Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-20-2016, 05:32 AM   #16
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 8,675
Well, video users (bless 'em!) would prefer lens stabilization to the current electronic stuff in body.

My Sigma 150-500 in K-mount does have IS.


Last edited by clackers; 02-20-2016 at 05:53 AM.
02-20-2016, 12:25 PM   #17
Site Supporter
Spodeworld's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New Joisey
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,215
I agree but they told me that it was in response to Pentax users wanting it out. And, as a result converting it for Pentax makes it a more difficult, expensive and a much less attractive proposition for Sigma in light of the relatively small market share.

And we lose the potential advantages.


QuoteOriginally posted by boriscleto Quote
Who would want to get rid of the OS? Maybe for short lenses, but for the long lenses in-lens OS is much better than in-body SR. You get a stabilized viewfinder...They must be talking to the wrong users.
02-20-2016, 12:50 PM   #18
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,763
QuoteOriginally posted by Spodeworld Quote
I agree but they told me that it was in response to Pentax users wanting it out. And, as a result converting it for Pentax makes it a more difficult, expensive and a much less attractive proposition for Sigma in light of the relatively small market share.

And we lose the potential advantages.
I call BS. Sorry, but Sigma has more excuses than "Pentax users wanted the OS out". The rep may have been told that, but it doesn't ring true. We've been told that Pentax doesn't have electronic aperture control. We've been told that it costs too much to make the lens barrel for the small number of lenses that would be sold in K-mount etc.
02-20-2016, 01:52 PM   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,770
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul the Sunman Quote
The way I read the K1 specs, the camera detects an APS-C lens and defaults to crop mode,
Although I haven't seen a K-1 manual, the menu options for crop mode will likely be Auto | On | Off. It's likely the default will be 'Off'. If you set the default to 'Off', the camera will shoot 36MP FF all day, every day, no matter what lens you mount.

02-20-2016, 02:16 PM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,215
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Although I haven't seen a K-1 manual, the menu options for crop mode will likely be Auto | On | Off. It's likely the default will be 'Off'. If you set the default to 'Off', the camera will shoot 36MP FF all day, every day, no matter what lens you mount.
On another thread (Kenspo! 1:1?) ogl showed a picture of the LCD Menu of what is presumably a pre-production camera. There were 4 choices for Crop:
  1. Auto
  2. Full
  3. APSc
  4. 1:1
02-20-2016, 02:41 PM   #21
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,770
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
There were 4 choices for Crop: Auto Full APSc 1:1
Thanks. The options look pretty straight-forward then.

If you set the camera to default to '2', it effectively means '36MP - no crop'.
'3' means '15MP - crop', and 'Auto' means the camera will [if the lens is Pentax one] attempt to figure out if the mounted lens is a DA that will work OK in mode 2, or not. Heaven knows what the '1:1' crop mode will deliver.
02-20-2016, 02:49 PM   #22
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 8,675
QuoteOriginally posted by Spodeworld Quote
I agree but they told me that it was in response to Pentax users wanting it out.
You don't believe your fellow owners on this forum but you do the words of some salesman?

Shame, Spodeworld, shame! ☺
02-20-2016, 03:05 PM   #23
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,553
QuoteOriginally posted by wissink Quote
I'm really hoping for my 35 ltd.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but although it covers more than APS-C, the DA35 macro limited is not quite a full frame lens. It is acceptable at macro focal distances, but for general photography it vignettes heavily in the corners.

These are only crappy test shots, but they get the message across I think.

Close up, wide open - good times.



Stopped down a bit, hood retracted - the vignetting is not huge, but it's heavy.



02-20-2016, 03:35 PM   #24
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 8,675
QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
Sorry to burst your bubble, but although it covers more than APS-C, the DA35 macro limited is not quite a full frame lens.
Looks like a lens you could do better than APS-C mode - shoot FF and do a manual crop in post.
02-20-2016, 04:27 PM   #25
Site Supporter
Spodeworld's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New Joisey
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,215
We had a number of back and forths and in the end it did make sense to me, unfortunately. He said to remove the OS it required a redesign and necessitated different parts that would otherwise not be required (he explained, but I forgot, although it may have had something to do with the barrel redesign w/o OS), increasing the complexities of accommodating Pentax and dimnishing economies of scale. He said as a result it was a costly process and not worth it for such a small market. It's not just them adapting the mount. It was much bigger, costlier effort b/c of the OS removal. In a world where 'repeatability' is highly valued, the small market that doesn't benefit from that is problematic for a manufacturer. I'm not sure why it's so difficult to consider that that might really be a real consideration.

QuoteOriginally posted by boriscleto Quote
I call BS. Sorry, but Sigma has more excuses than "Pentax users wanted the OS out". The rep may have been told that, but it doesn't ring true. We've been told that Pentax doesn't have electronic aperture control. We've been told that it costs too much to make the lens barrel for the small number of lenses that would be sold in K-mount etc.


---------- Post added 02-20-16 at 06:37 PM ----------

I might be inclined to if one of them worked for sigma and had real inside knowledge .....


QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
You don't believe your fellow owners on this forum but you do the words of some salesman?

Shame, Spodeworld, shame! ☺

Last edited by Spodeworld; 02-20-2016 at 04:34 PM.
02-20-2016, 07:04 PM   #26
Site Supporter
colonel00's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Shawnee, KS
Posts: 468
QuoteOriginally posted by Spodeworld Quote
We had a number of back and forths and in the end it did make sense to me, unfortunately. He said to remove the OS it required a redesign and necessitated different parts that would otherwise not be required (he explained, but I forgot, although it may have had something to do with the barrel redesign w/o OS), increasing the complexities of accommodating Pentax and dimnishing economies of scale. He said as a result it was a costly process and not worth it for such a small market. It's not just them adapting the mount. It was much bigger, costlier effort b/c of the OS removal. In a world where 'repeatability' is highly valued, the small market that doesn't benefit from that is problematic for a manufacturer. I'm not sure why it's so difficult to consider that that might really be a real consideration.
I don't think anyone is arguing that it wouldn't cost money to remove the OS from the lens. I think the argument is that most would be perfectly happy with the OS still in the lens and it seems like a convenient excuse that "Pentax users wanted the OS removed". Who are these Pentax users that are so influential that they can dictate the "necessary" removal of the OS when there are hordes of Pentaxians crying for more lenses in the K-mount and they really wouldn't care if it had OS or not. There are plenty of folks perfectly happy with their Bigmas that have OS.
02-20-2016, 07:16 PM   #27
Pentaxian
panoguy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Washington, D.C.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,290
QuoteOriginally posted by Spodeworld Quote
We had a number of back and forths and in the end it did make sense to me, unfortunately. He said to remove the OS it required a redesign and necessitated different parts that would otherwise not be required (he explained, but I forgot, although it may have had something to do with the barrel redesign w/o OS), increasing the complexities of accommodating Pentax and dimnishing economies of scale. He said as a result it was a costly process and not worth it for such a small market. It's not just them adapting the mount. It was much bigger, costlier effort b/c of the OS removal. In a world where 'repeatability' is highly valued, the small market that doesn't benefit from that is problematic for a manufacturer. I'm not sure why it's so difficult to consider that that might really be a real consideration.
Long ago I was told by the head of Sigma Service in NY that it was due to the aperture control lever and Pentax having much smaller market share than Nikon (which also has an aperture control lever). There is a cost to each new lensmount, and Canon and Nikon are easily covered by volume of sales, while making every lens in Sigma SA is not only a point of pride, but also essentially Canon EF electronics on a K-mount (so truly not much to do). The more "niche" a lens is, like the 120-300/2.8 I was pestering him about, the higher the cost to offer it in a new lensmount. This was before Global Vision, though.

He also said that a few lenses were made without OS in other mounts because the OEM's requested it, not the users. IOW, when I spoke to him Hoya owned Pentax, and they didn't want Sigma to sell lenses in K-mount with OS for some reason - maybe they thought it would make SR look redundant or ineffective? Also, remember Hoya supplies most of Sigma's raw material (optical blanks), and these are Japanese companies, so they do talk to each other and show respect, even if they compete. Why this no-OS nonsense continues today, I've no idea, but I'm pretty sure Sigma is actually *saving money* by not including OS in a lens that they sell at the same price, which could then offset the price of making fewer of that mount.

*Forgot to add, I have two Sigma lenses in K-mount with OS, the 50-500 and the 17-50 (which I note is no longer sold with OS for Pentax). Just turn off SR, otherwise the results are kinda soft.

Last edited by panoguy; 02-20-2016 at 07:27 PM.
02-20-2016, 07:21 PM   #28
Site Supporter
Spodeworld's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New Joisey
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,215
Well, maybe if they heard from a swarm of pentax users that they are interested in their lenses and would be even more inclined to purchase them if the left in the OS it would be one less hurdle to getting them.

QuoteOriginally posted by panoguy Quote
Long ago I was told by the head of Sigma Service in NY that it was due to the aperture control lever and Pentax having much smaller market share than Nikon (which also has an aperture control lever). There is a cost to each new lensmount, and Canon and Nikon are easily covered by volume of sales, while making every lens in Sigma SA is not only a point of pride, but also essentially Canon EF electronics on a K-mount (so truly not much to do). The more "niche" a lens is, like the 120-300/2.8 I was pestering him about, the higher the cost to offer it in a new lensmount. This was before Global Vision, though.

He also said that a few lenses were made without OS in other mounts because the OEM's requested it, not the users. IOW, when I spoke to him Hoya owned Pentax, and they didn't want Sigma to sell lenses in K-mount with OS for some reason - maybe they thought it would make SR look redundant or ineffective? Also, remember Hoya supplies most of Sigma's raw material (optical blanks), and these are Japanese companies, so they do talk to each other and show respect, even if they compete.
02-20-2016, 08:57 PM   #29
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,215
QuoteOriginally posted by Spodeworld Quote
Well, maybe if they heard from a swarm of pentax users that they are interested in their lenses and would be even more inclined to purchase them if the left in the OS it would be one less hurdle to getting them.
That's all fine, but I hope PENTAX hears from a swarm of users about what lenses we want PENTAX to release in K-mount.
02-20-2016, 09:17 PM   #30
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 8,675
QuoteOriginally posted by Spodeworld Quote
. He said to remove the OS it required a redesign and necessitated different parts that would otherwise not be required
No, no, no ... I meant, where are all these Pentax users who want it taken out?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
article, barrel, bottom, camera, canon, costs, dslr, k1, lens, market, mounts, nikon, options, os, pentax, photography, player, redesign, shame, sigma, sony, tamron, wildlife
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K1 pics new update with da lenses this time zmohie Pentax News and Rumors 766 02-13-2016 04:49 PM
Pentax vs Nikon, Canon, Sony etc. hjoseph7 General Photography 24 01-07-2015 07:04 AM
Lens suggestions for wildlife, etc. Traci Pentax K-5 14 07-14-2011 09:05 PM
For Sale - Sold: Major cleaning (cheap lenses -50mm 1.7, super takumar, sigma etc etc- and film stillnk Sold Items 10 04-11-2011 05:20 PM
Nikon D3s , BEST Dslr ever tested at dpreview Samsungian Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 31 02-24-2010 02:58 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:13 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top