12-24mm DA finally announced!!

http://www.letsgodigital.org/en/news/articles/story_4134.html

Its not the cheapest thing in the world though.....

I have to say, the thought of a DS2, 12-24mm DA, and AF540FGZ flash reallly really appeals...

any news on UK price and availability?

Cant wait for Practical Photography's group test against the sigma

I wish Pentax would make a 12mm prime, to compliment the 16-45 the way the 14mm compliments the 18 to whatever zoom.

I like primes, zooms are handy but it seems pointless to have overlapping focal lengths. Besides, primes are cheaper and better!

If nothing shows up in the next six months or so, I'll have to go for the zoom or the 14mm. And what's with this business of no apeture ring? Some of us shoot in the studio and would like to set the shutter speed on the camera and the apeture on the lens, like normal people do!

As long as I'm griping, I might as well gripe about the "crippleed" FAF mount. what were they thinking? Good save with the firmware upedate, but please, Pentax, realize that not all Pentax pro users are tied to Medium Format. Some of us have stuck with the Pentax 35mm equipement, and compatability is what keeps us from jumping ship. My 50mm f/1.4 A makes a great protrait lens on the *st D, which is much more professional in features and ergonomics than the overpriced stuff from Nikon and Canon.

Wake up, Pentax, you have a great product with incredable compatability. Don't blow it!!

couldn't agree more Mr Dent. I really don't know what anyone sees in zooms.

Steve

Arthur, you have quickly become the resident Meldrew on this forum!

Addressing your points:

First, there is not a snowball's chance in Hell that Pentax is going to bring out a 12mm prime when they have only recently introduced a 14mm. That would make no sense whatsoever. It's not going to happen.

Second, I would have slightly more sympathy with your oft-repeated point about aperture rings if you hadn't recently bought a camera that doesn't need them. Once you put your prejudices aside, and grapple with that monster called "Change" that you seem to find so terrifying, you will find that it is actually easier to set the aperture on the body (particularly if you have the pro-oriented *ist D, with its two wheels, rather than the amateur's DS or DL).

Third, the 14mm lens costs over £600 in the UK, and the 16-45mm zoom that you mentioned costs roughly half that. What was your point about primes being cheaper? They would be, if people still bought them in quantity, but nowadays primes are low-volume, high-price items.

Best wishes!

George

Well, there are other lenses that do not have apeture rings and are meant for full frame cameras.

The Pentax SMC-FA-J 18-35mm f/4-5.6 AL - Auto Focus Zoom is listed as suitable for 35mm cameras, but what if I want to use it on my MX cameras? Just because I own a fancy digital pro camera doesn't mean that I'll never use Kodachrome again!!

It seems the time is not right for lenses that can be mounted on manual cameras to have no apeture ring. There's somehing to be said for backwards compatability. Just look at the howl that went up when the *st D wouldn't work with old M lenses. Pentax made a quick save with the firmware update, I don't wnat to replace seven old lenses to use them with the digital camera!




Perhaps they'll put the full KAF mount in the D2, along with the new 12 megapixel chip. That would be a camera suited to professional use, and pros can be sniffy about zoom lenses. We earn our living with this stuff, and will spend some bucks to get the tools of the trade!

Threre is a 10mm lens to be available soon, also meant for the APS-C sensor. I prefer Pentax brand lenses, but if this one turns out to be sharp and contrasty I just might get one.

Besides, I've earned the right to be a grumpy old man. I paid my dues!!

Arthur,

The fact is that while the MX is a wonderful camera, they stopped making them in 1985, and it is no longer economical to repair them.

If you really want to use one of the new cheap sans-aperture-ring lenses like the FAJ 18-35 on a film body, you can pick up an SFX for £25.00, or an MZ5 for not much more. And I have to say, I should be very surprised if you don't already own such a camera.

But as a pro, you surely don't want to lower your standards by buying one of these cheap and nasty consumer lenses.

George

Well, you're probably right, I have two MX cameras in excellent shape that I use for film. I can buy used MX cameras on ebay should I need parts. And no, I don't own any of the new cheapies, I don't need them.

I just think that taking the attitude of "old is no good" to an extrene is why Pentax ran into the M-lens fiasco with the *st D, which is a fine camara. Nice save with the firmware, but still.....

They have maintained customer loyalty, even among people who make our living with these cameras, partly by allowing really superior old lenses to work on modern cameras. Shouldn't the theory work the other way?

I coughed up for a 28-70mm FA AL lens, just to see what the advantage is. Apparently it's no longer made, but it has a good reputation. It will work on any body I own, even the old K-1000 on the shelf! That's what I like about Penatx, I can use it on the old camera or the new camera.

The lens is the key to the image. A camera body needs to be sturdy and well-made, but the lens is what makes the image!

So I suppose I agree, I wouldn't use the crappy varifocal pseudo-zoom lenses for a job. But if I want to take some snapshots on vacation....

Anyway, what is, is. We're both lucky to be using top of the line equipenent and not paying for a "status" name. I am selling off my Canon gear and I got rid of the Nikon F a long time ago. (anyone remember the F?)

So soldier on, and have fun!

That's a good point and sometimes forgotten when considering the latest technological advances within the camera.
Here's an analogy that I often use - it doesn't matter how good/expensive your hifi system is, it'll still sound cheap and nasty if you use low quality speakers because ultimately, it's the speakers that you are actually listening to!

or, a correctly exposed image taken on a K1000 is identical to the same correctly exposed image taken on an LX, Z1, *ist or whatever - for a given lens!

That was me BTW, - forgot to login