Reading mode: Light Dark

Summary roadmap 2006 Pentax/Samsung

Go to last post
I agree. F4 keeps it in the realm of affordability. I know a few c@non shooters and thier 70-200 f4L lens is just awsome, and can be had for around $500. THAT is what I am waiting for from Pentax!
 
Even I agree....

Although I am happy with my FA*80-200/2.8 I thnk I could somehow live with an f4 in that range. For the 28-70 range I use the f2.8-f4 apertures too often to miss. Now, a D FA*18-75/2.8, wouldn't that be something????
--
Happy new year
janneman
http://www.pbase.com/jl2
 
They are an old established reputable company serving pro photographers for many years, you should have no worries at all.

There are very few rogue UK suppliers, we have quite severe laws here regarding mail order etc., it is called the Distance Selling Regulations Act and is rigidly enforced.
--
Richard Day - 'Carpe Diem!'
Gloucester UK
 
Ok. That's good to hear. Reading the catalogue make me feel the Christmas was wasted. But my birthday is getting closer...

thanks again,

Jonas
 
Janneman,

Yea, a 18-75 2.8 would be great. Only lens that I am interested in for my DS right now. I noticed several weeks ago, a poster listing all Pentax's current lenses. Missing was the 24-90 3.2-4.5?, I was hoping that Pentax had a replacement DA or D-FA lense to fit that void coming in 2006. Pentax is missing something in that area along with the longer telephotos.

My kit lens 18-55 is not long enough, I find myself changing lenses (DA 50-200) to frequently.

Dave D.
 
redmondson said:
I agree. F4 keeps it in the realm of affordability. I know a few
c@non shooters and thier 70-200 f4L lens is just awsome, and can be
had for around $500. THAT is what I am waiting for from Pentax!
Click to expand...
Yup... I'm only surprised that people are surprised (sic) that it's F4! Pentax don't make Pro bodies, why on earth would they make Pro glass?

The 70-200/4L is a fantastic lens and it would be great if we could have our own version: I suspect it's no coincidence that its focal range starts lower and goes higher... have you noticed that the 16-45 relates in exactly the same way to the 17-40/4L? Pentax could, however, take a leaf out of Canon's book in terms of physical construction... the 16-45 is great optically but nowhere near the 17-40L in terms of construction, I hope Pentax make more of an effort with this latest lens (and maybe release a MKII version of the 16-45 with same optical formula but more solid body?). Considering the price of the full-frame Canon equivalent, I think Pentax should be looking at closer to the $400 mark (or less) for this telephoto zoom...

I wish there were more details of those prime lenses... particularly what exact focal lengths are planned, but I bet they're going to be f2.8 :-( If Pentax couldn't make the 40mm Pancake lens have a max aperture of f2 then how are they going to manage to do it with 'pancakes' in the 20-30 or 60-70 range? Hum, I wonder if calling these next-generation primes 'Limiteds' will be rather like the way Vivitar started calling all their lenses 'Series 1' from the late 80's onwards? :-(

Just my thoughts...

Regards!
 
richardday said:
They are an old established reputable company serving pro
photographers for many years, you should have no worries at all.
There are very few rogue UK suppliers, we have quite severe laws
here regarding mail order etc.,
Click to expand...
Oh, just like the typical New York dealer, eh? [VBG]

--

Fred
 
WHAT! F4 Fing Su* s Well that D200 is looking Better and better. Atleast Nikon knows how to satisfy all their coustomers.

I dont care how good ISO is, When Im shooting F2.8 pulling 250 at 3200 ISO On a football/lacross etc field at night Im barly geting the slow action stoped. If they refuse to produce high end fast glass I can not stay. F4 may be great for most users, but not for me.

Yes I know the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 is great, I HAVE ONE, but Im looking to be 100%pk, and instead it keeps looking like the only option for fast glass anymore is 3rd party. I know the Limiteds are great, but ending at 77mm is not enough, and no F2.8, again not enough. I have not gotten the 16-45 because its not a 2.8 Its a nice lens but too slow. Instead I have the 14mm and a 28-80 F2.8
than the sigma, and finaly a nice fast 300 :)

Anyway, I hope entax can atleast get the flash out, for a while longer I will need to stick w/ them due to my lack of $8g to switch systems, and will never get the $$ Iv put into the system back out, so Ill hold on ot it But As I said before I will wait to see what PMA yealds and go from there.

I still say though, their going down the wrong road. Leading many people to realise it like me too late. (They are doing well building up the amature market, but it is from there the pro market forms! When all the Pentax amm figure this out they will see they are screwed if this trend of Cheeper, Lesser, Lighter, Slower, Cheeper continues.
IMO My 2 cents.

Ans a reminder to all thoes out there who think Im a troll Look at all my pre. posts and youll find out Im probaly the most hard-core PK shooter out there (true not all PK glass, but enough frames on 35mm/digital bodies that I can say Im probaly in the top 5% of PK shooters (Total frames about 300000 (about 150,000 Digital) All in the span of about 8 years.
Ahh I feel better, Now Im done venting :)
 
I agree I am very happy with the range and the fact it is an f4... We have constant 2.8 options already, the Sigma 70-200/2.8, the Tokina 80-200/2.8 and for those with the money the Pentax 80-200/2.8... There was no AF constant zoom option from any manufacturer available to us that was more affordable... the 60-250 will fit that gap IMO
blaketake said:
I am happy to hear this. I couldn't have afforded an $1000
pentax-branded f/2.8. Anyways, f/4 at 250mm is very good. The only
thing I'm worried about is the over 4 times zoom factor.

--
http://pbase.com/blaketake
Click to expand...
--
------------
Joel - *ist DS/P30n/SFX
http://www.pbase.com/joele
 
I agree about the lens.

I would upgrade my Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 to an equivalent Pentax model but a constant f4 with a little more zoom range seems like a downgrade.

bazz.
 
And if our hopes of a Pentax SLR with antishake are realised, then I'd be very happy to use a 60-250 f4 lens with it.
 
I prefer f2.8 zooms not because it can shoot at f2.8 but because generally it will be sharper at stopped down to f4 than an f4 lens wide open.

bazz.
 
I agree that the pro market does grow out of the amateur market as your refer. However, I am fairly certain that you will see pro level equipment announcements made with the introduction of the D2 body. Right now without the D2 body out the flash and the high grade lenses would not sell too well in my opinion and would be a bad marketing move. If Pentax can release the D2 with the pro flash and the announcement of a pro glass line I think that is best.

Remember Pentax can't afford to make a mistake here. They have a good prosumer line right now and I agree with there decision to support it. A pro flash would just sit on the shelves other than for a smaller majority of there customer base if it was on the market now.

I would like to see Pentax move back into the semi-pro range as much as the next guy and I will buy the D2 as soon as its announced but I do think they should do it when the time is right. I also realize the time would have been better now ;-)

The only thing I really hope is that Pentax announces the D2 soon even if its not available for a while. If they don't do that I do think they will loose a good number of advanced prosumers who are already to more up.
Brendan PK said:
Anyway, I hope entax can atleast get the flash out, for a while
longer I will need to stick w/ them due to my lack of $8g to switch
systems, and will never get the $$ Iv put into the system back out,
so Ill hold on ot it But As I said before I will wait to see what
PMA yealds and go from there.
I still say though, their going down the wrong road. Leading many
people to realise it like me too late. (They are doing well
building up the amature market, but it is from there the pro market
forms! When all the Pentax amm figure this out they will see they
are screwed if this trend of Cheeper, Lesser, Lighter, Slower,
Cheeper continues.
IMO My 2 cents.
Ans a reminder to all thoes out there who think Im a troll Look at
all my pre. posts and youll find out Im probaly the most hard-core
PK shooter out there (true not all PK glass, but enough frames on
35mm/digital bodies that I can say Im probaly in the top 5% of PK
shooters (Total frames about 300000 (about 150,000 Digital) All in
the span of about 8 years.
Ahh I feel better, Now Im done venting :)
Click to expand...
--

Pentax *ist DS/ 16-45 SMC / 18-55mm DA kit lens/50-200mm DA/50mm 1.7 SMC/ 360FZ Flash
 
sir_bazz said:
I prefer f2.8 zooms not because it can shoot at f2.8 but because
generally it will be sharper at stopped down to f4 than an f4 lens
wide open.

bazz.
Click to expand...
Normally this would be correct... however... Pentax did produce the DA16-45/4 and that is enough evidence that the contrary might be possible... I would give them the benefit of the doubt for now... ;-)

Wim

--
Belgium, GMT+1

 
You're quite selfish, aren't you? Thinking only about your needs and ignoring the rest of us, who can't afford/don't want/looks for a lighter lens than a f/2.8... :P

J/K, of course. But the f/4 zoom is a logical step: they have a consumer line (18-55 and 50-200 - it's quite OK) and an 'intermediate' line (12-24, 16-45) which now lacks a telephoto option. I would say this 60-250 f/4 is desperatelly needed; then some longer teles (primes? but, Pentax, I won't mind if the 300mm f/4 won't be a pancake )

And I'm sure they don't 'refuse to produce high end fast glass'. I'm sure fast, pro lenses will follow - but now they must satisfy people who want compact, high quality and not too expensive lenses.

I hope they'll publish another roadmap this year; it would make things much clearer.

About the flash: I've heard it'll appear (on market) this spring, April-May.

Alex Sarbu
 
Brendan PK said:
WHAT! F4 Fing Su* s Well that D200 is looking Better and better.
Atleast Nikon knows how to satisfy all their coustomers.
I dont care how good ISO is, When Im shooting F2.8 pulling 250 at
3200 ISO On a football/lacross etc field at night Im barly geting
the slow action stoped. If they refuse to produce high end fast
glass I can not stay. F4 may be great for most users, but not for
me.
Click to expand...
I agree with you here. I have a Tokina 80-200/2.8 and it is barely fast enough and barely long enough for a full size soccer field and I suspect that Pentax glass would be better (but that is only supposition). I bought an A*135/1.8 to get more speed and it works very well but doesn't have the reach I need. So I just bought a Tamron 300/2.8 to get more reach and I am hoping that the increase in magnification will ameliorate the still not enough 2.8 aperture but I sacrifice the ability to zoom in and out which I find very useful on a soccer field.

Personally I would like to have seen a 100-300/2.8 (actually an f2 would be better but that would be out of reach for me price-wise) because I currently use a Tokina 100-300/4 in daylight and it works well and I would love to have something like that for nighttime.

Sure these are selfish wants but it does me no good to hope Pentax produces something I can't use.

On the other hand this is probably the right move for Pentax because of the broader appeal but it is personally disappointing.
brendan PK said:
Yes I know the Sigma 70-200 F2.8 is great, I HAVE ONE, but Im
looking to be 100%pk, and instead it keeps looking like the only
option for fast glass anymore is 3rd party. I know the Limiteds are
great, but ending at 77mm is not enough, and no F2.8, again not
enough. I have not gotten the 16-45 because its not a 2.8 Its a
nice lens but too slow. Instead I have the 14mm and a 28-80 F2.8
than the sigma, and finaly a nice fast 300 :)
Anyway, I hope entax can atleast get the flash out, for a while
longer I will need to stick w/ them due to my lack of $8g to switch
systems, and will never get the $$ Iv put into the system back out,
so Ill hold on ot it But As I said before I will wait to see what
PMA yealds and go from there.
I still say though, their going down the wrong road. Leading many
people to realise it like me too late. (They are doing well
building up the amature market, but it is from there the pro market
forms! When all the Pentax amm figure this out they will see they
are screwed if this trend of Cheeper, Lesser, Lighter, Slower,
Cheeper continues.
IMO My 2 cents.
Ans a reminder to all thoes out there who think Im a troll Look at
all my pre. posts and youll find out Im probaly the most hard-core
PK shooter out there (true not all PK glass, but enough frames on
35mm/digital bodies that I can say Im probaly in the top 5% of PK
shooters (Total frames about 300000 (about 150,000 Digital) All in
the span of about 8 years.
Ahh I feel better, Now Im done venting :)
Click to expand...
--
-Larry
http://www.cook-imaging.com
 
Just because Pentax has announced that the DFA60-250 is an f4 lens does not preclude that there won't be a 50-150 f2.8 or some such animal further down the track. Pentax have to get their general consumer lens system going before any of the more exotic lenses. I seem to remember that the FA*28-70 and FA*80-200 were released well after all the other FA lenses.
--
Lance B
Lady Astor: 'Winston, you're drunk'
Winston Churchill: 'And you madam, are ugly, but tomorrow I'll be sober'
Lady Astor: 'Winston, if you were my husband, I would poison your tea!'
Winston Churchill: 'Madam, if you were my wife, I'd drink it!'
GMT +10hours

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top