, then discover "the wall." (Slow releases of new products, only two or 3 new releases a year. but still, lots to buy in the catalogue.) The issue is not about reviving, it's about can you adjust to what it is, from whatever you shot with before. Pentax doesn't change much, and users are a revolving door on any system. Maybe you buy into Pentax (or Nikon or Canon or Sony, or Fuji) and it meets your needs for a year and you've grown to need something else, or like myself, you buy in and it lasts you a lifetime. No judgement. Everyone's different.