New Pentax Releases: What You Love & What You Hate

[miserere_mei]

We might as well get a bitchin' thread started early, but I thought it would be nice if we mixed in some positive

comments too. So here's my list:<br>

<br>

<u>Things I Don't Like</u><br>

<br>

- The price of the DA* 60-250mm f/4 (MRSP $1,500!)<br>

- 1.4x TC only available under glass, so we can expect it to ship...when?<br>

- Different naming convention for the K-m/K2000 for the Worldwide/US markets<br>

- The DA* 55mm has a circular hood, not a petal-shaped one (maybe this is nitpicking)<br>

<br>

<u>Things I Do Like</u><br>

<br>

- The K2000 with new affordable versions of the kit lenses, looks like a great little camera that should bring in

cash for Pentax<br>

- AF200FG Auto Flash to be sold with the K2000, I want to hear more, but it sounds like a great idea to me (and I

might want one if it's small and I can put it in my pocket)<br>

- The DA 15mm f/4 Ltd, they made it small! I hear Justin might be leaving his wife for it (who will keep Caney?)<br>

- The ring flash, <i>nobody</i> expected this, but it's most welcome<br>

- 1.4x TC finally arrives, and it's the first AF TC Pentax has ever made (no, the 1.7x TC doesn't count as AF)<br>

<br>

Plenty of details to be found <a

href="http://pentaxdslrs.blogspot.com/2008/09/pentax-official-release-of-new-dslr.html">here</a>.<br>

<br>

Now voice <i>your</i> opinion! What do you like? What don't you like? Do you even care?

[musings]

Hi Mis -- to add what you posted above (I agree with your pros/cons, but I am still so blah on the whole K-m/2000 release), I would add that the size of the 60-250 was a pleasant surprise. I thought it would be bigger than it is. I have the AF-200 for my son's "future" (Christmas) *istDL and it's a great flash. It's small enough to tote around but I am not sure it would fit in your pocket comfortably (unless you have big, deep pockets).

 

What I don't like is the plastic lens mount. I am tired of plastic everywhere, especially when it could compromise structural stability (like on the hotshoe mounts). The whole plastic lens mount (even if it's only for the kit lens) is a bad idea IMO, particularly regarding consumers' confidences.

[le-plume]

Things I don't like: no weather seals on the K2000/Km when it's just the kind of camera I might want to fool around with on my boat. (Yeah, I might switch to digital one of these days, at least for day-to-day color pics. And I'll probably go the cheap way.)

 

Things I like: the new macro ring flash, 'cause hopefully it will bring second-hand AF080C and AF140C back to the market!

 

I'll check this week-end lottery draw before I even start forming a thought about any Ltd glass.<div></div>

[miserere_mei]

I should have added that I DO like Pentax's release of its first prime lens with SDM, the DA* 55mm f/1.4. I wonder whether they plan to release other primes with SMD but no star (weather-sealing).

 

Ben, will you be OK paying the asking price for the DA* 60-250mm? I'm concerned that Pentax have shot themselves in the foot with their pricing for this lens.

 

Christophe, to photograph the dark side of sailing, nothing better than joining the dark side of photography...digital! Allez-y mon vieux!

[johnmarsden]

First moan

 

The plastic mount ring on the K-m

I remember they did this on the Pz70 in Australia – to save 20 or 30 grams I think. Big deal. It very quickly

starts to wear away with even light lens changing.

 

I noticed a later pZ70 model had a metal mount ring – simple thing but made the camera much better.

 

Second moan

 

Gimme frames per second PLEASE. All my sports I do with the Canon 40d – and others use Nikon product. Hence I

under invest in Pentax lenses. – ‘cos I have to save a few dollars for the Canon stuff. 6 – 8 fps and I would be

totally Pentax.

 

 

If Pentax want us to shell out serious money on lenses, they now need to give us a serious grunt camera K1 or a

645 – rather than just nice to use exquisite cameras like the k10 and k20.

 

 

I can see the km being the present for the kid-who-has-everything’s birthday so he can mess about with a ‘real’

camera for a few weeks until the next thing comes along to take their mind elsewhere. Low end technology is so

transient I wonder if this is such a good idea – as it taints the range of Pentax and may not really bring in

much revenue.

 

 

(Then again I may be sounding like a photo snob!) But if you spend half an hour researching DSLR’s on the net

you will quickly conclude that Canon must be the best since they have the ‘best’ DSLR of all, so their other

cameras must be good too. We know otherwise, but the mass market will want a Canon D400 before any K-m if the

price difference is minimal. (I may have the wrong Canon camera, but I can’t be bothered to back up my whinge by

going on the net, ‘cos afterall who cares what I say – certainly not Pentax it seems)

 

And on the bright side

 

Full AF Teleconvertor – (awaiting cost and efficacy )

 

Question –

If it’s a 1.4x convertor – what does that mean on my cropped sensor !!

 

 

Say 200 mm F2.8

? Becomes 280mm f 4 which is equivalent to 420mm F4

 

All image stabilised - NICE !

[personalphotos]

Well That's interesting. I had said 6 months ago when a pre release version was shown of the 60-250mm that I

thought it would come in around $1499-1699 list price and got mildly jumped on. Too high everyone thought. This

is expected

or the price on the 300 would have to come down some. It is a different lens for a different look but the zoom

would take sales from the 300 if they were too close in price. I also assume that the constant speed and wide FL

contribute to the cost. I bet the street price will come down around $1299-1199 after a few months. I'll get one

then.

SDM and WS with a great FL. Beautiful!

 

I agree the DA50-200 circular hoods look like cheap crap. Out comes the Dremmel...

 

Here we go again with the USA z-xxx Vs PZ-xxx for the rest of us. I never got that.

 

I don't like the "L" in DA L for the kit lens. We should never copy another brand. There's a huge difference

between a Canon L series lens and a Kit lens. That's somewhat embarrassing IMO.

 

Ring flash, AF200, DA15 (the new 24mm!!), DA55 (if this lens can compare to the FA*85mm, It's on the top of the

list...) and the new TC all sound great.

 

I understand the drive to a cheaper consumer camera. Cameras don't make money and lenses do. Get more bodies sold

and in peoples hands, the company will do well. Really the average SLR buyer does not use or need half the

features of the K10D or K20D. I suspect a large % of these cameras are left in green or P modes and taking great

tourist shots of the vacation.

 

Forums members are a bit a different demographic. Lots of instant news and rumours. Looking for more stuff and

information. Pushing their photographic skills and knowledge faster than the average shooter. But there is a

large segment here and I'm sure off forum users that want more. Keep the K-M, K200D and K20D. PMA better add a

K30D or we may loose as many top end users as we gain in the bottom end. A 4 camera lineup would be great. It

might be time to build a unit that like Nikon and Canon, has the sensors programmed to AF for speed over

accuracy. The little (but accurate) Pentax double check might be good to drop on a top end camera that is 5+ Fps

and clean at ISO 1600 plus. Or come out with something even better. A menu (in the function button section for

fast access) that is AF-Landscape/Portrait Or AF Sports/action. Wouldn't that set the world on fire. Dual

programming for AF needs, user selectable.

 

Oh and I really really want a dual card ability in the next grip. File sizes are getting huge and I don't like or

trust a card bigger than 4 Gb. I shoot paid work and if a card fails and all the work is on one. I'm cooked. I

usually carry 10 4Gb cards and only half fill them during the event. I am shooting RAW + more and more these

days. Dual card ability please to handle the large amount of data per shot without constant card swapping. Plus

if it's selectable, I can have one card handle the Jpegs and the other handle RAWs. Then if a card fails, I'm

still OK.

[pj_vesterback]

Mis - Don't forget the other two prime DA* with SDM... the 200mm & 300mm.

 

 

I wouldn't worry about the suggested price for the 60-250mm. The suggested price for the 200mm was 800 Euro but

it was available for less than 900 CDN only a couple of months after it was released.

 

 

I don't like that the least expensive Pentax dig will fire off frames faster than the most expensive or my K10D.

 

 

I love the ring flash. Will probably be the first item that I end up with. That or the 15mm.

[garydem]

as for the price of the da*60-250 at $1500. have you looked at the prices of canon L lenses lately? the pentax *da lenses is pentaxes premium glass and as such fits in with other premium glass prices.

 

i have read this forum and others on different web sites and the one thing that has always occured and mentioned is the longing for premium glass. well, the pentaxians have got the glass and prices that goes with it. what did anyone expect?

[personalphotos]

Oh yeah, Plastic mounts??? We've been there already and it was a bad idea. Having just dropped my Sigma 70-200 f2.8 and *istD with grip and AF400T attached, I can just imagine me hunting Ebay today for a replacement camera. The Steel chassis/mount held firm with all that weight hitting the floor (I guess about 4 or 5Kg (10 Lbs+)).

[miserere_mei]

Peter, I think the K20D allows you to switch off the 2nd focus confirmation. I don't own a K20D, so maybe someone can confirm this.

 

I also want to comment on Nikon having announced a 50mm f/1.4 with HSM (or whatever they call SDM). It looks smaller than the Pentax offering.

 

Does the K2000 have a plastic mount, or is it only the lenses? Let's remember that the demographic that this camera is pointed at will practice minimal lens-swapping, so wear-and-tear is much less than for other folk with 20 lenses. [looks at everyone on this forum]

[personalphotos]

Patrick, you and many others will disagree, but I never consider anything over 100mm as a "Prime" primes are short length fixed focal lenses in my opinion. Anything (particularly with the 1.5x crop) over 100mm is a (fixed length) telephoto in my way of looking at it.

[miserere_mei]

Patrick, yes, I sort of forgot the DA* 200mm and 300mm. I was thinking of sub 135mm primes, not the super-telephotos :-)

[miserere_mei]

Peter, great minds think alike at 8:15am :-D

[musings]

Mis, I think the whole plastic mount is a consumer confidence issue. If the entry-level masses don't swap out lenses enough to make the wear/tear issue relevant, then the effect with the serious amateur/professional groups will be eroded confidence in the build quality and ruggedness of the whole Pentax line..Even if the K-2000 was never intended for them to begin with, the consequences will permeate the entire company's reputation. The transition that Pentax was making -- weather seals, rugged frames, confidence-inspiring heft/feel -- has now reversed course with the plastic lens mount. I don't see how much weight a plastic mount would have saved, but it couldn't have been much. If Pentax was looking to get into a low-end, semi-disposable DSLR camera line, they should have perhaps launched another company altogether and separated the two marques ("Pentax" and "Plastax").

[pbarnes]

Where did the notion of the plastic lens mount on the K-m* body come from? Mis is not sure that it is the body mount that is plastic, and I cannot find any reference anywhere else. But I like the idea of the small dslr that will take my lenses - I need a back up camera, and with my pancake lenses, this could be a great walking around unit. Some weather sealing would have been nice. I assume they will sell body only.

 

*I hope in Australia we get the Euro naming - but what stoopid marketing, one of the reasons I never went Canon was the confusion on the Web with Rebel XT whatevers and 450D whatevers being the same product

[musings]

There is some confusion as to whether this plastic is on the K-m body or the new kit lens. Either way, I think it's a bad idea and I'm totally against it. Metal-on-metal is the only option, even if the lens is for the entry-level marketing.

 

And, yes, the marketing is STOOPID for sure (whoever named the *istDL should be taken out and shot).

[shots worth sharing]

I think it's a good set of releases but there's nothing there that's going to make me break into Clara's college

account, check B&H 50x a day to see if they're taking orders, or give myself a dope-slap because I bought

something that I now perceive as clearly inferior to one of these new products.

 

The DA* 55mm is interesting but I'll need to be convinced it's really preferable to the FA 50mm f1.4 and, while

there is a (small) gap between my 43mm & 77mm, it's not a desperate need. Having just acquired (and been

astounded by) the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 ETC ETC, I'm pretty much immune to excitement over the DA* 60-250mm f4 ETC

ETC. The ring flash on the other hand *is* something I expect I'll acquire within the year.

 

I don't want one but I heartily applaud the K-M. I've been arguing that Pentax needed to focus attention on new

recruits and think this bodes well. It had better be reassuringly good quality and accompanied by some kick-butt

marketing though.

[personalphotos]

Jeff, I have the hangin' rope. You find the guy who's doing this. Every time someone asks me about my *istD I

stumble. I now just call it the 'First' since I have no clue how to say that.

[trw]

K2000 seems a poor choice of name to me... It sounds like it's 15 years out of date. A whole lot of stuff was marketed as

"2000" or "2K" in the late 90's. It doesn't look at all exciting to me... It looks like a cheaper K200D... with a higher pricetag.

 

The 55mm is interesting, I'll have a hard time justifying it given that I already have the FA50/1.4.

 

I'm not really interested in the ringflash, but I'm sure the dental market is... Is there a dental market? I don't remember ever

having a dentist take a picture of my teeth other than Xrays.

[musings]

LOL, Peter...I think we should assemble a lynch mob and go for it. :-) The *istD/L were good cameras but the nomenclature was a marketing nightmare. How exactly does one pronounce the " * "? Is this a footnote or an omission for a swear word? Or, is it like "The Artist Formerly Known as Prince" and you just don't say it at all? What a disaster.

 

What bothers me about the latest announcements (besides the plastic nmount of course) is JUST when we started to make sense of the Pentax line (K10, K100, K20, K200), we now have a K-M and K-2000 to deal with. If they had just stuck with the K-2000, it could make sense since each additional "0" in the name might mean it's a lower model down from the ancestor model (K-2000 is down from the K-200, though? Hmmm...). K-M means exactly what? A digital manual SLR? What the hell?

[jgredline]

What I like...The TC SDM is of most interest to me as is the DA*60-250mm...While not really thinking to much about a new camera, that K-M or K2000 thing, what ever it is called, has my attention...Seems like a great hiking kit to me...

That Body with a 40MM pancake sounds delicious...

 

What I don't like....I guess there really is not a whole lot I dislike...Sure it would be nice to have more new products and that ring flash sounds like something I need to get...But all in all, I have only one real gripe...

 

I have been waiting for a very long time for that DA*60-250 F/4.....For it to come out at $1500.00 is disappointing...Here are my reasons why if anybody cares...

First, it has nothing to do with the amount of money it cost...I am blessed to be in a position where I can afford to buy it with out hesitation...I have no debt...How ever, I have spent enough money foolishly on my Hobby to look like a fool.... ;-)...So here goes. In this range as far as Pro glass goes, I have the Sigma 100-300 F/4, The DA*200 and DA*300 and The DA*50-135 F/2.8....I am quite certain many folks have those very same lenses that I have and will be wondering the very same thing...the reasons this lens is not worth that much money to me is because it is too big..I have plenty of big lenses, don't need another....It is only an F/4 as mis noted and is simply too slow for $1500.00 and no low light advantage....Had it been an F/2.8 I know it would have been a little bigger and likely $2000.00, but that I would buy in a heartbeat......

 

For $1500.00 dollars I would rather buy and likely I will a

The new Canon G10,

Pentax K-M, with the DA*55-300 and still have money left over....

 

I agree with Mis, that pentax shot themselves in the foot with a $1500.00 lens...I am with Peter, when it is down to the $1000.00 price range, I will consider it.....Notice I said consider it....Those 70-200 F/2.8's are sounding reall good right about now.....

[zane1664879013]

The body has a metal lens mount, same as earlier models: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/PentaxKM/page4.asp

 

It's the new kit lenses that have the plastic mount. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092205pentaxdallenses.asp

 

They also removed the manual focus mechanism to save weight and cost.

[miserere_mei]

"Those 70-200 F/2.8's are sounding reall good right about now....."

 

Dave seems to be loving his Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8...at a mere $800.

 

Peter did predict the correct price, and I was among those who thought he'd be wrong (although I would never jump on him). I thought it should come in around $800, and didn't consider it would eat into the DA* 300 sales because it's a zoom, not a prime, and I would expect the DA* 300 to have better IQ at f/4. Also, if I'm buying the DA* 300mm it's to couple it with a TC or two. A prime 420mm f/5.6 sounds pretty good to me. It looks like Pentax (or Hoya, probably) have thought that the benefit of a zoom is what you're paying extra for.

 

Nikon's 50mm f/1.4 will hit stores at $439, so now we know how much weather-sealing costs on the DA* 55: $361.

[miserere_mei]

Thanks Zane. I don't know how anyone could believe that Pentax would use a plastic lens mount on a camera...

[andrewg_ny]

<i>"I don't know how anyone could believe that Pentax would use a plastic lens mount on a camera..."</i>

 

<P>Mis: Because they've done it before. In their defense though, I don't think Pentax considered the users of

the MZ/ZX-M/10/50/60 to be frequent lens-swappers or users of lenses of above-average size. How many people were

going to combine a low-end body like these with a 70-200 f/2.8?

 

<P>The DA* 60-250 f/4 has been of interest to me ever since I heard rumors of it, probably a year and a half ago.

I seriously doubt it will be sold at $1500 for very long, but it does seem likely that it will always stay north

of $1000 new. I'm a little disappointed that it is as large as it is but it's still considerably smaller &

lighter than a 70-200 f/2.8 or Sigma's 100-300 f/4--and starting at 60mm means it couples pretty well with

standard zooms for the portraiture range. I'm glad it has finally appeared, though it hasn't really become any

easier for me to decide whether I'd rather own that, a DA55-300, or a DA* 50-135, possibly with 1.4x SDM TC. I'm

glad I'm in no hurry to decide. I'll probably own a DA 15 f/4 Ltd before I own any of those three. Perhaps by

the time I'm ready to upgrade telephoto there will be more information and reviews available on these lenses.

 

<P>Don't know if I need a DA*55 or not. I have FA43 and DA70 and they get used a lot more than my FA50. While

petal-shaped hoods are 'cooler' and more modern-looking, it's not that unusual for a telephoto hood to be boring

and cylindrical. Attacking it with a dremel to make it look cool sounds like a bad idea--presumeably it doesn't

need <i>less</i> hood coverage.

 

<P>I don't know what the price will be on the ringflash yet but I'm guessing it will be more than I'll want to

pay--more likely if I want to improve my macro rig I'll go for some sort of brackets that can hold a pair of

AF-360FGZ. I am pleased to see that Pentax has introduced it though, whether I need it myself or not.

<P>The AF-200FG doesn't interest me much as it lacks a lot of the control and features of even the AF-360FGZ. If

I'm going to bother with an accessory flash, it should at least be bounce-able, be a decent wireless participant,

etc. What it might be good for is adding a little power and compatibility with larger lenses that would

otherwise block the built-in flash. It's too bad they didn't make it bounce-able like Nikon's similar dinky

flash (none of these are *that* dinky).

<P>K-m/K-2000:

<P>Like--Direct access to drive mode, WB, etc. without hitting Fn first. I might change my mind about that if it

turns out to be annoying to trigger these accidentally. Perhaps there should be a custom setting on bodies that

include an Fn button.

<P>Don't like--No cable-release socket, cheezy chrome trim strip, more than one name for the same product. I

don't care whether they use K-m or K2000 but for crying out loud, just pick ONE. Nobody needs confusion of this

kind.

<P>Interesting--AE-L not enabled by default, button is instead assigned to AF. I will assume that the new body

will have street price below the K-200D, at least until K-200D is being discontinued & replaced with a newer

model (e.g. K300D). I wonder what AF-Auto does?