Full Frame Lenses

FA J 18-35mm

I think the point I am getting at is that why release a Pro lens at Pro cost to a Pentax market that's made up of enthusiasts, is Pentax aiming for this market instead of going after the future buyers of D610, A7 or 6D potential owners and are going straight for the D810 and 5D market, Brand loyalty counts for nothing in the Pro world as you know, so would they be able to compete with their very first offering?

I hope I am wrong as I want to own a FF Pentax, but it would give us an idea on how this new camera is going to be priced and will be a kick in the teeth to the owners who have supported the brand through thick and thin.

Just been doing some K-5 comparison INF distance tests of the
Pentax-F SMC 28-80mm f3.5 - f4.5 against the
Pentax-A 50mm f1.4 at 50mm f/5.6 - f/8 which is a known top performer on Sony FF

Hardly any noticeable difference

Usable at f/4 which is wide open at 50mm

AF is a bit torquey and fast, but accurate and OK. Nice macro at 80mm.

Always been one of my favourite lenses along with the F 24-50mm

There's hardly any difference between 24mm and 28mm..... just step back slightly.

Note: This was the expensive SMC version not the cheap Kit-Lens that was produced in another factory. There was also a cheap Takumar version.


--

Hey Algi, any idea how my little F35-70macro will fare. ... ? It's looking like it might be my only hope, at least as far as a FF standard zoom goes !

The Samgyang 14mm will have all the resolution, contrast and aberration control needed, but its edge distortions on FF may well have me cropping right back in aps-c size !! I'm hopeful for the Tamron AF70-300, although accepting it would be a stopgap until funds are available for something more.

Now, regarding the intended market .... We ARE talking about a format shift here. Those who really want it and need it are looking to the very best in quality and performance. It is surely being marketed at those who can actually afford that ... And the best doesn't come from a sensor alone. It's being marketed at those who can afford the best camera AND lenses.

I'd hazard a guess that the very few who already own the top FA or D FA lenses would probably be the same people who could afford the newest FF lenses now being released.

The rest of us, looking hopefully at our more modest lens collections with one eye and at our credit card bills with the other, ... Well, is this new quality, and new cost, really for us after all?

Only two items that the yet unreleased Pentax has over the Sigma model that was released years ago; a few more elements and the WR. Even with those two items, the price difference is not justified

I do get the point, I'm just pointing out that they already have the basic design for an excellent mid-price lens without the faster aperture.

Pentax do need a "Pro" spec zoom in this range, but I can't see any good reason why a cheaper alternative cant be released at the same time.

I've got that lens as well Not quite as good as the 28-80mm but the edges hold up quite well for FF especially at f/8 - f/11. The poorest end is the 70mm end. I also have the A 35-70mm f/4 which is slightly sharper especially at the edges. It's also a very nice lens to use.

I'm just looking at a set of Practical Photography Tests on F lenses from 1990. The 28-80mm cost £200 and the 35-70mm £155.

The 28mm f/2.8 has poor edges..... but everyone knows that

It's a pity Pentax haven't re-badged the Tokina ....... Looks awesome ... Low distortion and good for 20x24 prints....

http://www.popphoto.com/lens-test-tokina-at-x-24-70mm-f-28-pro-fx

--

Thanks! So there's still some hope for the f35-70. Luckily I really like F8 and F11

Now come on ... Why are you always on about the 28mm edges? ..... My recent Kimmeridge Bay shots were taken with it and no-one said anything about the edges .... Ahhh, DING Perhaps I should stick to aps-c after all!

I think the point I am getting at is that why release a Pro lens at Pro cost to a Pentax market that's made up of enthusiasts, is Pentax aiming for this market instead of going after the future buyers of D610, A7 or 6D potential owners and are going straight for the D810 and 5D market, Brand loyalty counts for nothing in the Pro world as you know, so would they be able to compete with their very first offering?

I hope I am wrong as I want to own a FF Pentax, but it would give us an idea on how this new camera is going to be priced and will be a kick in the teeth to the owners who have supported the brand through thick and thin.[/quote]But any upgrade to a FF kit is not going to be cheap and in particular as this is the first time they have made an FF body there will be a lot of r and d costs to recoup. Why should companies reduce prices just to maintain brand loyalty? No other business does that!

Quite a lot of 28mm lenses suffer from field curvature and also poor centering. They are very often sharp at the edge close to the camera. Minolta made one with variable field curvature.

I don't suppose it matters as long as you don't pixel peep When you reduce down to say 1250 wide you can get away with quite poor equipment

Can you see anything odd about this 24mm test shot? It's not the leaning lamp.




--

For me it would be K35 f/3.5, FA43 f/1.9, A50 f/1.2, FA77 f/1.8 and i'm looking closely at a D-FA100 WR

So what is it that makes a lens full frame capable? Got a M 28mm f3.5 and the rear element is tiny but guess that it's full frame as its from the film era?

To be full frame the image the lens projects onto the sensor needs to be wide enough to cover the 24 x 36mm frame. APS-C lenses are smaller and project smaller image circles, so don't cover the whole of a full frame.

In this context, full frame means a format size the same as 35mm film cameras.

As someone who's been shooting Pentax for decades I'd spin the question round. Apart from my DA10-17FE & DA17-70/4 (bought because I needed something wider than 24mm on APS-C) all of my lenses cover the 135 format. As a mechanical film shooter, over the years I've bought Tak/K/M/A/F & FA lenses for their coverage & aperture rings.

Given that the 5D MkII/III brigade have been snapping up Super/SMC Takumars (40+ year old lenses with no automation) and paying more for them than equivalent new EF lenses, I'm convinced that most prime lenses will produce more than acceptable results on the Pentax FF body. Zooms are likely to be much more variable.

John.

Very wide film lenses will probably cause issues as digital is more affected by the angle the light arrives at.

I have a couple more crop lenses than you, having a 50-200 & 55-300 on top of the 2 you list. Yet I still have most of the way from 35mm - 500mm covered with FF compatible AF zoom lenses with 28mm, 90mm & 600mm manual primes added in (as well as others duplicating zoom views) . Off the top of my head the region I'm not sure of is 80-100mm but that's not really a big enough gap to matter even without the 90 in the middle of it.

Despite that I'm not sure if I'd be tempted by a FF Pentax even if my salary was suddenly doubled!

I'd expect the IQ with my lenses to be reasonable rather than good, but it's the weight that would be the main issue. (The DA55-300 is significantly lighter than the F100-300 & makes the DA50-200 redundant as well which lightened my bag significantly)