Web Analytics RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Pentax' Optical Design Copied Leica's?

Monday, August 05, 2013

Pentax' Optical Design Copied Leica's?

First, this is the Leica Tri-Elmar 28-35-50mm F4 Wide "Zoom", at 28mm:



And then, this is the Pentax FA20-35mm F4 Ultra Wide Zoom:



And then, compare the above two and then also against the Leica Summilux 21mm Prime below:



Via: http://www.dchome.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1215807
(in Chinese)

It is not difficult to notice that, as the OP has pointed out, the optical designs of the three lenses are quite similar, especially for the Tri-Elmar and the FA20-35. So, who copied whose optical design? :-o

I have also checked the optical formula of the DA21 F3.2 Limited lens, it can be seen that the optical design could still be similar, although it is somehow simpilfied:



(Diagram Source: http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/ultra-wide/DA21f3.2.html)

Nonetheless, as Pentaxians, we are of course glad to learn that we have Leica's optical formula embedded right inside our Pentax glass! So, Pentax could really be the poor men's Leica! ;-D

Comments (10)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Uncle Vova's avatar

Uncle Vova · 605 weeks ago

"...we have Leica's optical formula embedded right inside our Pentax glass! So, Pentax could really be the poor men's Leica! ;-D" (C)
As I know, the Pentax FA 28-105/4-5.6 IF, for example, is a really Tamron lens not only by optical design, but even in lens body design. So, dear RiceHigh, could we say that the Pentax is the rich men's Tamron? ;)
4 replies · active 605 weeks ago
Yes, the latest FA standard zooms of IF seems to be felt quite Tamronly!~
Uncle Vova's avatar

Uncle Vova · 605 weeks ago

This could cause a split personality: the part of the soul will feel like a poor follower of Leica, and the other part - as a rich follower of Tamron. ;-)
Using Pentax and supporting the brand for longer could cause mental illness and psychiatric problems like me, you know! ;-p
Uncle Vova's avatar

Uncle Vova · 605 weeks ago

;-)
not a PF fan's avatar

not a PF fan · 605 weeks ago

This is a real stretch!
Nonsense. 28-35-50/4 and 20-35/4 are absolutely different lenses.
As for DA21 - the difference is huge. Open your eyes, Rice.
Leica Tri-Elmar is M lens, this lens is developed for rangefinder camera. Tri-Elmar has only 3 focal length - 28, 35 and 50 mm - and nothing else.
FA20-35/4 has 20, 24, 28 and 35 mm (main focal length), but it's real to put intermediate length.
M mount and K mount have absolutely different flange focal distance...

What are you talking about, Rice? It's pure water bull shit.
As for DA21 - only cretin could draw a conclusion that DA21 and Leica Summilux have the same optical design.

There are a lot of lenses in the world with similar optical design, there are classical optical design like Planar, for example, and a lot of variation of Planar. It doesn't mean that somebody stole the optical scheme of lens.
But, this TWO examples are not correct at all.
1 reply · active 604 weeks ago
We should be happy to have Leica gene in Pentax glass, WTF? ;->
Tri-Elmar has 8 elements in 6 groups, second aspherical element is placed in absolutely other place if we compare with FA20-35/4.
Pentax has 10 elements in 8 group.
Minimum Focusing Distance - 1 meter. Pentax - 0.3 meter. The both lenses were started to produce in 1998.

DA21 is hard to compare with Summilux 21 - different optical formula, aperture blades, filter size. Summilux is FF lens. DA21 can't cover even APS-H sensor.

LEICA Summilux-M is 21mm f1.4, LEICA SUPER-ELMAR-M is 21mm f/3.4 ASPH. Maybe you mean 21/3.4? But this lens is different too.
There is also LEICA ELMARIT-M 21mm f/2.8 ASPH.

BUT this 3 lenses are retrofocus lenses.

Did you post this stories for idiots?

Post a new comment

Comments by