Beautiful cameras though they are, LX's are user cameras first and foremost. Only after you've used one do you realise how good they really are.

Bit surprised they didn't compare it to the DA17-70/4 - OK it's not weather sealed but it's more appropriate than the 18-55 IMHO. If I didn't have the DA17-70 I might prefer the extra width, WR & DC motor of the 16-85 (but, it's a bit slow at the long end) although I don't use focal lengths between 50 & 135 often.

I'm sure for many it will be the best lens for their needs, and a much better focal length range than the 18-135 for me.

+1 for no interest in independent lenses - at least until they support Pentax bodies properly and the focus rings turn the same way as Pentax ones.

Welcome to the forum, it's the daft answers you'll get that you have to worry about more than the questions.

John.

Hi Jon,

I can't believe this hasn't been snapped up (the mount alone is worth £15). I have one - they're superb ways into very long lenses (but in a compact, lightweight & manageable 'FF' compatible package). In film days the fixed f/8 was a bit of a pain but with a DSLR & in-body SR this becomes almost insignificant. Being a mirror lens, CA is almost insignificant (you need an awful lot of fancy 'APO' glass to achieve that in a refractor this long).

John.

Ricoh are very unlikely to brand it as Pentax, they've built up the GR brand since the GR-1 film camera from '96. The current GR is almost exactly the same size and form factor with the equivalent 28mm as the GR1, GR1s & GR1v film cameras (which can still be bought used from ebay for similar prices to the original '96 'new' price), the 21mm lens film version the GR21 goes for much more.

My experience with mono-pods has been mixed, unless I'm shooting in the same 'height' all the time I end up leaning it to one side or the other, thus I usually leave the head unlocked - I'd leave SR ON. If shooting with a light lens I'd prefer to shoot handheld - with SR ON, if shooting with a heavy lens I'd prefer to use a tripod with the head unlocked - with SR ON.

John.

+1 It gets a 9.60 in the US forum Lens Reviews link. I'd have been interested if I didn't already have F50/1.7 & FA50/1.4 lenses.

Personally, I'd keep hold of it until the FF arrives.

John.

The longer telephotos get, the harder they are to handle (bigger, heavier, slower etc.) and 400mm is significantly longer than a xx-300 zoom (especially on APS-C). CA also gets progressively worse unless you go for a good APO or a mirror lens. There's a point where a shorter lens cropped is likely to give better IQ, not necessarily because the lens is better but because it's easier to handle. Technique plays a much bigger part of the equation as the lenses get longer/heavier.

When the K-3 was launched I was hoping the investment Ricoh had put in would indicate a FF body was on the horizon. I'm also still shooting film so it made sense to get some FA lenses (for coverage & aperture rings) to add to various manual focus lenses I have historically. Before I knew it, my 'K3 budget' had been spent on lenses.

I struggled with choosing between the FA20 & FA24 lenses so I went for the FA20-35/4, it does 'double duty' (wide zoom on film, reasonable zoom range on APS-C) very well which is useful when I travel with both a K-5 & LX).

I also have the FA28/2.8, FA35/2, FA43/1.9 & FA50/1.4 lenses and a couple of PZ zooms - FA28-80/3.5-4.7 & FA28-105/4-5.6. I'm expecting the primes & FA20-35 will be fine for my needs, not sure about the PZ zooms.

I also have some 3rd party longer zooms - Tamron ADII SP70-210/3.5 & SP60-300/3.8-5.4 and Sigma 70-300/4-5.6 APO - will be interesting to see how these work out. Then there's the Sigma 400/5.6 APO & Tamron ADII 500/8 mirror. From previous discussions, it appears that longer lenses may suffer less from the 'tele-centric' issue (i.e. more parallel light rays) and therefore perform similar to how they did on film (accepting that the sensor might out resolve the lenses).

I'm not looking at new lenses at the moment - unless there's a 24-105/4 launched with the body which might tempt me.

John.

Hello & welcome.

I also shoot the P67 (but don't have the 105mm lens). As John pointed out, used hoods on ebay can be quite expensive. Another option is a Cokin P link or similar modular hood (Lee filters are probably better but if it's just a hood...). You may need a couple of the hood sections for the 105mm looking at bjolester's link.

John.