|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-10-2015, 01:20 PM
|
| |
Relatively fast lenses from the 1970s like the 50mm f/1.4 and the 75-150 f/4 were still at 49mm for filter size which would be considered amazing today. They were metal barrels and MF, of course. Even so, relatively small, plastic barrel screw-drive lenses such as the 28-70 f/4 (52mm filter) existed in the early FA days, but the build was low quality. Given the Ltd. line, I think in-lens motors are a major contributing factor. In-lens motors (DC) that don't tend to fail might need to be a bit larger yet. Canon and Nikon require ILIS, and that takes a bit extra space. We see more WR and * quality lenses requiring a bit more bulk. Many small factors add up to a lot more bulk.
Pentax will need to find more to distinguish itself against Canon and Nikon in the FF battle. When you consider that Pentax is the only IBIS among the three, and in a good position with relatively small FF prime lenses, the way of taking advantage of these differences should involve development of smaller zooms (both in terms of range and aperture size). While the 20-40 Ltd. hinted at that, its crop range, relative IQ, and variable aperture did not impress all that successfully with the apparent intended audience (and it isn't a FF lens). Rather than duplicate higher end f/2.8 zooms offered by the other brands, scaling down good zooms to f/3.5 or even f/4 constant aperture would put Pentax in an interesting class sized between the major FF dSLRs and the better mirrorless offerings. Where you need shallow DoF, the primes allow for it and tend to give a better bokeh - even in the modern zoom designs.
|
