Pentax DA 12-35mm WR DC


Gwyn

Link Posted 20/12/2010 - 14:50
Given the price of the 18-135 WR I doubt very much this new lens will be that affordable for most people. It has to be cheaper than the 12-24 to make it interesting.

Whilst this new lens is interesting, should it ever actually get built, I too would have been more excited by a long lens, whether a prime or for me, a zoom. An SDM TC would be good too - they have been promising that for a very long time.

There are people, like Oggy, who are switching systems - not because the other systems are better, but because they offer longer lenses. Fine there are a couple of long Sigmas out there for Pentax, but most people I think would love to see some long Pentax glass too so we have a choice.

johnriley

Link Posted 20/12/2010 - 14:56
Quote:
There is also the matter of the photo Pentax use on their site of their lens collection, a lot of which have been out of production for many years. This could be regarded as misleading.

That's interesting. I wonder how many of those lenses are actually still available in Japan? A lot of lenses and cameras were wqithdrawn from sale in Europe because of legislation relating to dangerous materials such as Lead. Specifically the 645 and 67 disappeared because of this.

I mention it because the A series 50mm f1.2 was available (assembled in Thailand) in the far East, but not here. There are quite a few others listed on the Japanese site, although I haven't looked recently.
Best regards, John

Don

Link Posted 20/12/2010 - 15:03
johnriley wrote:
Quote:
There is also the matter of the photo Pentax use on their site of their lens collection, a lot of which have been out of production for many years. This could be regarded as misleading.

That's interesting. I wonder how many of those lenses are actually still available in Japan? A lot of lenses and cameras were wqithdrawn from sale in Europe because of legislation relating to dangerous materials such as Lead. Specifically the 645 and 67 disappeared because of this.

I mention it because the A series 50mm f1.2 was available (assembled in Thailand) in the far East, but not here. There are quite a few others listed on the Japanese site, although I haven't looked recently.

I find the concept interesting for a moment then realized...
Pentax promises the best backward compatibility of all the brands... so it would not be misleading but they should maybe have more photos with new glass and mention the backwards compatibility of the lenses where older or rare glass is used.
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.

Oggy

Link Posted 20/12/2010 - 21:33
Gwyn wrote:
There are people, like Oggy, who are switching systems - not because the other systems are better, but because they offer longer lenses. Fine there are a couple of long Sigmas out there for Pentax, but most people I think would love to see some long Pentax glass too so we have a choice.

Not quite Gwyn.

I am not switching in the foreseeable future, I am keeping my K20 for things that don't move too fast and are close, and using the Canon for things that go whizzing past at 450mph. For this type of photo the Canon IS the better camera.

I have preferences for certain cameras for certain jobs. I have no unquestioning loyalty to one brand or another.

As for the lens price, I have the 100-400 at about £1000. I also have other options with or without very effective teleconverters which I can buy from any Canon dealer, totalling up to £silly.

Gwyn

Link Posted 20/12/2010 - 22:04
I stand corrected oggy .

You are not switching systems, but not everyone can afford to run two systems - there are some I know who have switched simply because they can't get the good long lenses they want/need. Meanwhile the wide end seems to be awash with lenses offering similar lengths and F stops.

Oggy

Link Posted 20/12/2010 - 22:09
Exactly Gwyn. This was why I did not look at the K5.

Offertonhatter

Link Posted 20/12/2010 - 22:13
Not sure about this lens. Who is it aimed at? It is too slow for "pros" and serious enthusiasts. They already have the 12-24mm F4 which is more suitable AND the 16-50mm F2.8 for more serious users, albeit longer at 16mm. Its only USP is the WR and SDM for which the 12-24 does not have (nor my lovely Sigma 10-20). Plus it is more than 3x optical zoom, so, in my opinion is going to be compromised (3x is in all seriousness the limit for maximum IQ on a zoom, even the 100-400 Canon is compromised, ask users....)

Now if instead they went down the route of a 8-16mm F4 super-wide with WR and SDM, I would have been more interested.

However, I, like many others, would rather see some lenses at the longer end, beyond the 300mm F4. Something like a 135-400 F4 or even a 400mm F4, or 500mm F4 (not F2.8, we are not CaNikon, and they will be cheaper and more useable)

Pentax cannot rely on 3rd party manufacturers to provide the long end, they have to do their own. As a 3rd party might stop making Pentax mount at any point - as has happened recently. 300mm is still too short for Nature, even on Digital.
Some Cameras

mecrox

Link Posted 20/12/2010 - 23:42
Oh well. 12-35mm is 24-70mm on 4/3rds, a useful spread should Pentax decide to go that route on an EVIL camera. Just a thought.

Don

Link Posted 21/12/2010 - 03:01
I find myself hoping this will be the first all plastic, inexpensive, yet pro image quality wr zoom for the masses.
who cares if it is "Fast" when cameras like the kx, kr, and k5 perform well at high iso?
Fired many shots. Didn't kill anything.

Marc Langille

Link Posted 21/12/2010 - 04:55
Don wrote:
johnriley wrote:
For whatever reason, it seems to have been a lower priority. Maybe they had eyed up more cooperation with Tokina and it fell through? Or maybe historically sales of long telephotos have been low and hence it's the less profitable part of the range? I'm only guessing...

Actually though are we not spoilt these days? The 300mm is equivalent to 450mm in film terms, and I never had a film lens that long.

maybe the sr doesn't play as expected with longer lenses?
Maybe nobody in retail wants to sock them due to sales demands?
maybe.... just maybe... Pentax figures the 300 is long enough...
I'd be interested if Pentax took an older design (or oddball lens like the 400-600 mirror) and gave the 35 mm plastic/price point make-over......

Can you imagine an affordable ultra compact and light all plastic 400-600 mirror?

@John: Don't feel too bad about availability, since this is a good example: unless you call around and stumble across it, the new Nikkor 600/4 is extremely hard to find. That's putting aside the $11,000 USD price tag. Even those in the NPS (Nikon Professional Services) gripe about the availability of longer glass and they have priority.

FWIW, I believe the Pentax big glass production ran in the low teens to mid-20's for the FA* 600/4, etc. The market for super telephoto primes is small and more than a few lens manufacturers will assemble a pre-order list before building them. It's too costly to keep them in inventory or on the shelves. I am not sure on the margins though. I was considering a Sigma 500/4.5 in Pentax mount for a wildlife photo competition - this was the information given to me by the Sigma rep through the store manager, whom I know and trust.

Lucky for me I had a personal sponsorship opportunity with the local camera store. I was given the loan of a Canon 40D + battery grip, Sigma 500/4.5 in Canon mount, plus a Pentax K20D + battery grip to use with the Pentax lenses.



@Don: SR on longer telephotos does work - razor sharp at 600mm, 1/125 sec. Obviously solid technique, support system and subject movement are huge factors in a "keeper" at lower shutter speeds.

Sorry for the rambling and digression. Back to the OT!

Cheers,
Marc
“The camera is only a tool: the image is the product of your mind and vision.”
Last Edited by Marc Langille on 21/12/2010 - 04:59

Algernon

Link Posted 21/12/2010 - 10:24
Thanks Marc... Nice to know that SR works at 600mm.
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi

Unlocker

Link Posted 21/12/2010 - 12:48
Algernon wrote:
Thanks Marc... Nice to know that SR works at 600mm.

Seconded!!

WebsiteBlogGearTwitterFacebook

rparmar

Link Posted 21/12/2010 - 12:53
Like all product release threads this becomes a place for those who want other lenses to gripe in a completely irrelevant fashion.

Until recently Pentax had a long lens on the books that they made on demand. No-one wanted it, so they stopped. And very very few of the people who call for longer glass would shell out the four to five figures it would cost. Pentax are totally right not to bother.

If you want a 600mm buy a system that has one. The price of the body is trivial after purchasing the lens.

Offertonhatter wrote:
It is too slow for "pros" and serious enthusiasts. They already have the 12-24mm F4 which is more suitable AND the 16-50mm F2.8 for more serious users, albeit longer at 16mm. Its only USP is the WR and SDM

I think if there were any more contradictions in a single paragraph your head would explode. The 12-35 is "too slow" but the 12-24 is "more suitable"? Pros won't want the former but are fine with the latter? 16mm is somehow a substitute for 12mm? Though the 12-35 has two distinct advantages in "WR and SDM", no pros would want it?

You have clearly pointed out all of the advantages of the proposed lens. To which I can only add that f/3.5 to f/4.5 is not now, nor has it ever been slow for a wide-angle zoom. For "professional" applications one would invariably stop down and be using a tripod. The lens could be released as an f/8 and still find buyers, if every other characteristic was exemplary. (Wouldn't look good for marketing though.)
Listen to my albums free on BandCamp. Or visit my main website for links to photography, etc.
Last Edited by rparmar on 21/12/2010 - 12:55

Gwyn

Link Posted 21/12/2010 - 13:11
Why would it cost 5 figures?
They could make a reasonable zoom - even a 250-400 (or better yet 500) which would fit in nicely with what is already available from them and I can see no reason it would cost 5 figures. 4 OK, but 5?

I'll wait to see what this new lens costs before deciding whether one would be worth my while or not. I don't do a lot of really wide angle so I would probably not bother, but if the price is reasonable, simply because it is a WR I might consider it.

George Lazarette

Link Posted 21/12/2010 - 13:21
Well we have drifted away from the topic, and I regret to say that I will be continuing in the same vein.

The cost of a lens is directly related to how many will be sold. They could produce a 600mm 1:4 for £300 if enough people could be relied upon to buy it. But the fact is that it is hard to take good pictures hand-held with very long lenses, which is why I usually choose my 300mm in preference to my 400mm, and then crop the image.

So I wouldn't buy a 600mm if it cost more than 50 quid. I just wouldn't use it enough to justify the outlay. The market for such a lens is tiny, whatever the price, and as Robin says, those who NEED a 600mm should switch to Canon.

However, I wonder whether Pentax shouldn't be brave and make and sell a 500mm for say £600.00, as a loss-leader to keep people like Oggy on board.

If they were to sell it in a T-mount configuration, they might sell rather a lot, and actually make a profit.

G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.