K-5 DR, E-5 Lenses

Raist3d · Dec 27, 2010

Cax said:
Aren't they all discontinued? Same as the K-mount Cosina Voigtländer lenses?

Oh, and there's no AF.

You are right, no AF. They are pretty nice.

Someone could probably make the case that perhaps 4/3rd lenses are also discontinued if not now very soon

Cax said:
But the DA Limiteds are nice, even though there are no built-in AF motors. There's even a special Limited lens case that fits several. The old FA Limiteds I don't think I would pay for.

Both lines, DA and FA have their advantages. Anyhow, point is, there are good lens options for Pentax too. Certainly Olympus has very nice lenses too.

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

ginsbu · Dec 27, 2010

msusic said:
(vs 850 + 600 for Pentax lenses), albeit new, but second hand LTDs are very rare and still pretty pricey.

77/1.8 ltd: $785
70/2.4 ltd: $550

Both at B&H. I don't see why you keep quoting inflated prices.

Rriley · Dec 27, 2010

at one time where a whole lot better than they appear to be now. Gone are the Super Takumar's and in their place digital primes and a bunch of mediocre slow zooms. Yes they have a long history of K and PK mount lenses in MF, but then we can addapt those lenses just the same.

Its a fine system if you are into primes, but I wouldnt want to be the working pro shooting a wedding with a bag of primes, and if you give up lens speed for higher ISO you remove from your grasp at least some of its high ISO advantage and off comes some of the (significant) DR advantage too. Then again if your shooting environment is more base ISO there really isnt a noise advantage at all. In that way i cant see what the 'overpowering' advantages are against 4/3rds, or much of what the huff and puff is about for all things Pentax.

Yes I see K5 is a small body, but the working kit doesnt seem to hold and size or weight advantage against weatherproofed HG zooms, and doesnt hold much hope of better lenses in the way we can choose to progress to SHG, only cheaper lesser ones from 3rd party manufacturers that can cost you 2 stops performance in the bargain.

And contrary to the boasts it isnt a system that suggests to me any reliably greater longevity prospects than four thirds. It has been a company stalked by significant troubles right from the product lines to its boardroom management. Even as we speak has some real quality management issues that appear to be abundant confidence deterrents in the marketplace, the same marketplace that we see it rise or fall.

What it does have going for it is one body with 14 stops DR, and some nice primes, thats not enough for me to want to go toe to toe with people in the many threads about 'Pentax' that have surfaced here in recent weeks, I just dont want to give up the nice things I have for some different nice things that I dont especially need.

meh....

--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended

Ergo607 · Dec 27, 2010

msusic said:
You can get second hand 14-35 for around 1300-1400 dollars (vs 850+600 for Pentax lenses), albeit new, but second hand LTDs are very rare and still pretty pricey.

Who said that? I got my second hand FA 50 macro for a mere €69,-, IIRC (there is a very old thread about that over at the Pentax forum, but I am too lazy to search.) Then again, I bought the 77 ltd (NEW!) for €400,- and the DA 70 ltd used for €300,-. To top of: the ZD 50 macro cost me 300,-. A second hand 14-35 will set me back at least €1000,- if I am lucky, so that would be the cost of the 4 lenses mentioned earlier...

msusic said:
35-100 is slightly more expensive, about 1500-1600.

Thus, I can still get a fifth lens...

msusic said:
--
Cheers,
Marin

--
Cheers,
Marc

http://www.digifotofreak.nl

WGArts2 · Dec 27, 2010

Raist3d said:
or do you want me to start posting here my K-5 photographs?

I sure can do that

You see, the glass image quality is pretty good too. Pentax has some really nice primes that 4/3rs doesn't have. This doesn't make 4/3rds bad just like the Pentax lineup isn't bad per se as it is being tried to imply in this thread.

So what does that leave then? When you are comparing switching systems, we talk about some key differences that 4/3rds right now just doesn't have. That little exercise on shadow lifting does show in the real world in a certain flexibility.

Of course, if I had to pay $1,700 USD for a 3 year old sensor design, I would try to think it's all too funny too. Cognitive dissonance is painful

But it's a nice camera.

Ergo607 · Dec 27, 2010

Rriley wrote:
Only wanted to respond to this two paragraphs:

Rriley said:
And contrary to the boasts it isnt a system that suggests to me any reliably greater longevity prospects than four thirds. It has been a company stalked by significant troubles right from the product lines to its boardroom management. Even as we speak has some real quality management issues that appear to be abundant confidence deterrents in the marketplace, the same marketplace that we see it rise or fall.

The fall of Pentax has been predicted from the early nineties. Still, they are still here, having witnessed the fall of Konica Minolta and (probably, though I do not hope so) 4/3's...

Rriley said:
What it does have going for it is one body with 14 stops DR, and some nice primes, thats not enough for me to want to go toe to toe with people in the many threads about 'Pentax' that have surfaced here in recent weeks, I just dont want to give up the nice things I have for some different nice things that I dont especially need.

Same here, I was happy with the Pentax system (at one time I had 3 ist D's (still love that camera) and a long list of lenses, but now I am happier with the E-30 (although I wouldn't mind an Oly K-5...)

Rriley said:
meh....

--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended

--
Cheers,
Marc

http://www.digifotofreak.nl

mcabato · Dec 27, 2010

so, what's the issue with your pentax?
i believe and am happy that pentax is able to build good cams and good lenses.
but since i am in the FT stuff, i am not interested in your gear.
do you also make photos, or just justify why you spent money for pentax?
taking pictures is luxury.
taking pictures with pentax is luxury.
so, congratulations to you.
feel happy now?
best regards. gusti.

narddogg81 · Dec 27, 2010

I think the cheapest nikon lens with any kind of sealing is the 24-70 2.8 and cost about $1700 (and is massive). Also, pretty much no nikon shooter I have ever talked to had any faith in the degree of weathersealing nikon provides. they still reach for the trash bags or go inside when it rains. its nothing like what olympus and pentax do with their sealing.

xavozin said:
D7000 uses the same or very similar sensor to the one in the K5 and the Nikon lineup of lenses has many telephoto options, just be open-minded to the fact that the weather-sealed options may or may not include an exact equivalent to the 50-200 focal-length-wise.

--
xavo

image is the only validation and most of their life isn't real.
modified from Sam Sparro - Black and Gold.

--
My PPG

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/home#section=ARTIST&subSection=7472316&subSubSection=0&language=EN

ginsbu · Dec 27, 2010

Rriley said:
Its a fine system if you are into primes, but I wouldnt want to be the working pro shooting a wedding with a bag of primes, and if you give up lens speed for higher ISO you remove from your grasp at least some of its high ISO advantage and off comes some of the (significant) DR advantage too. Then again if your shooting environment is more base ISO there really isnt a noise advantage at all. In that way i cant see what the 'overpowering' advantages are against 4/3rds, or much of what the huff and puff is about for all things Pentax.

Some fair points, especially re Pentax's decision to favor size over speed in their primes. But you're setting this up as an Oly 4/3 vs Pentax thing (as are others here), but that's not the way I see it. Oly's apparent decision to end 4/3 makes it more of a Pentax vs the other options thing to me (including m4/3). If Oly was going to maintain and grow 4/3 in the future, Oly would probably remain the best choice for me. Sadly, they aren't, so many of us Oly users are starting to consider their options.

Rriley said:
Yes I see K5 is a small body, but the working kit doesnt seem to hold and size or weight advantage against weatherproofed HG zooms, and doesnt hold much hope of better lenses in the way we can choose to progress to SHG, only cheaper lesser ones from 3rd party manufacturers that can cost you 2 stops performance in the bargain.

I broadly agree. I think it's fair to say that someone looking at Pentax shouldn't expect to replicate their 4/3 kit lens for lens: to get the most out of the system a different mix of lenses will be needed. Whether that different mix best suits a particular person's photography is up to him.

Rriley said:
And contrary to the boasts it isnt a system that suggests to me any reliably greater longevity prospects than four thirds. It has been a company stalked by significant troubles right from the product lines to its boardroom management. Even as we speak has some real quality management issues that appear to be abundant confidence deterrents in the marketplace, the same marketplace that we see it rise or fall.

I seems to me that the 645D launch is a pretty serious sign of commitment from Hoya. Maybe I'm wrong about that. I was wrong about Oly's commitment to 4/3 after all.

Sergey_Green · Dec 27, 2010

dark goob said:
What Pentax lens compares at all to the 50-200 SWD? I'd like to mention that NOBODY has a lens that compares favorably to the 50-200 SWD when it comes to an APS-C, weatherproof telephoto lens for with a tripod shoe that AFs with a doubler on it, is relatively light, and gives 2.8-3.5 type brightness.

I am sure there are lenses in Pentax camp, including 3-rd party ones, that Olympus users can only dream about. As for 50-200, which I have also, compare it to Sigma 150/2.8 at the same range and on the same camera. And then imagine you have it in front of the larger sensor as well - this could be your answer. It certainly was for me. And since 50-200 has mostly been used at wide end and pretty much the same settings most of the time I take Sigma. If you need flexibility the 50-200 may be your ticket, but it is not mine.

dark goob said:
Also I've tried the 16-50 2.8 and honestly, I'm sorry but it does not hold a candle to the 12-60mm SWD.

Can not compare, never used either. From my lenses I have only two zooms; the 12-24/4 Tokina and 24-70/2.8 Nikon. Ah three, the 70-200/2.8 Nikon, can't remember when I used it last time. I have six primes, and thinking of adding two more. So again, whatever your priorities are. Olympus have nice lenses, but small sensor for me pretty much cancels it all out. It is nice when you do not need to stop down, but then I shoot wide open whenever I can, and I like the results.

dark goob said:
I mean what good is dynamic range if your lens sucks? I'm just saying. And look, I know Olympus' lenses are not perfect, but I'll soon be renting a 90-250 and taking it up to the mountain and out to the woods. I'm not sure what Pentax might have that is in that realm.

That is for you, but it is not the same for many others. And obviously not for those who buy and use Pentax.

--
- sergey

mcabato · Dec 27, 2010

sergey,

i do not understand the discussion here.

owning the 4/7-14, the 2.8-3.5/14-54, the 3.5-4.5/40-150, 4-5.6/70-300, the 2.8/90-250, a 21mm OMZ and a 1.4/50mm OMZ and other omz, why should i bother how good pentax is?
why do you want to sell pentax to me or others?

i am able to do my pics with my gear and i am able to walk a whole day with minimum equipment and maximum felxibility & reach.

yes, i am sure, i would be able to do my pics also with canon, samsung or pentax, if i would search long enough for lenses and would carry more with me.

shooting nature (which i mostly do): with extension tube ex-25 and the 70-300 i am perfectly equipped for my macros.

with the 2.8/90-250 plus ec-14 and ec-20 i am perfectly equipped for any other wildlife. i do not need more to carry with me - it is macro plus 70-1000mm in 35mm equivalent, 5 kg in total including macro.

and: the ex-25 plus the 70-300 is marvellous for insect hunting. you can shoot from 15 cm to 250cm butterflies nearly frame filling ...

for city tours: 7-14 and 14-54 plus ec-20 ... 14-210 mm in 35mm equivalent.

for business travels overseas: 14-54 plus ec-20 plus ex-25 plus 70-300 just in my laptop-back-bag

for evening events: 2.8/90-250 and 1.4/50

and everything in professional quality.

so, moneywise it is low-budget-equipment compared to similar possibilities and quality from canikon or pentax.

since i am used to shoot for decades an om-2 i also know arguments about shallow DOF or viewfinder size and brightness. and, do i bother? no, because my crop 2 gear is a perfect optimum for me and i feel sthrength coming from equipment for my fotography and not restrictions or can't dos.

i do not know, whether my equipment is superior to canon gear. but it is superior to average gear canon users tend to have or i would have from canon with my money spent.

so, i am not buying your pentax gear or nikon gear. i also do not need your DR, since i prefer shooting in decent light, or, i delete shots with not nice light situations. yes, there is one only point for you: high is noise. i am limited to iso 1600. but sometimes i will get an oly body where i will sometimes use iso 3200 or later even more. but do i need this? the wedding i shot from 10:00 in the morning until 2:00 in the morning without flash produced wonderful pics, the professional fotographer with his aps-c gear did not have the same success.

but: i do like that pentax has good gear as a competitor to nikon and canon. that is important for further development of the photography gear market and makes R&D departments creative.

rgds gusti

Sergey_Green · Dec 27, 2010

mcabato said:
sergey,

i do not understand the discussion here.

owning the 4/7-14, the 2.8-3.5/14-54, the 3.5-4.5/40-150, 4-5.6/70-300, the 2.8/90-250, a 21mm OMZ and a 1.4/50mm OMZ and other omz, why should i bother how good pentax is?
why do you want to sell pentax to me or others?

I m not trying to sell anything, I only responded to the op where he claims there is nothing in the other brands that can compare to Olympus offerings. I know for a fact there are lenses in the other brands as well that many Olympus users can only dream about, and it only matters what the shooter's priorities are.

--
- sergey

Raist3d · Dec 27, 2010

You can get the 16-50 f2.8 Constant aperture weather sealed lens at the 12-60 class lens price. As you know the 12-60 and 14-54 lenses start at f2.8 and end at f3.5/f4.0. I don't know where you get the remotest idea here that then you have to lose iso stops because the Pentax lens will somehow be slower than those two

So if you want to talk about losing stops you have to resort to buying a very expensive lens that is the f2.0 13-35 with which your deluded self still thinks will be enough to catch up ignoring the fact that a k-5 has at least two stops of iso advantage, not one. Such is the price of using a three year old sensor instead of a state of the art one. And I am not even talking about banding.

If you want to talk about quality control rest assured, pentax acknowledged the stains issue officially and is fixing it for those first batch cameras. Where was Olympus acknowledgement for the back focusing e-3? Oh since you mention lenses what about virtually all 14-35 - the very expensive lens you are forced to buy if you want to catch up - and still be behind by one stop of iso at least - serious slow auto focus issue in lower light? You know the kind of situation where you want it to perform for a wedding reception ? Where was Olympus acknowledgement of this? I was this close to buy one but it had that issue so I passed.

That's the problem with people that decide to close their mind and not really find what is out there- then start making stuff up or believe way off premises without even some thought- like what you did.

As for the future of the system Olympus canned the telephoto macro. Many here wanted that lens no? A lens Pentax put out for their system weather sealed relatively recently- The FA 100 f.8 telephoto macro. What a joke it is to suggest that the Pentax lens system as a system is dying or in peril coming from an Olympus four thirds point of view...

As for the lens and body sizes being larger on Pentax... What a retarded ignorant comment. Check that 14-35 weight and size. You know the very lens that according to you eliminates the iso gap and compare and I am not even talking about the pancake da limited primes...

For the record I do think Olympus lenses are really good Pentax also has some really good lenses Read a little bit before posting this laughable nonsense and give the other system a try.

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)

Raist3d · Dec 27, 2010

I was answering the OPs question, not yours. As for me taking photographs looks like you haven't been paying attention but I gave been constantly posting photos in this forum for years at least once a month. Would you like for me to start posting my k-5 photos here too?

If you don't care about any of what I said why are you replying to a thread that was asking a Pentax question in this forum and my response as if I was responding to you?
--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

Raist3d · Dec 27, 2010

ginsbu said:
I seems to me that the 645D launch is a pretty serious sign of commitment from Hoya. Maybe I'm wrong about that. I was wrong about Oly's commitment to 4/3 after all.

The 645 system was a system that was due to come out, then canned, and then revived (improved from the original spec). You don't come out with a new system like that if you aren't committed to it. Already the 645D is getting rave reviews for being DSLR like and relatively cheap for what you get, along with superb image quality.

That said, while I also think that the 4/3rds lens system will stop being supported as in new lenses, the new future bodies Olympus will do, will use them support them. On that end, it doesn't bother me much if they focus fast on the new bodies.

Of course, there's intention and then execution.
--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)
Andreas Feininger (1906-1999) 'Photographers — idiots, of which there are
so many — say, “Oh, if only I had a Nikon or a Leica, I could make great
photographs.” That’s the dumbest thing I ever heard in my life. It’s
nothing but a matter of seeing, and thinking, and interest. That’s what
makes a good photograph.'

Jan Chelminski · Dec 27, 2010

Also its not large and unattractive like the E-3/5...

Rriley · Dec 27, 2010

Raist3d said:
You can get the 16-50 f2.8 Constant aperture weather sealed lens at the 12-60 class lens price. As you know the 12-60 and 14-54 lenses start at f2.8 and end at f3.5/f4.0.

thats a 24-75 EFL zoom vs a 24-120 EFL zoom, but yeah those cranks out at PZ tested it, so here they are side by side

still think its a 24-120mm EFL lens ?

Member said:
I don't know where you get the remotest idea here that then you have to lose iso stops because the Pentax lens will somehow be slower than those two

that would be b/se you wont-didnt-cant read, this is what I said

Yes I see K5 is a small body, but the working kit doesnt seem to hold and size or weight advantage against weatherproofed HG zooms, and doesnt hold much hope of better lenses in the way we can choose to progress to SHG, only cheaper lesser ones from 3rd party manufacturers that can cost you 2 stops performance in the bargain .

which is follow up on the 7-14 to Sigma 8-16 boobn2 was on about earlier where I compared a 7-14 with the sigma. The synopsis is we can go to SHG which is a step up, Pentax you can only go down to 3rd party lenses.

Member said:
So if you want to talk about losing stops you have to resort to buying a very expensive lens that is the f2.0 13-35 with which your deluded self still thinks will be enough to catch up ignoring the fact that a k-5 has at least two stops of iso advantage, not one. Such is the price of using a three year old sensor instead of a state of the art one. And I am not even talking about banding.

and in no way do any of these pentax lenses come anywhere near SHG quality lenses which is why our conversation is better placed at HG level. But Im happy to expand on that if you figure another rant is in order

Member said:
If you want to talk about quality control rest assured, pentax acknowledged the stains issue officially and is fixing it for those first batch cameras. Where was Olympus acknowledgement for the back focusing e-3? Oh since you mention lenses what about virtually all 14-35 - the very expensive lens you are forced to buy if you want to catch up - and still be behind by one stop of iso at least - serious slow auto focus issue in lower light? You know the kind of situation where you want it to perform for a wedding reception ? Where was Olympus acknowledgement of this? I was this close to buy one but it had that issue so I passed.

Member said:
As for the future of the system

pentax have a history of instability, Hoya already tried unsuccessfully to dump it

http://www.photozone.de/pentax/405-pentax_1650_28?start=1
http://www.photozone.de/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/450-oly_1260_284?start=1

--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended

Raist3d · Dec 27, 2010

Rriley said:
Raist3d said:

You can get the 16-50 f2.8 Constant aperture weather sealed lens at the 12-60 class lens price. As you know the 12-60 and 14-54 lenses start at f2.8 and end at f3.5/f4.0.

Click to expand...

thats a 24-75 EFL zoom vs a 24-120 EFL zoom, but yeah those cranks out at PZ tested it, so here they are side by side

I mentioned the 12-60 as a lens in the class where this lens falls price wise and the type of lens it is. You mentioned, for example, the "faster stop issue" and didn't clarify that for that to happen you need to necessarily go for the 14-35 F2.0 because the 12-60 starts at F2.8 and ends at F4.0. You going now and pointing out the EFL of the 12-60 is meaningless in this discussion.

And that said, you sure seem to make the same mistake of some of the other people int his forum when quoting this site and lenstips which is- you can't compare resolution charts/tests across different systems!

http://www . photozone.de/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests

Read the warning, it's right there.

"Please note that the tests results are not comparable across the different systems!"

Rriley said:
still think its a 24-120mm EFL lens ?

No, I never said it was. And? Is the 14-35 a 24-120mm ELF lens? Which one is better? The 12-60 or the 14-35? Do both have their pros and cons? You are the one who brought up suggesting that you have to have a bag of primes to have a decent zoom lens which is false. Moreover, you also suggesting giving a stop of light which so happens the Pentax lens int eh 12-60/14-54 type zoom is faster. So I don't know what your problem is.

Rriley said:
Rriley said:

I don't know where you get the remotest idea here that then you have to lose iso stops because the Pentax lens will somehow be slower than those two

Click to expand...

that would be b/se you wont-didnt-cant read, this is what I said

Yes I see K5 is a small body, but the working kit doesnt seem to hold and size or weight advantage against weatherproofed HG zooms, and doesnt hold much hope of better lenses in the way we can choose to progress to SHG, only cheaper lesser ones from 3rd party manufacturers that can cost you 2 stops performance in the bargain .

Sorry but this is what you said above:

"Its a fine system if you are into primes, but I wouldnt want to be the working pro shooting a wedding with a bag of primes, and if you give up lens speed for higher ISO you remove from your grasp at least some of its high ISO advantage and off comes some of the (significant) DR advantage too."

There's no mention of 3rd party lenses in this paragraph, nor in any of the text before it, and the 16-50 lens isn't a bad lens as you seem to say. If you didn't mean to say that maybe you should write it in a different way. Even more than that you opened your reply with:

" Gone are the Super Takumar's and in their place digital primes and a bunch of mediocre slow zooms."

Implying that the zooms that exist are all slow and mediocre which is a complete flat out lie.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=37297327

Rriley said:
which is follow up on the 7-14 to Sigma 8-16 boobn2 was on about earlier where I compared a 7-14 with the sigma. The synopsis is we can go to SHG which is a step up, Pentax you can only go down to 3rd party lenses.

That's not what you wrote on your reply in the link I mentioned. What you wrote, you wrote in reply to:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=37297204

I don't see how exactly it is supposed to be interpreted it is a follow up to the other gay. Maybe you did the reply to the wrong poster?

[]

Rriley said:
Such is the price of using a three year old sensor instead of a state of the art one. And I am not even talking about banding.

and in no way do any of these pentax lenses come anywhere near SHG quality lenses which is why our conversation is better placed at HG level. But Im happy to expand on that if you figure another rant is in order

The primes certainly do. The zooms may not be at the SGH level (maybe one of them is), but that doesn't mean they are slow mediocre zooms. Unless of course you consider Olympus HG zooms slow and mediocre too.

Rriley said:
Rriley said:

If you want to talk about quality control rest assured, pentax acknowledged the stains issue officially and is fixing it for those first batch cameras. Where was Olympus acknowledgement for the back focusing e-3?

Click to expand...

[]

No comment here. Interesting huh?

Rriley said:
Rriley said:

As for the future of the system

Click to expand...

pentax have a history of instability, Hoya already tried unsuccessfully to dump it

Your claim doesn't seem to hold since it was under Hoya approval that the 645D came out now. It's common to have periods of instability when a company is taken over. Doesn't seem to be the case anymore. In the mean time Olympus continues to lose more marketshare and the time is ticking for the IMG division as Olympus said themselves . Oh and Olympus has stopped 4/3rs lens development too. It's a bit funny to accuse Pentax here given the Olympus 4/3rds state of their mount.

Rriley said:
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/405-pentax_1650_28?start=1
http://www.photozone.de/olympus--four-thirds-lens-tests/450-oly_1260_284?start=1

Companies have their ups and downs with lenses.

http://www.photozone.de/pentax/479-pentax_60250_4?start=2

I still would not be able to believe paying $2,200 USD for the 14-35 focusing really slow in the middle of a wedding losing shot after shot after shot. Could you believe that? Paying that amount of cash to lose shots?

Rriley said:
--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended

--
Raist3d (Photographer & Tools/Systems/Gui Games Developer)

Rriley · Dec 27, 2010

Raist3d said:
Rriley wrote:

[trimmed word limit]

Member said:
I mentioned the 12-60 as a lens in the class where this lens falls price wise and the type of lens it is. [trimmed word limit]

the bulk of these lenses are mediocre and slow
http://www.pentaximaging.com/camera-lenses/
lets just hope theyre not all like this one
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/pentax_16-45_4_p15/page3.asp
oh wait, maybe they are
http://www.dpreview.com/lensreviews/pentax_18-55_3p5-5p6_p15/page3.asp

Member said:
You going now and pointing out the EFL of the 12-60 is meaningless in this discussion.

thanks for eliminating the charts btw

Member said:
And that said, you sure seem to make the same mistake of some of the other people int his forum when quoting this site and lenstips which is- you can't compare resolution charts/tests across different systems!

i didnt quote lenstip

what you cant see a qualitative difference ?
you cant see its a 5x zoom vs a 3x zoom
you cant see the more even field performance of the Zuiko?
maybe you just cant see

you compared them, so I included the now eliminated MTF charts from PZ
[trimmed word limit]

Member said:
Member said:

that would be b/se you wont-didnt-cant read, this is what I said

[trimmed word limit] we can choose to progress to SHG, only cheaper lesser ones from 3rd party manufacturers that can cost you 2 stops performance in the bargain .

Click to expand...

Sorry but this is what you said above:

what are you saying i lied? you called me a ****** and god knows what else, now you say i made no such qualifications?

Member said:
"Its a fine system if you are into primes, but I wouldnt want to be the working pro shooting a wedding with a bag of primes, and if you give up lens speed for higher ISO you remove from your grasp at least some of its high ISO advantage and off comes some of the (significant) DR advantage too."

the zooms are slow

trouble with things like this is people want to have it both ways, you want to tell me this system is noisier at high ISO and the equivalent DoF is more in the same rant. If the noise performance is better, then the zooms are slower in exposure. If you need to stop down you lose noise advantage, i think thats pretty clear

Member said:
There's no mention of 3rd party lenses in this paragraph, nor in any of the text before it,

thats why i included it, 4/3rds can go up a grade in glass, pentax cannot

Member said:
and the 16-50 lens isn't a bad lens as you seem to say. If you didn't mean to say that maybe you should write it in a different way. Even more than that you opened your reply with:

[trimmed word limit]

Member said:
Implying that the zooms that exist are all slow and mediocre which is a complete flat out lie.

which is the second time you visited this in the same post, my answer was
"the zooms are slow

trouble with things like this is people want to have it both ways, you want to tell me this system is noisier at high ISO and the equivalent DoF is more in the same rant. If the noise performance is better, then the zooms are slower in exposure. If you need to stop down you lose noise advantage, i think thats pretty clear"

Member said:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=37297327

Member said:

which is follow up on the 7-14 to Sigma 8-16 boobn2 was on about earlier where I compared a 7-14 with the sigma. The synopsis is we can go to SHG which is a step up, Pentax you can only go down to 3rd party lenses.

Click to expand...

That's not what you wrote on your reply in the link I mentioned. What you wrote, you wrote in reply to:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1022&message=37297204

I don't see how exactly it is supposed to be interpreted it is a follow up to the other gay. Maybe you did the reply to the wrong poster?

i made a post independent of any other post, i cant see any association with that

Member said:
[]

Member said:

Such is the price of using a three year old sensor instead of a state of the art one. And I am not even talking about banding.

and in no way do any of these pentax lenses come anywhere near SHG quality lenses [trimmed word limit]

Click to expand...

The primes certainly do.

and so back to a bag of primes, got it now?

Member said:
The zooms may not be at the SGH level (maybe one of them is), but that doesn't mean they are slow mediocre zooms. Unless of course you consider Olympus HG zooms slow and mediocre too.

i dont, and i dont see pentax zooms as anything particularly good. They seem to conform with a standard that has very soft edges until f/8

Member said:
Member said:

Member said:

If you want to talk about quality control rest assured, pentax acknowledged the stains issue officially and is fixing it for those first batch cameras. Where was Olympus acknowledgement for the back focusing e-3?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&message=37101214&changemode=1

Member said:
No comment here. Interesting huh?

nobody on the planet will answer every point of you rambling rants, and the forum is better off not being required to

--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended

Rriley · Dec 27, 2010

ptII

Rriley said:
Rriley said:

Rriley said:

As for the future of the system

Click to expand...

pentax have a history of instability, Hoya already tried unsuccessfully to dump it

Click to expand...

Your claim doesn't seem to hold since it was under Hoya approval that the 645D came out now.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1000&message=23162979&changemode=1

May 10, 2007

TOKYO (Nikkei)--Pentax Corp. (7750) plans to sell its Tokyo headquarters and withdraw from less profitable businesses under strategies the camera maker has crafted to block a takeover bid by optical glass manufacturer Hoya Corp. (7741), The Nikkei learned Wednesday. /

Rriley said:
It's common to have periods of instability when a company is taken over. Doesn't seem to be the case anymore.[trimmed word limit]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoya_Corporation

Hoya discussed a merger with Pentax into Hoya Pentax HD Corporation during 2007. Hoya's primary goal was to strengthen its medical-related business by taking advantage of Pentax's technologies and expertise in the field of endoscopes,[trimmed word limit] It was speculated that Pentax's camera business could be sold off after the merger.

http://www.photographyblog.com/news/hoya_buys_pentax_finally/
Hoya Buys Pentax (Finally) June 1, 2007

http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2008/09/hoya-closing-pentax-production.html
Hoya Closing Pentax Production Facilities in Japan September 20, 2008

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a2INg8z8QZAQ&refer=asia
"Pentax had a 38 million yen loss in the quarter."August 11, 2008

http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2009/11/ten-dadfa-lenses-officially.html
Ten DA/DFA Lenses Officially Discontinued! November 25, 2009

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-05-27/hoya-founder-s-grandson-calls-pentax-acquisition-failure-seeks-reforms.html

Hoya Founder's Grandson Calls Pentax Acquisition 'Failure,' Seeks Reforms May 27, 2010

Rriley said:
Companies have their ups and downs [trimmed word limit]

right...

Rriley said:
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/479-pentax_60250_4?start=2

I still would not be able to believe paying $2,200 USD for the 14-35 focusing really slow [trimmed word limit]

people are saying that its much faster and more reliable on E5

now you had your long rant, and i attempted to answer the more lucid parts, if i missed something worthwhile i apologise

--
Riley

any similarity to persons living or dead is coincidental and unintended

K-5 DR, E-5 Lenses

Raist3d

Guest

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Raist3d

Guest

Raist3d

Guest

Raist3d

Guest

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Raist3d

Guest

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Keyboard shortcuts