Rumour of the Week: Pentax Full-Frame and New DFA Lenses

[miserere_mei]

<p>The Pentaxian we all love to hate (his name need not be mentioned) has posted images from <a href="http://ricehigh.blogspot.com/2009/05/new-lens-roadmap-revamped-5-new-lenses.html">an allegedly leaked lens roadmap</a> from Pentax showing 5 new lenses:</p>

<ul>

<li>DFA* 20mm F2.8 SDM</li>

<li>DFA 645 25mm F2.8</li>

<li>DFA* 50mm F1.0 SDM</li>

<li>DA 135mm F2.8 Ltd</li>

<li>DA* 400mm F4 ED[iF] SDM</li>

</ul>

<p>If the roadmap is real, the addition of 2 DFA lenses can only mean one thing: <strong>A Pentax Full-Frame DSLR is nigh</strong> . Please discuss amongst yourselves.</p>

<p>As for that last lens, I can already hear a number of forumites salivating. I won't name names, but ducks, woodpeckers and polar bears come to mind :-)</p>

<p>To further fuel speculation, check <a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/611998-post24.html">these documents</a> out.</p>

[shots worth sharing]

<p>I'll salivate in stoic silence (but over that 135 ltd as well as the 400mm.)</p>

[starvy]

<p>can pentax realistically afford to release a full frame and sell in bulk?</p>

[mithrandir]

<p>Since Pentax works with its users by not obsoleting lenses, it would make sense for them to go FF on the lenses before they are ready to produce a FF body. It cuts the cost of making both cropped sensor and FF lenses (since FF lenses work on both) and allows them to bide their time until a FF body makes sense for them.</p>

[kathyb]

<p>The DA 400mm F4 looks mighty inviting but I want the Pentax K7 more. LOL</p>

[miserere_mei]

<blockquote>

<p>can pentax realistically afford to release a full frame and sell in bulk?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My answer has always been 'no'. But I'm willing to be proved wrong :-)</p>

[k_kakkinen]

<p>What ?</p>

<p>What the H*** ....And I who, just today preordered the K-7......<br>

Ahh, who cares...not me (okey, a little bit then)....</p>

[jptreen]

<p>it's a big fat hoax, guys...</p>

[jpo3136b]

<p>I saw that same chart on one of the official Pentax websites a few days ago. Is this news? I didn't see the 35mm connection; but, I think, big deal. They've still got fully automatic 35mm film cameras out there; how does it follow that this means there will be a larger sensor in future Pentax DSLRs? </p>

<p>When those businessmen get around to saying they'll release one, they'll do it. I think that what we're seeing is a trend in backwards compatibility, that maintains an existing user base. That's a little more in line with what Pentax has done all along. </p>

<p>I could be wrong, but I think it's more about what's on hand, and less about daydreaming about the future.</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>Yeah, this has been out for a few days.</p>

<p>Pentax can release a full frame, it never sold any 35mm in bulk (for the last 20 years, not talking about K1000/LX/KX/ME days...since auto focus), it sold the 645 in bulk but those days (might be) are gone, so it stands to reason it could sell these lenses and cameras.</p>

<p>Honestly the 50mm 1.0 only makes sense on a FF camera, however, the DFA designation makes me wonder, maybe a retro film camera? Maybe for film cameras, or ... yep, they'll eventually release a full frame camera. They didn't say they WOULDN'T they just said at this time APS sized sensors still had plenty of room to improve. Besides as technology progresses the yield of FF sensors should improve in production. Remember when a 20in LCD was $1000....now these things sell for under $200.</p>

<p>Anyway, it's on the road map...doesn't mean it's being made, where is the 30mm 1.4 DA*??</p>

<p>I agree, Pentax needs to release and have a lineup of FF lenses before releasing a FF body. If they release the body without lenses there will be a mass riot.<br>

<em><br /> </em><br>

<em>One thing to note...2 lenses doesn't make a kit for most people. 20 and 50mm? Unless they are going to say, implement a crop mode for the teles, and buy the existing FF limiteds. This makes sense to me...buy, again people will riot if a 70-200 FF lens isn't released. Some people as a matter of principal will NEVER EVER use the crop mode and NEVER EVER mount a DA lens to a FF camera. Prepare for a lot of complaining about, "why did I spend $2500 on a FF camera that I can use to it's fullest potential with tele lenses."</em></p>

<p>The other thing is I'll believe the 50mm f/1 when I see it. Not that Pentax cannot make it, but that it is going to have a tough time selling it. I mean I don't think the f/.95 Leica's jump off the shelves at thousands each. There is no way Pentax can sell this lens for less than $2000, and besides Mis, I don't see a lot of people buying this over a $200 F/1.4. Keeping in mind everyone is already complaining that the 55mm is WAY over priced...at less than $700! Unless that unusable (real world, not for artsy stuff) stop is that important, most people are better off going f/1.4 and learning to use digital DOF reduction by buying the best computer and software they can get with the $1800 they saved on the extra stop! Afterall if a $10,000 medium format camera is well out of the reach of most people, I am confident a $2000 "normal" lens is not going to be high on the wishlist.</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>BTW, the 135mm limited is the most interesting lens on there to me, well besides the 400mm f/4 that I've been asking for. 400mm f/4 is a perfect sports lens. Again I expect that to be 2x the price of the 300mm f/4...so start saving pennies and don't complain when it releases at $3000, and settles at $2000-2500. (and I'm actually being optimistic there, 400mm F/4 is a lot of glass...it might settle at $3000)</p>

[miserere_mei]

<blockquote>

<p>...and besides Mis, I don't see a lot of people buying this over a $200 F/1.4.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ha ha ha! :-p</p>

<p>The one thing I doubt about the 50mm f/1 is whether it's even physically possible given the size of the Pentax mount. Based on the 50mm f/1.4 and f/1.2, I calculate that the rear element of this lens would have to be about 41mm in diameter. Take out one of your K mount lenses and measure that on the back; the aperture lever gets in the way!</p>

<p>Kari, you'll probably have 20,000 shots on your K-7 before the FF comes to market...if it ever does. Getting a K-7 now is the smartest thing you can do if you like the premise of the camera.</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>I agree with Mis, if you want the FF camera, you need to buy Pentax products. It's that simple, FF is going to be costly to make, and sell, they have to make a profit to produce these gizmos.</p>

<p>Yeah, the 50mm f/1 might be a buzz creator, nice work Mis on determining the issues with this on a Pentax mount.</p>

<p>However, isn't the .96(is that right) Leica on a range finder? Aren't the elements smaller on RFs?</p>

[miserere_mei]

<blockquote>

<p>Aren't the elements smaller on RFs?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Isn't that because the registration distance is smaller?</p>

[miserere_mei]

<blockquote>

<p>BTW, the 135mm limited is the most interesting lens on there to me</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /> Actually, for me too. I'd much prefer a DA* 135mm f/2 (of course! ha ha), but a small, metal 135mm lens on a K-7 would definitely make my palms sweaty. Especially if the cost were around $600 :-)</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>Mis, perhaps they'll make it* f/1 in the center and there will be loads of falloff just like many other wide aperture lenses.</p>

<p><em><small>* not to be taken as any endorsement that this "leak" is anything more than a hoax.</small> </em></p>

<p><em><br /> </em></p>

[shaloot]

<p>Even if there is a f/1.0, what in world is the use for it?? That depth of field will be ridiculous won't it..? I mean if you want such extreme bokeh, maybe just shoot your photos out of focus :P</p>

[p_l_jensen]

It is almost certainly a fraud. The D-FA645 25/2.8 gives it away. Such a lens is almost unthinkable and rather pointless as well.

[phule]

<p>http://nedbunnell.blogspot.com/2009/04/op-ed-thoughts-by-spa.html</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>In our case, if we developed a full frame camera, it's likely that very few of our recent DA lenses (those designed for APS-C) would be able to properly fill the viewing area of this new sensor. And although we have some wonderful FA lenses, like my favorite FA 31mm Limited, I'm not sure even this lens would be up to the optical challenge.<br /> <br /> I know that our engineers have studied these issues and would probably not agree totally with my simplistic explanation. However, I think it's important to understand that going to a full frame sensor means not only having to design a brand new camera from ground up, but likely a new line of lenses that meet the more demanding optical requirements.</p>

</blockquote>

[k_kakkinen]

<p>Miserere......Justin</p>

<p>Since my K10D is my first Pentax ever....I know that if I would buy a FF camera I also have to buy all these other sets of lenses which I basically don't want to....<br>

Properly speaking.....I just wanted to "shout out" that I'm going to be one of those K-7 owners..and at last my waiting for a second camera is over since I "jumped over" the K20D......</p>

<p>But, Thank You for your support</p>

[r.t. dowling]

<p>Anyone ever seen the Canon EF 50/1.2L? That thing is about the size of a grapefruit, has AF issues, vignettes noticeably on APS-C and badly on FF, and costs over $1600. Unless Pentax has some pretty amazing magic up its sleeve, I'm not sure that a DFA 50/1.0 is possible... and if it is, it's going to be one hell of a beast, and insanely expensive too!</p>

[joe_jackson4]

<p>"Even if there is a f/1.0, what in world is the use for it?"</p>

<p>I guess it's for those that like to do their low-light shooting with a CP... :) Still, some folk do seem to like/use such ultrafast beasts... Here are some shots from the (discontinued) Canon EF 50 f/1.0 L USM on a 5D, for example:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrbokeh/tags/5010l/">http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrbokeh/tags/5010l/</a></p>

<p>BTW, the latest rumour I've heard is that Pentax have something really special up their sleeves with this one, and the 50/1.0 is a pancake lens... Only 3/4" thick, apparently... The only slight downer is that it has a diameter of 2 ft, weighs 15kg, and only autofocuses properly on Tuesday afternoons... Bummer... :(</p>

<p> </p>

[rparmar]

<p>It's fake.</p>

[jerry thirsty]

<p>Re: the impossibility of making a 50/1.0 in a Pentax mount</p>

<p>I'm not an optical designer, but I don't see why the diameter of the K mount would prevent designing such a lens. As long as the aperture blades can open up to 50mm at its' location in the lens barrel, and the lens elements behind the aperture can concentrate that much light down through a smaller diameter and then project it onto the necessary sensor area, I can't see any reason why it couldn't work. You don't actually need 50mm diameter elements all the way through the lens. As an extreme analogy, think of an astronomical telescope; the aperture may be 6 or 8 or 10 inches but the diameter at the eyepiece end may only be 1 inch. The f/stop doesn't depend on the physical size of the exit aperture. Obviously it's a complicated design, but what f/1.0 lens isn't?</p>

[jtk]

<p>Remember the K30 speculation...all (all) of it was entirely wrong. Nothing even hinted at anything like K7. The market for MF digi is miniscule, as Mamiya and Hasselblad already prove.<br />Pentax won't chase after D700 and 5DII when they can easily increase detail resolution of the K7 sensor (if there can be 12mp digicams there can be APS sensors that deliver far more than 30mp). Noise will increase but since few purported photographers are sufficiently interested in photography to make big prints, it won't matter to them.</p>