[Zygonyx]

Yeah, but i doubt that XF lens covers 24×36mm image circle : so your comparison sounds unfair.

[Doundounba]

Yeah, but i doubt that XF lens covers 24×36mm image circle : so your comparison sounds unfair.

Point taken - it's admittedly an APS-C shooter's comparison. But I doubt Pentax will offer me a lighter DA-only equivalent lens for my K-3. I don't blame them - they're heading into FF territory so emphasis on small and light will be difficult to maintain in new lens releases. And I can see the appeal, for people who might shoot both FF and APS-C, of having a single long tele zoom for both bodies. But for APS-C only shooters, Fuji is increasing its attractiveness with this lens... They still don't have the whole equation solved, as far as I'm concerned, but they're moving in the right direction.

[Zygonyx]

That is right.

[Digitalis]

they're moving in the right direction

by staying exactly where they are.

[tuco]

I have experience with several camera systems and their lenses. I had a XP1 for a while. I liked what glass I had. The Fuji 18-55mm 2.8-4.0 lens was a really good performer for a kit lens and it was on that camera most of the time. That camera was my candid, hiking and messing around camera. I really liked the 35/1.4 lens too. Who f-ing cares if it was focus by wire. It didn't bother me but the more sensitive types out there my find it objectionable in some hypothetical way

[Rondec]

I have experience with several camera systems and their lenses. I had a XP1 for a while. I liked what glass I had. The Fuji 18-55mm 2.8-4.0 lens was a really good performer for a kit lens and it was on that camera most of the time. That camera was my candid, hiking and messing around camera. I really liked the 35/1.4 lens too. Who f-ing cares if it was focus by wire. It didn't bother me but the more sensitive types out there my find it objectionable in some hypothetical way

Isn't part of the issue the hypothetical situation that the wire mechanism fails, your lens is shot, whereas a non-focus by wire lens is usable as a manual focus lens, even in the situation where, say, the in-lens motor burns out. None of the lenses designed for auto focus are great manual focus lenses, but some, like the FA limiteds, are better than others.

[tuco]

Isn't part of the issue the hypothetical situation that the wire mechanism fails, your lens is shot, whereas a non-focus by wire lens is usable as a manual focus lens, even in the situation where, say, the in-lens motor burns out. None of the lenses designed for auto focus are great manual focus lenses, but some, like the FA limiteds, are better than others.

And how many problems have focus-by-wire had so far, I wonder. What about all these fancy digital cameras today. They have lots of points of failure with all their electronics. A manual focus lens does little good when the body fails. So it really doesn't matter, IMHO. If a person is critical of electronic lenses they also need to be critical of their electronic body.

[Rondec]

And how many problems have focus-by-wire had so far, I wonder. What about all these fancy digital cameras today. They have lots of points of failure with all their electronics. A manual focus lens does little good when the body fails. So it really doesn't matter, IMHO. If a person is critical of electronic lenses they also need to be critical of their electronic body.

I don't care either way. The less electronics, probably the less likelihood of failure in the future, but be that as it may, Pentax doesn't have these type of lenses, so I probably won't experience these.

[tuco]

...Pentax doesn't have these type of lenses, so I probably won't experience these.

Not today. But what about tomorrow. It will most likely be the future for commodity cameras.

[Doundounba]

Pentax so far has, by and large, taken the point of view that although digital camera bodies are quickly obsoleted commodities, lenses are not. Thus the physical mount itself has barely changed in what, over 35 years? New camera bodies continue to support screw driven AF, and SDM lenses can be converted to screw drive if the lens motor breaks. You can still mount K and M-series lenses from the 70s and 80s without any adapter! And with all of them, you get auto-iris - you focus wide-open and the camera automatically closes the lens iris to your chosen aperture only when you hit the shutter. I'm not aware of any adapter that will give you this when using Pentax glass on non-Pentax mirrorless bodies. Backwards compatibility is not perfect - see the "un-cripple the k-mount" folks - but personally, I really appreciate Pentax's approach in this area. It's still one of their values, as evidenced by recent teasers for the upcoming fullframe. And it's something that weighs heavily in favor of me remaining a Pentax shooter. So having focus-by-wire on Fuji lenses is not a selling point for me - on the contrary...

[wed7]

Following this thread.

[asp1880]

Not today. But what about tomorrow. It will most likely be the future for commodity cameras.

AFAIK, the 18-50 collapsible kit zoom is focus by wire, for compactness' sake.


Regards,
--Anders.

[Scintilla]

And with all of them, you get auto-iris - you focus wide-open and the camera automatically closes the lens iris to your chosen aperture only when you hit the shutter. I'm not aware of any adapter that will give you this when using Pentax glass on non-Pentax mirrorless bodies.

As much as I like the Pentax attention to backwards compatibility, and the ease of operation this affords to Samyang lenses, and the fact that I can keep using any FA-or-older lens via inexpensive "dumb" adapters even if something should happen to the K-mount, I found this line here a little odd. Is there an advantage to focusing wide-open on mirrorless bodies? Without an OVF to worry about dimming, wouldn't you rather focus at the selected aperture to get accurate DoF feedback (and no focus shift issues)? Unless perhaps light was really low...


(Disclaimer: I have never tried using an adapted lens on a mirrorless camera before)

[Doundounba]

Is there an advantage to focusing wide-open on mirrorless bodies? Without an OVF to worry about dimming, wouldn't you rather focus at the selected aperture to get accurate DoF feedback (and no focus shift issues)? Unless perhaps light was really low...

Actually, you focus wide open on a Pentax body (with a K-mount lens), and with a stopped down lens on a mirrorless with an adapter. Assuming a lens that has no significant focus shift issues, you get much more precise focusing with a wide open lens. But yes, for me the main advantage is low light focusing. And you do have to worry about dimming even with an LCD (I use liveview pretty much all the time for macro). There's a limit to the LCD gain which can be applied. My main use case is macro, and it's super difficult to see anything with a stopped down lens. Makes shooting reversed lens setups very difficult. So if I can, I'd much rather be shooting with a native lens that stays open until I hit the shutter than with an adapted one where it's stopped down. The only downside to focusing wide-open for macro is that sometimes at high magnifications your DoF gets so fantastically thin wide-open that it's really hard to find the subject. Even if you're pointing right at it, it can be bokeh'ed into oblivion. Still that's better than total darkness.

The theoretical ideal (for macro) would be a lens/camera combo that adapts to light conditions and when there's reasonable light stops down a bit even prior to the shot, and then stops down fully once you hit the shutter. Alas, that doesn't exist, AFAIK...

[johnmflores]

As much as I like the Pentax attention to backwards compatibility, and the ease of operation this affords to Samyang lenses, and the fact that I can keep using any FA-or-older lens via inexpensive "dumb" adapters even if something should happen to the K-mount, I found this line here a little odd. Is there an advantage to focusing wide-open on mirrorless bodies? Without an OVF to worry about dimming, wouldn't you rather focus at the selected aperture to get accurate DoF feedback (and no focus shift issues)? Unless perhaps light was really low...


(Disclaimer: I have never tried using an adapted lens on a mirrorless camera before)

On Panasonic M43 mirrorless cameras, there is a way to view the image with the aperture stopped down, kind of like pressing and holding down a DOF preview button or lever. It's helpful for static shots on a tripod, but at small apertures (large F-numbers) it leads to a ghosting laggy screen as the camera is trying to gather enough photons to render a viewable image on the LCD.

For example, if you are stopped down for F11 for greater DOF but that leads to a 1/2s shutter speed, the screen is basically operating a 2 frames per second, which does funky things when you are trying to compose the image.