Pentax K-1 Mark II rumours


McGregNi

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 14:26
Apart from the D FA70-200 it is hard for me to understand why the new full frame lens range needed to be with such a wide aperture as F2.8 ....?

I can see the practical purpose in the 70-200 (ie. portraits). But in all honesty, are there any images that you could take with the 15-30 that would look any different if shot at f4.0 instead of F2.8? And if someone could demonstrate any difference, could it possibly be worth the price paid, both financially and in extra weight/bulk ?

I appreciate that no one has had the choice yet, so I can't criticise those who have bought them, but is the F2.8 designation not as much a badge of prestige as it is a practical benefit?
My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver
Last Edited by McGregNi on 27/01/2018 - 14:32

RobL

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 15:00
McGregNi wrote:
Apart from the D FA70-200 it is hard for me to understand why the new full frame lens range needed to be with such a wide aperture as F2.8 ....?

I can see the practical purpose in the 70-200 (ie. portraits). But in all honesty, are there any images that you could take with the 15-30 that would look any different if shot at f4.0 instead of F2.8? And if someone could demonstrate any difference, could it possibly be worth the price paid, both financially and in extra weight/bulk ?

I appreciate that no one has had the choice yet, so I can't criticise those who have bought them, but is the F2.8 designation not as much a badge of prestige as it is a practical benefit?

It is especially useful for low light and astro photography.

Mike-P

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 15:30
RobL wrote:
Mike-P wrote:
I would be more than happy with a set of lower priced f4 lenses for the K-1. I doubt very much it will happen but a 16-35mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm f4 setup would suit me perfectly. Canon's versions of these lenses are sharp wide open and relatively cheap when compared to their 2.8 offerings.

There is a medium telephoto on the lens roadmap which looks as if it might cover 70-200mm, and as there is already an f2.8 then maybe it will be an f4.

I'm expecting that to be a full frame compatible decent quality 70-300mm f5.6, Pentax need one as it is quite a big gap in the range. Apart from the very old Sigma and Tamron lenses (which are nowhere near good enough) there is nothing unless you can find a Sigma 100-300mm f4.
No equipment list here but thanks for taking an interest. My Flickr
Last Edited by Mike-P on 27/01/2018 - 15:31

darkskies

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 15:56
RobL wrote:
McGregNi wrote:
Apart from the D FA70-200 it is hard for me to understand why the new full frame lens range needed to be with such a wide aperture as F2.8 ....?

I can see the practical purpose in the 70-200 (ie. portraits). But in all honesty, are there any images that you could take with the 15-30 that would look any different if shot at f4.0 instead of F2.8? And if someone could demonstrate any difference, could it possibly be worth the price paid, both financially and in extra weight/bulk ?

I appreciate that no one has had the choice yet, so I can't criticise those who have bought them, but is the F2.8 designation not as much a badge of prestige as it is a practical benefit?

It is especially useful for low light and astro photography.

Indeed. I use the K-1 and f2.8 lenses for gig photography.

There, that was easy to answer, wasn't it!
This space deliberately left blank.

McGregNi

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 16:10
No, it can't be that easy! You can't just say you use it .... That doesn't count. You would have to show that the images were better than what they would be if shot at F4.0 and one stop higher ISO ..... With a K1 I wonder if that might be quite difficult?
My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver

pschlute

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 16:11
I think with the improvements in higher ISO/lower noise sensors, the need for a faster lens for it's light-gathering capabilities has been lessened. i recently shot some night scenes with the K1 at ISO 3200 enabling me to use f5.6 and keep a hand-holding shutter speed. i would not have been able to do that with my old K10, and opening up a lens to 2.8 or faster in the circumstance I was shooting in would have been hopeless, it would not give me the DOF I needed.

Having said that, there are many times we want the minimum DOF for artistic reasons and fo that i can always see the faster lenses being desired. I do take Nigel's point that in the 15-30 FL range the difference could well be marginal.

I don't do astro-photography (yet !) but understand that the fastest lenses are an advantage.
Peter



My Flickr page

Algernon

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 16:30
For Pentax users spending loads of money is what they like to do

Loads of people have bought expensive Zeiss and Voigtlander MF lenses even though they haven't a clue how to focus them

Since the ME-F Pentax have had a very precise (to the mm ) electronic focus indicator. It makes me laugh when I see threads like this one from experienced photographers.....
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4246583

The Pentax 24-90mm is a good lens but not very popular because it's F/4 Better range as well compared to the 24-70mm.

--
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

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

Algi

McGregNi

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 16:33
Sour grapes Peter, because I can't have a K1 or new F2.8 zoom!!

I do think the practical differences for many images would be marginal, yes. Perhaps for long exposures an extra stop, even on a K1, might bring more noise, I can see that.

I just wonder whether F4 zooms, more economical in price and more compact, might attract many times more buyers and be a boost to the business?
My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver

StephenHampshire

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 17:38
McGregNi wrote:
Sour grapes Peter, because I can't have a K1 or new F2.8 zoom!!

I do think the practical differences for many images would be marginal, yes. Perhaps for long exposures an extra stop, even on a K1, might bring more noise, I can see that.

I just wonder whether F4 zooms, more economical in price and more compact, might attract many times more buyers and be a boost to the business?

The DA 60-250 F4 is almost FF, although it can be modified to reduce the vignetting that is the main problem with it on the K1. I actually use it unmodified, but then I normally crop my photos a little anyway (to a 7/5 ratio) and even sometimes add a bit of vignetting in post processing as well. The F4 max aperture is a good trade off for keeping the size and weight of the lens down. A proper re-working of this lens with better AF motor and proper full frame coverage would fit the telephoto zoom slot discussed above.
Everything Changes
http://www.flickr.com/photos/arleimages/

JAK

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 17:56
pschlute wrote:
I think with the improvements in higher ISO/lower noise sensors, the need for a faster lens for it's light-gathering capabilities has been lessened. i recently shot some night scenes with the K1 at ISO 3200 enabling me to use f5.6 and keep a hand-holding shutter speed. i would not have been able to do that with my old K10, and opening up a lens to 2.8 or faster in the circumstance I was shooting in would have been hopeless, it would not give me the DOF I needed.

Having said that, there are many times we want the minimum DOF for artistic reasons and fo that i can always see the faster lenses being desired. I do take Nigel's point that in the 15-30 FL range the difference could well be marginal.

I don't do astro-photography (yet !) but understand that the fastest lenses are an advantage.

In the case of the 15-30 f2.8, wasn't it a case of the basic design was available in it's Tamron guise, so easy to rework for Pentax. I'm not aware of a similar f4 variant to choose off the peg.
John K

darkskies

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 18:44
I haven't got much time to answer at the moment, as I'm just getting ready to go to photograph a gig!

I don't think some people have quite grasped the reason why an f2.8 lens is better, even necessary, when shooting gigs. The example of a night shot at ISO3200, for example, is almost impossible at a gig. Here's why..........

Firstly, the artists are moving. Bit of a bugger, I know, but it does mean that a minimum shutter speed to freeze the movement is required. Although this can be reduced for the less-lively performers, a shutter speed of 1/25 secs gives you a reasonable chance of getting sharp images, although if there are multiple performers all doing their thing, even that can be difficult. Take quite a few shots, get a few keepers. Nobody mentioned shutter speed, but at gigs it's most important.

Now, I know the venue I'm going to tonight. The lighting is poor, though not the worst I've been to. The best one I have been to, with the best front lighting, allows me to take images at 1/250 s, f2.8 and ISO 3200-4000. That's the best! Tonight, I'll be lucky to shoot at ISO 6400-8000. There is a dark corner, usually where a bass player or lead guitarist will tend to stand. I may go to ISO 8000-10000 there, and may even have to shoot a slower shutter speed, take more sots and just hope I get some without movement.

There is a noticeable difference in image quality above ISO 6400/8000. The noise increase means that the noise reduction in pp will show an increased softening.

In some very dark places, I've had to shoot at 1/100 sec and ISO 12,800. The images end up rather soft. But when it gets like this, you either take them and just realise they won't be great. Better than nothing, though.

I'm sure you know all this anyway, except, perhaps, the numbers involved with the K-1.

So, now imagine shooting at f4. Only in the very best lit places will it not affect the image quality.

OK, gotta go shoot bands now!
This space deliberately left blank.

StephenHampshire

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 19:10
Those of us that shoot moving things in the dark are very grateful for apertures wider than f4, but I think we are in the minority. (See my FlickR for a variety of steam trains in less than ideal light)
Everything Changes
http://www.flickr.com/photos/arleimages/

stu62

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 19:39
It don't matter what we say Ricoh are not bothered bought it as they will just do what they want with the lenses and charge a primeum price because of the lack off support by 3rd party lens makers

And I think that is one off the main stumbling blocks that as user off Pentax we have

(But that is another debait)

RobL

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 20:26
stu62 wrote:
It don't matter what we say Ricoh are not bothered bought it as they will just do what they want with the lenses and charge a primeum price because of the lack off support by 3rd party lens makers

And I think that is one off the main stumbling blocks that as user off Pentax we have

(But that is another debait)

Thatís a bit harsh, compared to other makes on a like for like basis the Pentax lenses are usually well priced. And you are getting excellent quality optics, coatings and WR.

McGregNi

Link Posted 27/01/2018 - 20:34
Thanks Darkskies for your detailed explanation and specific scenario examples. I do accept that really low light shooters will be wanting all the help they can get!

My point was mainly about the relative cost / size /weight / IQ equation, which is clearly a fairly complex equation for each individual. I was just thinking that the price for one stop wider aperture on a lens is quite high ..... But that the cost of one stop higher ISO nowadays is considerably less. Processing abilities and software choices for noise reduction are going to add a lot of value for some as well.

Good luck at the Gig tonight ....ah, can you take a few at F4 with one stop higher ISO for us please

Oh yes, I meant to ask, I was thinking of trying out some gigs .... Does anyone know what sort of maximum aperture lens I should be looking for to pair up with the K7 ....?
My Guides to the Pentax Digital Camera Flash Lighting System : Download here from the PentaxForums Homepage Article .... link
Pentax K7 with BG-4 Grip / Samyang 14mm f2.8 ED AS IF UMC / DA18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL WR / SMC A28mm f2.8 / D FA 28-105mm / SMC F35-70 f3.5-4.5 / SMC A50mm f1.7 / Tamron AF70-300mm f4-5.6 Di LD macro / SMC M75-150mm f4.0 / Tamron Adaptall (CT-135) 135mm f2.8 / Asahi Takumar-A 2X tele-converter / Pentax AF-540FGZ (I & II) Flashes / Cactus RF60/X Flashes & V6/V6II Transceiver
Last Edited by McGregNi on 27/01/2018 - 20:41
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.