Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Pentax K roadmap 2014
#1
So we WILL finally see some new lenses in 2014 ... or later ...

#2
And one of them isn't DA Smile

#3
Quote:So we WILL finally see some new lenses in 2014 ... or later ...
I don't understand your point about the supposed "lack of lenses" for Pentax. It seems they have been releasing lenses steadily over the last few years for different mounts so how come there is this profound problem?

#4
Quote:I don't understand your point about the supposed "lack of lenses" for Pentax. It seems they have been releasing lenses steadily over the last few years for different mounts so how come there is this profound problem?
Well there's still a  lack of telephoto lenses above 300mm unless you're into paying $6000 or more for the DA 560mm monster which nobody seems to have bought, (I have "never" seen one post from someone who has purchased this lens and only a couple from people who have borrowed it). 

    Their range is very complete but some of the designs date from far back and are a bit long in the tooth, also their limiteds lack lens motors and are not cheap but are lenses for life, when compared to the Canikon range Pentax is way behind especially in AF. I also think Pentax needs to address the AF speed situation which limits it's sports usage.

  However, in comparison with Sony, Panasonic, Olympus and Samsung things are pretty bright! 

Dave's clichés
#5
Quote:Well there's still a  lack of telephoto lenses above 300mm unless you're into paying $6000 or more for the DA 560mm monster which nobody seems to have bought, (I have "never" seen one post from someone who has purchased this lens and only a couple from people who have borrowed it). 

    There range is very complete but some of the designs date from far back and are a bit long in the tooth, also their limiteds lack lens motors and are not cheap but are lenses for life, when compared to the Canikon range Pentax is way behind especially in AF. I also think Pentax needs to address the AF speed situation which limits it's sports usage.

  However, in comparison with Sony, Panasonic, Olympus and Samsung things are pretty bright! 
 

Yes in telephotos there is a gap, but those are mostly expensive niche lenses for bird nutters and management probably doesn't think they can sell many. Low volume also probably explains the ridiculous price of the 560mm. 

 

As far as AF goes the latest cameras (well the k3) are getting competitive (finally) so I don't think they are "way behind". Canon is definitely the leader though when it comes to their high-end AF modules.

 

With the limited lenses they can be small due to lack of in-lens motors and drive speed is never a concern. The only issue may be in-body motor noise, but I am not sure how many people really care. All in all there is a pretty big selection unless you need exotic and expensive fast primes/zooms, however Sigma mostly takes care of that gap. Sure things could be better, but they are far from dire as people suggest.
#6
The 560mm also is not a very good lens... 

Typical of Pentax (to me) seems the bad lens designs of the newest lenses. Take that off 20-40mm f2.8-4 for instance. Why that limited range? Why the relatively small aperture (f4)?  It should be pretty darn special then, but it isn't at all. Fine in the center, nothing special in the borders. And then the price... Yes, it is weather sealed. But $1000 for a 30-60mm ff4.2-6 full frame equivalent? For that money Canon almost offers a 24-70mm f4 L IS USM.

 

Same goes for a lot of the lenses in the Pentax range. Not the best rendering optics, or steep pricing. Sure (and luckily), there are some gems in between also. 

 

With Canon and Nikon, photographers after shallow DOF possibilities are offered cameras with FF sensors and lenses with big max. apertures. For architectural and other purposes, Nikon and especially Canon offer a range of tilt shift lenses. And then there is that special Canon MP-E 65mm f2.8 macro. Not just with tele the Pentax range is limited.

 

For me it is a bit hard to pinpoint which kind of photographer a Pentax DSLR is the ideal choice for. I guess photographer looking for a basic "street" primes setup can find his way with the 21mm f3.2, 31mm f1.8 and 77mm f1.8. 

#7
Quote:The 560mm also is not a very good lens... 

Typical of Pentax (to me) seems the bad lens designs of the newest lenses. Take that off 20-40mm f2.8-4 for instance. Why that limited range? Why the relatively small aperture (f4)?  It should be pretty darn special then, but it isn't at all. Fine in the center, nothing special in the borders. And then the price... Yes, it is weather sealed. But $1000 for a 30-60mm ff4.2-6 full frame equivalent? For that money Canon almost offers a 24-70mm f4 L IS USM.

 

Same goes for a lot of the lenses in the Pentax range. Not the best rendering optics, or steep pricing. Sure (and luckily), there are some gems in between also. 

 

With Canon and Nikon, photographers after shallow DOF possibilities are offered cameras with FF sensors and lenses with big max. apertures. For architectural and other purposes, Nikon and especially Canon offer a range of tilt shift lenses. And then there is that special Canon MP-E 65mm f2.8 macro. Not just with tele the Pentax range is limited.

 

For me it is a bit hard to pinpoint which kind of photographer a Pentax DSLR is the ideal choice for. I guess photographer looking for a basic "street" primes setup can find his way with the 21mm f3.2, 31mm f1.8 and 77mm f1.8. 
Agreed, in fact it's the middle period lenses that were probably the best, their recent lenses just don't raise the bar sufficiently and as you say DA 20-40 is decent but no more, needing stopping down to 5.6 to get decent sharpness across the frame and at a $1,000, however Pentaxians are seemingly very happy with it as they are with the  DA18-135 and the DA 55-300 both very average optically. That set against Sigma/Tamron who are standing toe to toe against each other and releasing a new level of class lenses gives Pentax a good reason for upping their game! 

  They were at their peak in the eighties with the FA* 300 F2.8, FA* 28-70 F 2.8 and the like, those were the days!  
Dave's clichés
#8
Quote:Agreed, in fact it's the middle period lenses that were probably the best, their recent lenses just don't raise the bar sufficiently and as you say DA 20-40 is decent but no more, needing stopping down to 5.6 to get decent sharpness across the frame and at a $1,000, however Pentaxians are seemingly very happy with it as they are with the  DA18-135 and the DA 55-300 both very average optically. That set against Sigma/Tamron who are standing toe to toe against each other and releasing a new level of class lenses gives Pentax a good reason for upping their game! 

  They were at their peak in the eighties with the FA* 300 F2.8, FA* 28-70 F 2.8 and the like, those were the days!  
Good point about the 20-40mm, that lens is a mystery - slow, expensive, soft etc. The appeal is the nice build I guess, but that's where it ends.

 

As far as the 560mm is concerned, it is quite sharp from what I have seen so it is a good lens, just quite overpiced. 

 

The appeal of the other limited lenses is also there I think. They have good (if not exceptional) optics with a unique build and small size that has Leica type charm without the price. Handling your standard plastic lens seems rather dull in comparison. These characteristics may not appeal to everyone though.
#9
Quote:Good point about the 20-40mm, that lens is a mystery - slow, expensive, soft etc. The appeal is the nice build I guess, but that's where it ends.

 

As far as the 560mm is concerned, it is quite sharp from what I have seen so it is a good lens, just quite overpiced. 
From what I have seen, it is not overly sharp, has so so bokeh and very heavy CA.... 

And then it does not seem to be a real tele lens (rather a long focus lens). Notice the strangely long dimension of 522mm? 

 

Real telelenses are shorter. 

Some examples:

Canon EF 500mm f4 L IS USM: 387mm

Nikkor AF-S 500mm f4 VR: 391mm

 

It seems to be designed by a newbie. Not sharp or contrasty at all wide open (f5.6), weird optical design with a build length of a simple long focus lens, as if telelens design had not happened, and strong CA for a tele prime.

 

The only two plusses I can think of for this particular lens is that it has AF which my Tamron 500mm 8 lacks, and has much nicer bokeh than that lens. For the rest.... better look at the new Tamron 150-600mm f5-6.3 VC USD instead.

Quote:The appeal of the other limited lenses is also there I think. They have good (if not exceptional) optics with a unique build and small size that has Leica type charm without the price. Handling your standard plastic lens seems rather dull in comparison. These characteristics may not appeal to everyone though.
#10
Am I the only one to have totally written Pentax off of late? I'm glad I never went this route back in the day. Not even Tamron seems eager to make lenses in their mount now. Sad

  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)