[johnmflores]

What is so surprising?
Even the K10D and K20D has plastic on the inside. Have you seen the bayonet mount of a K10D ripped off from the body? I have... and you will be pleased to discover the bayonet screws go into... yeah, err... plastic.

Umm, my tongue was firmly in my cheek. I've got no issue with a plastic mount at this pricepoint.

I know an owner of a camera repair shop locally and he has a drawer full of damaged cheap plastic lenses, mostly Canon and Nikon that were sheared off at the lens mount or chipped or broken filter rings. He has customers coming in all the time asking if something can be done to fix the lens, to which he says that it is not repairable and not worth the expense. Guess what, there were also a few el-cheapo Pentax plastic FA and FA-Js in the collection...

Having used a few Pentax lenses with plastic lens mounts myself, I have no doubts that they are usable, but there is always the lingering thought whether it can stand-up to moderate use. If by some chance your camera and lens attached takes a heavy knock and there is a damage at the mount, that lens is basically junk. So I have no illusions on the supposed durability of plastic lens mounts. As they say, there is no free lunch... your mileage might vary of course.

Come to think of it, it makes a lot of sense to have a plastic mount at this pricepoint as it reduces the odds of the camera's bayonet mount being damaged in a fall. I'd much rather have a drawer full of cheap broken lenses than a drawer if expensive bodies that have had their mounts damaged because a cheap lens transferred the full brunt of a fall to them.

[creampuff]

. . . and it lists for the low low low price of 1700 Pounds . . . but wait . . . there's more . . .

Hey, you get plenty of street cred when you tote such a lens... lots of Nikon users will max out their credit cards just to catch the envious looks from other financially challenged Nikonians when they brandish that to die for f/1.4...

Rigggght. But that lens isn't $90. It's, um, twenty times that. (Not an exaggeration.)

Ahh, don't you guys know what the "G" after the f/1.4 means? "G" = grand
I'm sure Pentax's uber secret f/1.4 prototype is a lot cheaper but we won't get to see it because it couldn't pass marketing's idea of pricing and affordability.
Proof positive that the Pentax user's legendary reputation for penny pinching has a direct effect on the marketing decisions at Pentax HQ.

I've lost track of what's going on in this thread. But isn't the point that if they go beyond the entry level camera, they won't mind going beyond the cheap f/1.8 prime? I mean, I'm not even an entry-level Nikon user and that's what I want to do.

With Nikon, you got a clear upgrade path for cameras AND lenses. Once you're hooked... there are so many nice expensive goodies to aspire to and spend. I just saw images taken with the AF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D on FF and I dare say even the A 135mmf/1.8 can't touch it. I think Pentax users must face up to the hard reality that Pentax will unlikely roll out fast lenses again...

[Blue]

Hey, you get plenty of street cred when you tote such a lens... lots of Nikon users will max out their credit cards just to catch the envious looks from other financially challenged Nikonians when they brandish that to die for f/1.4...

I'm sure that the likes of Rice Low and Ken Rockwool will be comparing the Nikon 35/1.4 G to the DA 35/2.4 and confirm how superior the Nikon is to the lowly DA L.

Ahh, don't you guys know what the "G" after the f/1.4 means? "G" = grand
I'm sure Pentax's uber secret f/1.4 prototype is a lot cheaper but we won't get to see it because it couldn't pass marketing's idea of pricing and affordability.
Proof positive that the Pentax user's legendary reputation for penny pinching has a direct effect on the marketing decisions at Pentax HQ.

And I thought the G stood for the gold used in it.

With Nikon, you got a clear upgrade path for cameras AND lenses. Once you're hooked... there are so many nice expensive goodies to aspire to and spend. I just saw images taken with the AF DC-NIKKOR 135mm f/2D on FF and I dare say even the A 135mmf/1.8 can't touch it. I think Pentax users must face up to the hard reality that Pentax will unlikely roll out fast lenses again...

Many will "pretend" that high ISO makes fast lenses obsolete.

[creampuff]

I'm sure that the likes of Rice Low and Ken Rockwool will be comparing the Nikon 35/1.4 G to the DA 35/2.4 and confirm how superior the Nikon is to the lowly DA L.

I think Michael Poon aka RH (Relative Humidity) is for the most part a Canon user... I guess given how cheap the DA 35mm f/2.4 is expected to go, anyone can buy one and do a review... not so sure with the Nikon though.

[Asahiflex]

I have a 1:2.8 zoom, and don't see the need to spend 200 for half a stop of light and dof control. If it was f2 or f1.8 and under $250, then I'd be pre ordering it.

The whole point of the DA 35/2.4 is NOT the light gathering abilities (or lack thereof) but the size... You must admit that the DA 35/2.4 is TINY compared to any f/2.8 zoom. So, you are clearly not the target customer for this lens.

[montecarlo]

What? AF-S is a function of the camera body, not the lens.



... And now you seem to be contradicting yourself. I'm confused!

Nope.. it's Nikon's AF-S .. or SWD (Canon USm.. whatever) ;-) ... pentax does not have that build in the lens... nikon has (the 35mm f:1.8 AF-S DX lens) (i think sony too).

[unfocused]

What's the cost difference between plastic and steel mounts? A couple of quid? Marketing-wise Pentax should not risk upsetting the dinosaurs of which there are a large multitude and some who have fond memories of the 2.4/35 Flektogon. If Pentax want to move towards plastic lens mounts they should first explain the engineering and user benefits.

For my money they missed the boat. What's needed is a f2.4/30 at a sensible price but with quality stamped all over it.

Also worrying is the way the lens was announced in tandem with the K-5 implying that they go together in quality terms. There should have been clear blue water between them as any criticism of the lens is bound to reflect to some extent on the camera. I do sometimes wonder about Pentax marketing!

BTW the K-r is advertised in the UK (Park Cameras) at £600 c/w kit 18~55, available mid-October.

[Asahiflex]

Also worrying is the way the lens was announced in tandem with the K-5 implying that they go together in quality terms.

You got your facts all wrong, sorry.

[Blue]

The whole point of the DA 35/2.4 is NOT the light gathering abilities (or lack thereof) but the size... You must admit that the DA 35/2.4 is TINY compared to any f/2.8 zoom. So, you are clearly not the target customer for this lens.

That is a very good point given that the f2.8 zooms are large lenses. Even the DA 17-70mm is substantial.

[GeneV]

That is a very good point given that the f2.8 zooms are large lenses. Even the DA 17-70mm is substantial.

Quite so. And the weight difference between the DA*16-50/2.8 and its closest F4 counterpart is quite substantial.

[unfocused]

You got your facts all wrong, sorry.

Not entirely but I should have said K-r, sorry. The K-5 spec and photo were leaked the next day, so all 3 products were pretty well tied up with the same ribbon.

[ilya80]

I'm sure that the likes of Rice Low and Ken Rockwool will be comparing the Nikon 35/1.4 G to the DA 35/2.4 and confirm how superior the Nikon is to the lowly DA L.

Give RH a break. He's actually a Pentax fan of a sort

[Blue]

Give RH a break. He's actually a Pentax fan of a sort

That was giving him a break.

[mattdm]

Not entirely but I should have said K-r, sorry. The K-5 spec and photo were leaked the next day, so all 3 products were pretty well tied up with the same ribbon.

The relevant point is: the K-r and lens had the ribbon. The K-5 is still on the top shelf of mommy and daddy's closet and we're not supposed to be peeking yet.

[Blue]

Not entirely but I should have said K-r, sorry. The K-5 spec and photo were leaked the next day, so all 3 products were pretty well tied up with the same ribbon.

Actually, the K-r and DA 35/2.4 AL were listed on Pentax Imaging with the official specs at the same time. The K-5 has yet to be officially announced and listed. Until that time, its mere existence is just a rumor. BTW, I fail to see what this lens being developed from the FA 35/2 AL has to do with the old Flektogon. If you want to delve into m42 lenses at that speed lets talk about the Auto Tak 35/2.3.