 |  |  |  |
| Wild American Flamingos by Fotorequest from Flamingos Unlimited | No Space Race Here by Nilesh Trivedi from Empty spaces in the city | _MG_5014 by tim and jan from Cruise Liners | Two Surfers by JeffryZ from Reflections on the Shore |
| | | |
| Wild American Flamingos by Fotorequest from Flamingos Unlimited | No Space Race Here by Nilesh Trivedi from Empty spaces in the city | _MG_5014 by tim and jan from Cruise Liners | Two Surfers by JeffryZ from Reflections on the Shore |
drummercam: "Ricoh announces new $1,400 21mm F2.4 ED Limited DC WR lens, set for November release"
Is price in the headline the new style at DPR? Because ANY similar quality lens from ANY maker is in the same price range, and size range, too, given the race for "ultimate" IQ. And frankly, I seriously doubt one will find in other lenses the level of actual "quality" that this lens will prove out, unless you move to Leica.
In fact, I might be inclined to class the Pentax 21 by itself, as compared to those . . .
drummercam: "Ricoh announces new $1,400 21mm F2.4 ED Limited DC WR lens, set for November release"
Is price in the headline the new style at DPR? Because ANY similar quality lens from ANY maker is in the same price range, and size range, too, given the race for "ultimate" IQ. And frankly, I seriously doubt one will find in other lenses the level of actual "quality" that this lens will prove out, unless you move to Leica.
I don't agree, I am completely sincere, that all the lenses you mention are in the same class at all.
"Ricoh announces new $1,400 21mm F2.4 ED Limited DC WR lens, set for November release"
Is price in the headline the new style at DPR? Because ANY similar quality lens from ANY maker is in the same price range, and size range, too, given the race for "ultimate" IQ. And frankly, I seriously doubt one will find in other lenses the level of actual "quality" that this lens will prove out, unless you move to Leica.
scokill: Why is so big and expensive? :)
Any similar quality lens from any maker is in the same price range, and size range, too, given the race for "ultimate" IQ.
Excellent picture! What part of the world has this form of the cicada? Brood X 17-year cicada in northeast USA, which emerged in 2021, does not look like this.
These fellows are making some beautiful lenses. https://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/limited_lens/interview/
jonby: Nice. Where's the K3 III review?
Waiting until all other review have been studied and we, the users, have sussed out everything ourselves (basically done).
Magic.
drummercam: My father, USMC, serviced the wing guns of VMF-422's Corsairs on Engebi in WWII.
It's a stunning picture. Best I've seen of a Corsair.
My father, USMC, serviced the wing guns of VMF-422's Corsairs on Engebi in WWII.
My father, USMC, serviced the wing guns of VMF-422's Corsairs on Engebi in WWII.
the one and only
Someone below said that disabling such things as sharpness or CA options was the only thing that makes sense for a review site. And DPR believes Pentax Custom Image "Natural" is the proper default test condition, not "Bright," which is how Pentax ships the cameras. I think both of these "everything off" assumptions are premises not necessarily ascribable to the intentions of all manufacturers for best use of the camera in the majority of conditions. I know the idea is to, supposedly, get at exactly what a sensor is "doing" and what a lens is "doing." But cameras are systems that include in-built processing engines. This, and the sensor, and a lens are a 3-way system. (The photographer is a fourth component, but I'll let that rest even though that "component" is very often visible in DPR tests.) "Off" is sometimes itself just an option.
Michael Piziak: Congratulations in coming in 2rd! This is a worthy accomplishment, in my opinion!
Regards,
Michael
Thank you. GRIII's macro is very good, and very handy.
drummercam: This lens is not "expensive" relative to others in its class. From Pentax"
“In the past, we employed a mechanism with a single roller […]. The new lens […] features two separate rollers which fit the width of each groove […] to effectively minimize instability. To reduce unsteady movement along the optical axis, it also incorporates a structure which […] prevents rotation torque of the cam ring from affecting zoom-ring operation, and assures effortless zooming without excessively large torque, while minimizing the generation of unwanted instability."
This type of construction in never discussed in detail in so-called "reviews." I'm pretty sure that any modern, premium Pentax lens would prove the equal or clear better than any competitor in a take-apart comparison. Some of the cost is in these robust features, in addition to clearly competitive optics.
"If Pentax is approaching premium in a new way, for whatever that means, I guess that's good." The concept is not my invention. There's been plenty of suggestion that Pentax is aiming at a new premium niche, "the Leica of DSLR's," etc. It's not just me "saying it" and hasn't been for some time.
drummercam: This lens is not "expensive" relative to others in its class. From Pentax"
“In the past, we employed a mechanism with a single roller […]. The new lens […] features two separate rollers which fit the width of each groove […] to effectively minimize instability. To reduce unsteady movement along the optical axis, it also incorporates a structure which […] prevents rotation torque of the cam ring from affecting zoom-ring operation, and assures effortless zooming without excessively large torque, while minimizing the generation of unwanted instability."
This type of construction in never discussed in detail in so-called "reviews." I'm pretty sure that any modern, premium Pentax lens would prove the equal or clear better than any competitor in a take-apart comparison. Some of the cost is in these robust features, in addition to clearly competitive optics.
"less contrived than drummercam". I've been a Pentax shooter since 1977. There's nothing contrived about my experience. My point has been that Pentax seems to be approaching "premium" in a new way, based exactly on my longstanding experience. Comparisons to older items, in my view, are going to mislead people who DO NOT have that experience. I'm not trying to take on anybody. I'm trying to be helpful.
drummercam: This lens is not "expensive" relative to others in its class. From Pentax"
“In the past, we employed a mechanism with a single roller […]. The new lens […] features two separate rollers which fit the width of each groove […] to effectively minimize instability. To reduce unsteady movement along the optical axis, it also incorporates a structure which […] prevents rotation torque of the cam ring from affecting zoom-ring operation, and assures effortless zooming without excessively large torque, while minimizing the generation of unwanted instability."
This type of construction in never discussed in detail in so-called "reviews." I'm pretty sure that any modern, premium Pentax lens would prove the equal or clear better than any competitor in a take-apart comparison. Some of the cost is in these robust features, in addition to clearly competitive optics.
No, I mentioned the 50, the 85, "and now this one," getting back to the point about the new barrel extension support. I'm not being argumentative. I'm making a point no one else is making: Pentax "premium" is a reinvigorated concept now, and that includes not just IQ, WR, etc., but other aspects of build quality no one ever mentions. Backwards comparison is no longer helpful, as I believe Pentax has adopted a new game. My 55-300, not of the premium line but great optically, is very solid all through the extension. I would not be surprised that it too got unadvertised extension support upgrades from the older lenses. you mentioned.
drummercam: This lens is not "expensive" relative to others in its class. From Pentax"
“In the past, we employed a mechanism with a single roller […]. The new lens […] features two separate rollers which fit the width of each groove […] to effectively minimize instability. To reduce unsteady movement along the optical axis, it also incorporates a structure which […] prevents rotation torque of the cam ring from affecting zoom-ring operation, and assures effortless zooming without excessively large torque, while minimizing the generation of unwanted instability."
This type of construction in never discussed in detail in so-called "reviews." I'm pretty sure that any modern, premium Pentax lens would prove the equal or clear better than any competitor in a take-apart comparison. Some of the cost is in these robust features, in addition to clearly competitive optics.
My point is that I think Pentax's approach to "premium" is reinvigorated, and they deserve congratulations for having had enough quality all along to have survived long enough to implement their new approach. "It's about time-ism" is looking backwards, when new Pentax products are showing real development improvements.
drummercam: This lens is not "expensive" relative to others in its class. From Pentax"
“In the past, we employed a mechanism with a single roller […]. The new lens […] features two separate rollers which fit the width of each groove […] to effectively minimize instability. To reduce unsteady movement along the optical axis, it also incorporates a structure which […] prevents rotation torque of the cam ring from affecting zoom-ring operation, and assures effortless zooming without excessively large torque, while minimizing the generation of unwanted instability."
This type of construction in never discussed in detail in so-called "reviews." I'm pretty sure that any modern, premium Pentax lens would prove the equal or clear better than any competitor in a take-apart comparison. Some of the cost is in these robust features, in addition to clearly competitive optics.
218, every maker out there has a full collection of lenses with similar issues, and worse, especially in their consumer lines (like that 17-70). Pentax should do something? They have. They've adopted a new approach to their premium lines. The new 50, 85, and now this one make that clear. And their top-line bodies have been unequivocally premium grade for a long time.
This lens is not "expensive" relative to others in its class. From Pentax"
“In the past, we employed a mechanism with a single roller […]. The new lens […] features two separate rollers which fit the width of each groove […] to effectively minimize instability. To reduce unsteady movement along the optical axis, it also incorporates a structure which […] prevents rotation torque of the cam ring from affecting zoom-ring operation, and assures effortless zooming without excessively large torque, while minimizing the generation of unwanted instability."
This type of construction in never discussed in detail in so-called "reviews." I'm pretty sure that any modern, premium Pentax lens would prove the equal or clear better than any competitor in a take-apart comparison. Some of the cost is in these robust features, in addition to clearly competitive optics.