Two more front ends
Posted 30/01/2014 - 07:12
Link
Wow Ricoh are really putting some effort into this now. Like the sound of both those lenses but especially the 18-70 WR.
Posted 30/01/2014 - 07:53
Link
K10D wrote:
It looks like Ricoh may announce two new lenses for CP+:
•HD Pentax-DA 135-380mm f/4-5.6 ED [IF] DC WR
•HD Pentax-DA 18-70mm f/2.8-4.5 AL [IF] DC WR
The 135-380mm may attract some of our aircraft shooters?
Best regards
As an (EX) Aviation shooter wanting to get back into it again, I've had my eye on this ever since it was put on the road map, if it's any good, I'll throw in my DA*300, to part pay for it, as the 1.4x convertor seems to be a photoshop job.It looks like Ricoh may announce two new lenses for CP+:
•HD Pentax-DA 135-380mm f/4-5.6 ED [IF] DC WR
•HD Pentax-DA 18-70mm f/2.8-4.5 AL [IF] DC WR
The 135-380mm may attract some of our aircraft shooters?
Best regards
it's all price dependant but I just can't see why every lens over 300mm has to be built like a tank, I'm hoping for a truly radical lightweight weather resistant (Not sealed) DC lens, that does not break the bank, someone has to do it and Pentax like to be different.
380mm/F5.6 = 67.8571428571mm, so a 72mm thread would do it, will keep the size down, in keeping with the Pentax ethos, Like it so far...
The 18-70mm could be the Lens I have been waiting for to kickstart my lightweight kit along with the K60, I'm not looking a anything now until CP+ announcements are made, going to be a long two weeks and I hope I'm not disappointed!
Cheers Jules...
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
My viewfinder is 576,000,000 pixels.
My other viewfinder is 5.76,000,000.
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Posted 30/01/2014 - 10:33
Link
18-70 sounds great
Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -
Posted 30/01/2014 - 11:31
Link
The 135-380mm could be what I'm looking for. I'm moving towards wildlife photography and the extra reach would be very handy.
Best regards, John
Posted 30/01/2014 - 11:35
Link
The 135-380 WR is something I've been eagerly awaiting since it appeared on the Roadmap quite some time ago. It's just the lens to pick up from where my excellent DA* 50-135 stops off. Pentax made a great job of the DA* 60-250 with its approx 4x zoom factor so hopefully the 2.8x factor of the 135-380 bodes well for performance and reasonable compactness. And IF should make the most of the DC drive.
An 18-70WR is also a welcome addition. Hopefully it might be better built than the current 17-70 .
On the subject of WR, I'd like to see Ricoh Pentax actually designating levels of weather and dust resistance rather than, as they do now, vaguely implying that some lenses (eg DA*) have better protection than others.
Regards
Jim
An 18-70WR is also a welcome addition. Hopefully it might be better built than the current 17-70 .
On the subject of WR, I'd like to see Ricoh Pentax actually designating levels of weather and dust resistance rather than, as they do now, vaguely implying that some lenses (eg DA*) have better protection than others.
Regards
Jim
Posted 30/01/2014 - 11:45
Link
The HD Pentax-DA 135-380mm f/4-5.6 ED [IF] DC WR is what I have been waiting for. I was hoping for 400mm at the long end, but you can't have everything. If the IQ is there then I will most probably sell the 55 - 300
DA 16-50,DA 50-135,DA 135-380, though not a lightweight combination would be my go to kit.
Regards - Steve
DA 16-50,DA 50-135,DA 135-380, though not a lightweight combination would be my go to kit.
Regards - Steve
Posted 30/01/2014 - 11:49
Link
I too look forward to the 135 - 380 WR. I guess though that it will start at a silly price as the excellent 18 - 135 WR did. Our best chance may be in a bundle with one of the upcoming bodies or the K3 I guess.
I'm really pleased they are extending the use of the excellent DC motors. The cut down weather sealing (four seals compared to all the way through on star lenses) seems to work fine.
My question is will the keeping to a modest (and compact) f5.6 for max size of telephoto aperture still compromise focus lock as with the 55 - 300 DA we all seem to otherwise love?
I'm really pleased they are extending the use of the excellent DC motors. The cut down weather sealing (four seals compared to all the way through on star lenses) seems to work fine.
My question is will the keeping to a modest (and compact) f5.6 for max size of telephoto aperture still compromise focus lock as with the 55 - 300 DA we all seem to otherwise love?
Posted 30/01/2014 - 11:58
Link
wvbarnes wrote:
I too look forward to the 135 - 380 WR. I guess though that it will start at a silly price as the excellent 18 - 135 WR did. Our best chance may be in a bundle with one of the upcoming bodies or the K3 I guess.
I'm really pleased they are extending the use of the excellent DC motors. The cut down weather sealing (four seals compared to all the way through on star lenses) seems to work fine.
My question is will the keeping to a modest (and compact) f5.6 for max size of telephoto aperture still compromise focus lock as with the 55 - 300 DA we all seem to otherwise love?
Probably not. I'm using a Tokina 400/5.6 and focus lock on both K7 and K30 is excellent.
I too look forward to the 135 - 380 WR. I guess though that it will start at a silly price as the excellent 18 - 135 WR did. Our best chance may be in a bundle with one of the upcoming bodies or the K3 I guess.
I'm really pleased they are extending the use of the excellent DC motors. The cut down weather sealing (four seals compared to all the way through on star lenses) seems to work fine.
My question is will the keeping to a modest (and compact) f5.6 for max size of telephoto aperture still compromise focus lock as with the 55 - 300 DA we all seem to otherwise love?
Posted 30/01/2014 - 12:35
Link
202mm-570mm F4-5.6 WR on a K3 sounds good to me
how much would that cost for a FF ?
how much would that cost for a FF ?
Posted 30/01/2014 - 12:43
Link
Quote:
On the subject of WR, I'd like to see Ricoh Pentax actually designating levels of weather and dust resistance rather than, as they do now, vaguely implying that some lenses (eg DA*) have better protection than others.
It's more than imply and pretty specific in the lens instruction manual.On the subject of WR, I'd like to see Ricoh Pentax actually designating levels of weather and dust resistance rather than, as they do now, vaguely implying that some lenses (eg DA*) have better protection than others.
Quote:
DA* lenses are dust-proof and water-resistant because each part is individually sealed. This makes it difficult for dust and water to enter the lens.
DA* lenses are dust-proof and water-resistant because each part is individually sealed. This makes it difficult for dust and water to enter the lens.
Quote:
Lenses with simplified weather-resistant construction (WR lenses are listed). These lenses are made with a simplified weather-resistant construction by using DA* lens sealing technology which makes it difficult for water to enter the lens.
Hope that helps!
Lenses with simplified weather-resistant construction (WR lenses are listed). These lenses are made with a simplified weather-resistant construction by using DA* lens sealing technology which makes it difficult for water to enter the lens.
Best regards, John
Posted 30/01/2014 - 12:53
Link
Dust proof in my book means it is impossible for dust to enter, not difficult to enter. The wording is not well thought out.
The 'difference' between DA* and WR is the former makes it difficult for water to enter the lens and the latter makes it difficult for water to enter the lens through the use of the same technology.
I think that proves Jim's point.
The 'difference' between DA* and WR is the former makes it difficult for water to enter the lens and the latter makes it difficult for water to enter the lens through the use of the same technology.
I think that proves Jim's point.
Posted 30/01/2014 - 12:53
Link
I'd call both those instruction manual sections vague
....This makes it difficult for dust and water to enter the lens.
....which makes it difficult for water to enter the lens.
....This makes it difficult for dust and water to enter the lens.
....which makes it difficult for water to enter the lens.
LennyBloke
Posted 30/01/2014 - 13:03
Link
(Going off topic a bit)
IMO, DA* has more to do with the optics and that the sealing is a nice addition. It harks back to the other star lens designation. e.g. FA* 24/2
The WR is a DA with added sealing.
So, a DA* is better optically, but both DA* and WR are likely to be the same with regard to sealing.
Clear as mud on a DA*, WR, or K10/K20/K5/K3
Matt
IMO, DA* has more to do with the optics and that the sealing is a nice addition. It harks back to the other star lens designation. e.g. FA* 24/2
The WR is a DA with added sealing.
So, a DA* is better optically, but both DA* and WR are likely to be the same with regard to sealing.
Clear as mud on a DA*, WR, or K10/K20/K5/K3
Matt
http://www.mattmatic.co.uk
(For gallery, tips and links)
(For gallery, tips and links)
Posted 30/01/2014 - 13:33
Link
They might keep out mud..... but I try to avoid
mud whenever possible!
--
mud whenever possible!
--
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber
Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff
Algi
Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff
Algi
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
6415 posts
17 years
•HD Pentax-DA 135-380mm f/4-5.6 ED [IF] DC WR
•HD Pentax-DA 18-70mm f/2.8-4.5 AL [IF] DC WR
The 135-380mm may attract some of our aircraft shooters?
Best regards