03-02-2011, 02:20 PM
[quote name='thxbb12' timestamp='1299074149' post='6441']
They just didn't release the lens I'm interested in:
* 16-45: not long enough nor WR
* 16-50: a bit too short, soft at f/2.8 and soso up to f/4, plus the lens doesn't focus well on non-contrasty subjects
* 17-70: "only" starts at 17mm and not WR
* 18-55: only 18mm
* 18-135: only 18mm as well
A 16-70 WR (f/2.8-4.5 or constant f/4) would be ideal.
Zeiss made an excellent 18-60 f/3.5-4.5 in Sony mount and Nikon have the 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 (bit slow).
Both of these lenses are very good optically while not breaking the bank.
I believe Pentax could make a good 16-70 WR optically and to me it would be a nice differentatior.
Plus, I don't understand why they don't release more WR lenses. Afterall, they prone themselves for targeting outdoor photographers while they don't seem to release that many WR lenses (limiteds shouldn't be, but 12-24, 17-70 and 55-300 clearly come to mind).
[/quote]
Regarding WR - agreed but it's surely a matter of resources.
As far as the 17-70mm is concerned - they simply wanted to sell more 12-24 or 14/2.8 ;-)
They just didn't release the lens I'm interested in:
* 16-45: not long enough nor WR
* 16-50: a bit too short, soft at f/2.8 and soso up to f/4, plus the lens doesn't focus well on non-contrasty subjects
* 17-70: "only" starts at 17mm and not WR
* 18-55: only 18mm
* 18-135: only 18mm as well
A 16-70 WR (f/2.8-4.5 or constant f/4) would be ideal.
Zeiss made an excellent 18-60 f/3.5-4.5 in Sony mount and Nikon have the 16-85 f/3.5-5.6 (bit slow).
Both of these lenses are very good optically while not breaking the bank.
I believe Pentax could make a good 16-70 WR optically and to me it would be a nice differentatior.
Plus, I don't understand why they don't release more WR lenses. Afterall, they prone themselves for targeting outdoor photographers while they don't seem to release that many WR lenses (limiteds shouldn't be, but 12-24, 17-70 and 55-300 clearly come to mind).
[/quote]
Regarding WR - agreed but it's surely a matter of resources.
As far as the 17-70mm is concerned - they simply wanted to sell more 12-24 or 14/2.8 ;-)