Matt1645f4: Pentax K3 but i agree with some of the comments regarding lack of lens line up, I use Pentax but i do sometimes miss the large choices offered by both Canon and Nikon, and third party manufactures who seem content to just build for the "big 2". And before i get slated by my fellow Pentaxians i refer to long lenses the 560mm is just crazy be nice to see a 70-400 f4
You won't be slighted, but just reminded that you repeat a common misconception. Pentax alone offers as many APS-C lenses (25) as Nikon and Canon *together* (15 +11). Add to the mix lenses from Tamron and Sigma, there is at least 35+ excellent lenses to choose from.I'd suggest anyone — especially reviewers who repeat these misconceptions constantly ("limited range of lenses" as they misinform the audience) — to explore, educate themselves, and check facts first.
Pentax system is the most advanced and the most sophisticated APS-C system on Earth, and is quite dedicated to its choice.
Many said below this year was disappointing for DSLRs, but Pentax brought quite a splendid and uncompromising K-3, which excited even Nikon and Canon users.
Perhaps that's what people have been waiting for in vain — a positive statement and a different tune from other manufacturers as well, to offer users something that rewards with full enjoyment, no compromises, and the maximum power within a chosen format.
About travel cameras ...To me, a trusty D3 with 24-70, 70-200, and a flashgun is an ideal travel camera. Any discerning photographer takes only the favourite camera on a travel: all bookings, reservations, coaches, tickets and dinners are for “me and my beloved camera”. When kids, pets, family and all unnecessary cases are all left at home, one travels quite compact indeed.
What is the point of these random snapshots done with random lenses?There are already hundreds of superb photographs taken by renowned photographers with this camera that are nothing short of amazing.
I believe people buying cameras such as K-3 et al aren't really interested in snapshots; such galleries are maybe good for pocket compacts, but for top of the line weatherproof DSLRs with 8.3 fps, 24MPs, selectable AA, etc ..?
C'mon. Times change, people's habits change, but DPR's habits never, it seems. Good old 2004 is still on around here.
KonstantinosK: According to the Pentax lenses roadmap, there's a zoom approx. 15-85 mm DA* coming at some point. THAT's a lens I can't wait to be made.
18-70 / 2.8 zoom. Big and heavy as Canon's 24-105/4.
Bravo, yes, for design achievement.Sometimes engineers do thing simply because they love challenges, not because people really need them. Not a single Q user ever posted a desire for a slow zoom lens for the Q. Faster wide prime lens was always users' preference, so many times confirmed around here. And for a good reason — more versatile use in all light conditions and more usable f-stops before the tiny sensor hits the diffraction limit. 01 prime lens for the Q was so good that people were eager to see more such lenses.
RStyga: f/3.7-f/4 ?? So, there is magically no diffraction problem anymore, if you spend GBP 430 on this lens? This is "great"...
A fast wide prime could be well used on all Q models, this zoom only on Q7 because of the diffraction issue.I find it too extreme to applaud. If this was a lens to lure Q and Q10 users to buy Q7, they can think again.
Zvonimir Tosic: Ricoh Imaging is really behaving quite strangely with this Q experiment. At one side they design a bunch of very cheap, optically irrelevant, fixed aperture and almost unusable "toy prime lenses" to define the playfulness of the Q system, and on the other, very, very expensive zooms to .. what end?
I agree Eric, and that's why I believed wide faster prime would be more suited for a small sensor camera such as Q.
tinzi1: sigh, Pentax, u gotta put some investment in marketing research before production. look around! lame.
They did a research and found no one else has ever made such a lens. Therefore decided to take a chance and deliver something new. So they did exactly what you suggested.
thx1138: Got to give it to Pentax for making darn sexy looking lenses and unlike Leica, you don't need to sell a kidney to own one. Now maybe Nikon should release a bunch of retro lenses for the Df with beautiful engraved DoF/distance scales.
That's a good idea. Hopefully Nikon has long terms plan for the Df.
Depends how cheap your photography goals are.
Ricoh announced they were buying Pentax, and on the same date Q system was launched. They knew it all months before, of course, and they knew what they were buying. Maybe even suggested what to announce.
PK24X36NOW: Sorry, but I don't get it, Pentax. This is a 2:1 zoom ratio, relatively slow, variable aperture lens that isn't very wide on the wide end, isn't very long on the long end, and you want 849 POUNDS for it (I don't even want to think of what that is in dollars)?!
The main thing that's "limited" about this lens is what - range, versatility??
You would think that for your top-line lenses, you should be able to muster a 3:1 zoom ratio, constant aperture, and a focal length range that isn't boring.
Being different and exciting is the opposite of predictable, repetitive and being boring. In the tide of 3x zooms with huge aperture, this kind of lens is exactly what we've been missing all the time.
It's 30-60 mm in 135 format terms — it covers both classic 35mm and 50 mm FoV, with extra few mm on both ends. To many this could be the only lens they'd ever need. And it's WR too.It also has a classic touch to it, with a Super Takumar focus ring type.
Ricoh Imaging is really behaving quite strangely with this Q experiment. At one side they design a bunch of very cheap, optically irrelevant, fixed aperture and almost unusable "toy prime lenses" to define the playfulness of the Q system, and on the other, very, very expensive zooms to .. what end?
Most likely, this could be a well designed lens and quite excellent optically. But it defies the purpose, really; a good fast wide prime for half the money would lure more people into Q than this zoom. And that is exactly what Q users have suggested for many, many months already.
ntsan: It is even more expensive than Nikon 1 or EOS M's UW zoom lens, both of them have much bigger sensor to cover, I am pretty sure it will be much cheaper produce than either the 1" or APS-C
They are not in a hurry to sell them.
A good first step taken by a major DSLR manufacturer in building an alternative to a typical and ubiquitous blobby DSLR design — copied across DSLR brands for over a decade, and one that even mirroless cameras now mimic, in a desperate attempt to show 'seriousness' and secure some money.
Like a Leica camera often ridiculed here, or any other quality craftsmanship that comes with an asking price above one brass farthing, this is definitely not a tool for majority of users here. But it is an encouraging thought — something about it must be right, especially in times where everything looks so same, boring and depreciated.
It provokes a thought indeed, be it intelligent or a mindless rant, nevertheless.Well done Nikon.
So I presume that in the DPR final score it will have negative points for not having a dedicated video button, as is usual DPR's punishment to DSLR designs?
Judging by the shadow, it has a small grip?So it's not FM reborn. :-(