If P-R can release FA 645 lenses why not K mount

Started 5 months ago | Discussions
yesman12
Contributing MemberPosts: 823Gear list
Like?
If P-R can release FA 645 lenses why not K mount
5 months ago

Hi all, 
And perhaps John Carlson can answer this...

I think it is great that PR released 645 lenses.. Why not introduce the best of the K mount lenses FA * such as the 24 F2, 85 1.4 etc? In the past I heard that these lenses had issues with lead included in the glass (never understood why this was an issue as it is encapsulated).  However if this were true the 645 lenses would not be allowed back.

-- hide signature --

A picture is worth a thousand words but talk is cheap.
Best regards
Nick

 yesman12's gear list:yesman12's gear list
Pentax smc FA 77mm 1.8 Limited
Cideway
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,677Gear list
Like?
Re: If P-R can release FA 645 lenses why not K mount
In reply to yesman12, 5 months ago

The issue as I understood it, cannot find the links now, was that the 35mm lenses used a particular type of glasses that is no longer made due to the lead in the ingredients. This may not have applied to the 645 lenses and as such they are free to be re-manufactured unmodified.

-- hide signature --

Chris.
A weather sealed ultra wide, is that too much to ask?
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/chriside
GMT +9.5
Pentax SLR talk FAQ
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=23161072

 Cideway's gear list:Cideway's gear list
Pentax K-5 II Pentax K-3 Pentax smc FA 50mm F1.4 Pentax smc DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL (IF) SDM Pentax smc DA* 50-135mm F2.8 ED (IF) SDM +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
viking79
Forum ProPosts: 13,273Gear list
Like?
Re: If P-R can release FA 645 lenses why not K mount
In reply to Cideway, 5 months ago

Cideway wrote:

The issue as I understood it, cannot find the links now, was that the 35mm lenses used a particular type of glasses that is no longer made due to the lead in the ingredients. This may not have applied to the 645 lenses and as such they are free to be re-manufactured unmodified.

Lead does impact index of refraction, so it likely means they would have to have a suitable replacement or redesign the lens for a different type of glass.

As for OP, I would rather see them spend effort making new design lenses.  I would be all for the old lenses for the launch of a Pentax full frame, but for APS-C don't see a lot of reason for them to re-release those.

Eric

 viking79's gear list:viking79's gear list
Sony Alpha 7R Samsung NX30 Samsung NX 30mm F2 Pancake Samsung NX 85mm F1.4 ED SSA Samsung NX 60mm F2.8 Macro ED OIS SSA +5 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
paulkienitz
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,805Gear list
Like?
Re: If P-R can release FA 645 lenses why not K mount
In reply to Cideway, 5 months ago

Cideway wrote:

The issue as I understood it, cannot find the links now, was that the 35mm lenses used a particular type of glasses that is no longer made due to the lead in the ingredients. This may not have applied to the 645 lenses and as such they are free to be re-manufactured unmodified.

On the other hand, the 645 lenses may just have a lot more old stock available.  We'll know if some of them start running out.  Then they'll have to make new ones, which might involve having to tweak the optical design.  Wouldn't be the first time; as I understand it the late-model Three Amigos differ from the originals.

I wonder if the lead issue is why we occasionally keep seeing new lenses, made in Vietnam, on the used market?  Lenses supposedly long discontinued, like the A 50/1.2 or the F 1.7x autofocus adapter.  Maybe they're actually illegal to sell in some markets, but they make new batches and sell them under the table.

-- hide signature --

"A good photograph is knowing where to stand." -- Ansel

 paulkienitz's gear list:paulkienitz's gear list
Pentax Q Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED Pentax smc DA* 300mm F4.0 ED (IF) SDM Samyang 8mm F3.5 Aspherical IF MC Fisheye +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
paulkienitz
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,805Gear list
Like?
Re: If P-R can release FA 645 lenses why not K mount
In reply to yesman12, 5 months ago

yesman12 wrote:

Hi all,
And perhaps John Carlson can answer this...

I think it is great that PR released 645 lenses.. Why not introduce the best of the K mount lenses FA * such as the 24 F2, 85 1.4 etc? In the past I heard that these lenses had issues with lead included in the glass (never understood why this was an issue as it is encapsulated). However if this were true the 645 lenses would not be allowed back.

Unless they're going to finally do a full frame, there are very few FA lenses we really need.  Why not just make a new DA 24/2 or 28/2, and maybe a long portrait lens like 120/2.  That plus what's on the roadmap should do us pretty well.

-- hide signature --

"A good photograph is knowing where to stand." -- Ansel

 paulkienitz's gear list:paulkienitz's gear list
Pentax Q Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED Pentax smc DA* 300mm F4.0 ED (IF) SDM Samyang 8mm F3.5 Aspherical IF MC Fisheye +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
James O'Neill
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,928
Like?
No new releases ...
In reply to yesman12, 5 months ago

yesman12 wrote:

Hi all,
And perhaps John Carlson can answer this...

I think it is great that PR released 645 lenses.. Why not introduce the best of the K mount lenses FA * such as the 24 F2, 85 1.4 etc? In the past I heard that these lenses had issues with lead included in the glass (never understood why this was an issue as it is encapsulated). However if this were true the 645 lenses would not be allowed back.

The 645 lenses which are now being offered in the US were never out of production. They were made in limited volumes and the Japanese market consumed almost all of them and Europe had what was left.

Whilst I would like to see some of the FA lenses available again, John's already talked about some of the problems with that http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53502536

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
justin23
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,200Gear list
Like?
Re: No new releases ...
In reply to James O'Neill, 5 months ago

James O'Neill wrote:

yesman12 wrote:

Hi all,
And perhaps John Carlson can answer this...

I think it is great that PR released 645 lenses.. Why not introduce the best of the K mount lenses FA * such as the 24 F2, 85 1.4 etc? In the past I heard that these lenses had issues with lead included in the glass (never understood why this was an issue as it is encapsulated). However if this were true the 645 lenses would not be allowed back.

The 645 lenses which are now being offered in the US were never out of production. They were made in limited volumes and the Japanese market consumed almost all of them and Europe had what was left.

Whilst I would like to see some of the FA lenses available again, John's already talked about some of the problems with that http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/53502536

This is exactly the difference. The FA645 lenses are still in production, it was mostly just USA that missed out. I know they were orderable in many countries from the local importer, I bet if a pro asked Pentax USA for a FA645 lens they could have got one also. It was just retailers couldn't get them.

The FA 35mm lenses have been out of production for at least 10 years now with a few exceptions.

-- hide signature --

Justin
--------------------------------------------------------
http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/justinwatson

 justin23's gear list:justin23's gear list
Pentax K-5 Pentax Q Pentax K-3 Pentax smc FA 50mm F1.4 Pentax smc DA 16-45mm F4 ED AL +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zvonimir Tosic
Senior MemberPosts: 2,155Gear list
Like?
A case for the MF mirrorless instead of an FF mirrorless
In reply to yesman12, 5 months ago

yesman12 wrote:

Hi all,
And perhaps John Carlson can answer this...

I think it is great that PR released 645 lenses.. Why not introduce the best of the K mount lenses FA * such as the 24 F2, 85 1.4 etc? In the past I heard that these lenses had issues with lead included in the glass (never understood why this was an issue as it is encapsulated). However if this were true the 645 lenses would not be allowed back.

-- hide signature --

A picture is worth a thousand words but talk is cheap.
Best regards
Nick

All 645 lenses already made, and now available in the US, can out-resolve even a 150 MP MF sensor. We can say they may last forever.

For the 135 format, available lenses are not so great. They would indeed require modifications of design, and an all new production. New type of motors, etc. to be comparable with competition. Is it justifiable? Not for all. Perhaps for just a few that are also usable on APS-C cameras.

Ultimately, it comes down to a question: does Pentax brand really needs a 135 format sized sensor? Not quite. The availability of old film lenses for the 135 format is heritage, and a coincidence too, rather than true necessity for the design of a camera system for the age of digital and new unprecedented image qualities.

A case for the MF mirrorless instead of 135 format (aka FF) mirrorless

For example, why would Pentax bother designing an all new 135 format mirrorless system many have suggested, when they could design an MF mirrorless system using this 645Z sensor?

And in one camera have both MF and FF through any crop of your choice. The number of lenses needed for an MF in such a case could be minimal; say 6 lenses instead of 12-15 for the 135 mirrorless, because the crop alone on the MF, from a perfectly usable 52 MP sensor, would allow for unbelievable new possibilities.

-- hide signature --

Madamina, il catalogo è questo; Delle belle che amò il padron mio; un catalogo egli è che ho fatt'io; Osservate, leggete con me.

 Zvonimir Tosic's gear list:Zvonimir Tosic's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
James O'Neill
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,928
Like?
There is no case for mirrorless. ESPECIALLY FOR PENTAX
In reply to Zvonimir Tosic, 5 months ago

xxZvonimir Tosic wrote:

yesman12 wrote:

Hi all,
And perhaps John Carlson can answer this...

I think it is great that PR released 645 lenses.. Why not introduce the best of the K mount lenses FA * such as the 24 F2, 85 1.4 etc? In the past I heard that these lenses had issues with lead included in the glass (never understood why this was an issue as it is encapsulated). However if this were true the 645 lenses would not be allowed back.

-- hide signature --

A picture is worth a thousand words but talk is cheap.
Best regards
Nick

All 645 lenses already made, and now available in the US, can out-resolve even a 150 MP MF sensor. We can say they may last forever.

For the 135 format, available lenses are not so great. They would indeed require modifications of design, and an all new production. New type of motors, etc. to be comparable with competition. Is it justifiable? Not for all. Perhaps for just a few that are also usable on APS-C cameras.

Ultimately, it comes down to a question: does Pentax brand really needs a 135 format sized sensor? Not quite. The availability of old film lenses for the 135 format is heritage, and a coincidence too, rather than true necessity for the design of a camera system for the age of digital and new unprecedented image qualities.

A case for the MF mirrorless instead of 135 format (aka FF) mirrorless

For example, why would Pentax bother designing an all new 135 format mirrorless system many have suggested, when they could design an MF mirrorless system using this 645Z sensor?

And in one camera have both MF and FF through any crop of your choice. The number of lenses needed for an MF in such a case could be minimal; say 6 lenses instead of 12-15 for the 135 mirrorless, because the crop alone on the MF, from a perfectly usable 52 MP sensor, would allow for unbelievable new possibilities.

Suppose just for a they build the 645Y - Like the Z but without the mirror: Permanent live view either feeding the back LCD or a small LCD which you can look at through an eye piece. No SAFOX system for AF, because AF is driven from the sensor, and no 86 KPixel metering system because you have a 50 MPixel one. It has shorter battery life, the sensor runs hotter and therefore noiser, maybe costs $8,400 instead of $8,500. And the advantage is what ?

Remember mirrorless cameras are selling poorly. FOUR SLRS are sold for every Mirrorless interchangeable.

and design the lenses to work with their element close to image then you can build a smaller camera. So you only get a benefit from mirrorless IF you throw away your lens mount and start again. If you keep an existing lens format .... well some might say the K-01 had the success it deserved

It's OK to go for a new lens mount IF you have the RD budget to bring new lenses to market, or you get into a partnership with others. (Picture a "Gigantic Four Thirds" group with 44x33 sensors size ) But that's not working out for Olympus and Panasonic.

The attraction of Full frame K mount is that it means body and lenses will be the same size as the current range, and FF lenses go onto crop bodies.  There's no benefit to Ricoh in customers being able to mount old lenses and those lenses may not perform all that well anyway - I think it was a miscalculation to develop so many lenses which will only work with APS-C.

The idea of paying the premium for a 44x33 sensor over a 24x36 one - which is thousands of dollars - and then telling users "Oh no, you don't need a 400mm lens just use a 300 and crop it", in fact if you have 200mm one you crop down to a perfectly OK APS-C sized piece of the it would get you laughed out of any chance of selling one.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads