Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-10-2010, 05:19 PM   #61
Veteran Member
RBellavance's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Montréal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,716
QuoteOriginally posted by levelred Quote
I think the 2.4 is a great stepping stone to other lenses. Most consumers are used to 3.5.
Actually, at 35mm the kit lens is at least f/4, maybe even f/4.5, so your point is even more valid.

09-11-2010, 12:23 AM   #62
Veteran Member
Steve Beswick's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Ontario, California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,484
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
...
I see the price as US$30 too high. Street should be sub-US$150 to give Pentax value cred, IMNSHO.
...And by February it will be. I highly doubt that the Nikon 35mm 1.8 hit the market at it's current price. On Nikon's USA web site it currently lists the lens at $199, only $20 cheaper than what has been quoted by Pentax for the DA L 35mm, and that is launch price.
09-11-2010, 01:47 AM   #63
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Since the lens is not fast, i think it should be outstanding optically.

Actually it had to be focus closer as well - not macro, but decent closeup.

Otherwise it doesn't justifies itself.
09-11-2010, 02:00 AM   #64
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Norfolk
Posts: 83
With the all-up weight of dSLR+zoom outfits getting out of hand it's nice to see Pentax encouraging a back-to-basics approach. The standard 50/55 or moderately wide 35mm prime was always the best and fastest lens in the bag and the smallest, and a lot could be achieved with it.

This new 2.4/35 (50 equiv) is not so fast as to cause design problems so should be a good performer, though I would prefer to see a shortened version of the 1.9/43. As I already have the 2.8/35 macro and an old 2/35 'M' series I'm not in the market for this, but Pentax gets a Brownie point for providing a compact walkabout.

09-11-2010, 03:15 AM   #65
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AUS
Posts: 3,262
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote
Since the lens is not fast, i think it should be outstanding optically.
Aye. And it's still a stop faster than your standard kit zoom.

It's lot, lot easier to design a prime than a zoom. Especially when the prime is a tried-and-tested traditional length and the zoom has to start from (in 35mm terms) an ultrawide length of 18mm.

Given that it's a) a rather oddball max aperture, b) rather slow, at that, I'm willing to bet it will be a killer lens in terms of distortion control and sharpness for $200. We know Pentax seems to work from image quality, and let things like aperture and focal length fall where they may. Or that they designed a killer f1.7 or 1.8 lens, but would not be able to make it hit the $200 price point, and it was necessary to bring it down to f2.4 to suit the K-r.
09-11-2010, 03:19 AM   #66
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Well, the kit lens is nearly perfect at 35mm, and depending how far you actually zoom in you can even get F4 (it changes from f/4 to f/4.5 somewhere around 35mm).
No light fall off, zero distortion, great resolution etc.
This, the quality of FA35 and DA35Ltd, makes me think it's some sort of focal length sweet spot.

If it fixes the dull colors of FA35 with new coatings, it might give razor sharp, saturated and highly contrasty images even at maximum aperture.
09-11-2010, 05:13 AM   #67
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote
Since the lens is not fast, i think it should be outstanding optically.

Actually it had to be focus closer as well - not macro, but decent closeup.

Otherwise it doesn't justifies itself.
It might if it has the same flare control as the DA15.
09-11-2010, 05:59 AM   #68
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
// ... ...it doesn't end here. ... //

You're right. Of course it doesn't. It goes down and down, until it hits the rock bottom of the absurdity of the consumerist existence, and then starts to dig some more.

To pay a $150-$180 dollars for a DA35/f2.4 within a few months in an average camera shop, a brand new lens that weights 124 grams and is only 45mm and still complain how it is "slow", "waay overpriced", etc. ... actually makes me sick in my stomach. It's probably drink that's served here.

So let me recapitulate: we get a quality plastic version of a Leica Summarit M lens (which is 35mm f/2.5, so Summarit is even SLOWER for freaks around), with an AutoFocus, in colours of a rainbow and over the rainbow, all for a month's worth of expenditure on booze in a typical Western country (and less than that), and some people here trash it straight away?

So by that same token a Summarit M would end up in trash too?

"Oh, it's too slowww for my super-consumer taste; microscopic too. I don't want my body builder Canon gear neighbour see me around with it ... I have nothing to compare. He may put aside his bazooka he's pumping his muscles with, start to laugh and show his super-wide aperture toothless smile .. and kill me with his monster breath ..."

I think no camera manufacturer deserves such an audience.


Last edited by Uluru; 09-11-2010 at 06:05 AM.
09-11-2010, 06:51 AM   #69
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Beforehand i want to say i'm positively biased towards the new lens. I think i might even get one. Also, currently it's only on paper and compared to camera specs, this doesn't tells a lot. Most it's qualities will be determined by actual images.

QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
...lens that weights 124 grams and is only 45mm...
-ALL plastic,
-Smaller and simpler optics (non-linearly cheaper as well),
-No AF motor inside,
It's not like a precisely designed limited.

QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
...we get a quality plastic version of a Leica Summarit M lens with an AutoFocus, in colours of a rainbow and over the rainbow, all for a month's worth of expenditure on booze in a typical Western country...
-We have jet to see it's optical capabilities, expect FA35-like not Summarit performance:

(http://forum.digitalfotonetz.de/viewtopic.php?p=1007028#1007028, black - FA35, magenta -DAL35)

-The real build and plastic quality (i doubt one could expect decentration errors, af failures or wobbly construction with Leica),
-The lens itself doesn't do much to AF,
-We are photographers, not alcoholics

Sometimes it may be consumerism, sometimes you must be aware if the big companies aren't simply ripping you off.
If others can produce lenses using internal AF drive, with larger and more complex optical elements at the same price where do you think the price difference goes?
That is, if it's performance doesn't end up being well above competition (e.g. thanks to smaller, but much more better machined and designed optics and strict QC or manufacture in Japan).

Last edited by ytterbium; 09-12-2010 at 01:32 AM.
09-11-2010, 08:01 AM   #70
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AUS
Posts: 3,262
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
all for a month's worth of expenditure on booze in a typical Western country (and less than that)
Much less, if you're currently living in the Top End.

I found it odd that people bitch about the speed, but you're right - if it had Summarit on there, they wouldn't be bitching about the speed.
09-11-2010, 12:04 PM   #71
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
I don't really think that 35mm is a good portrait length... this will be a "walk around" lens.

I like to shoot portraits between 55 - 100, as it gives you much more control over DOF and lets you stand back far enough to get a nice shot with no distortions.
09-11-2010, 01:07 PM   #72
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,678
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote

-ALL plastic,
-Smaller and simpler optics (non-linearly cheaper as well),
-No AF motor inside,
It's not like a precisely designed limited.


-We have jet to see it's optical capabilities, expect FA35-like not Summarit performance,
-The real build and plastic quality (i doubt one could expect decentration errors, af failures or wobbly construction with Leica),
-The lens itself doesn't do much to AF,
-We are photographers, not alcoholics
You start off showing interest in this lens, and even state how specs aren't as important as real-life performance - then you say the above...

What's the point of even trying to compare the DA 35 to a Leica?
What do you know for sure about the cheapness and simplicity of the optics?
How about the FA 43? How simple are its optics?
All plastic build? What non-ltd DA lens isn't all plastic apart from the mount (except perhaps DA 10-17)? So it's really the plastic mount you're complaining about?
These arguments trying to discredit the DA 35 before anyone's had their hands on it are despicable... sorry to say.

QuoteQuote:
Sometimes it may be consumerism, sometimes you must be aware if the big companies aren't simply ripping you off.
If others can produce lenses using internal AF drive, with larger and more complex optical elements at the same price where do you think the price difference goes?
That is, if it's performance doesn't end up being well above competition (e.g. thanks to smaller, but much more better machined and designed optics and strict QC or manufacture in Japan).
This is far too simplistic - you'll just have to wait and see for yourself since you're probably going to buy the DA 35...

QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
I don't really think that 35mm is a good portrait length... this will be a "walk around" lens.

I like to shoot portraits between 55 - 100, as it gives you much more control over DOF and lets you stand back far enough to get a nice shot with no distortions.
And you were expecting a portrait lens for a kit prime?
I as well as a few others here shoot some portraits with the FA 31...
If the focal length doesn't suit you for your purposes, why would you not consider the myriad of other lens options?
It seems Pentax can do no right...
09-11-2010, 01:22 PM   #73
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Yep. Thats why i'm quite excited and can't wait to see some samples. Local price as well .
The lens is actually just what i have been asking for in several older discussions, but a bit underspec'ed.

Last edited by ytterbium; 09-12-2010 at 04:22 AM.
09-11-2010, 01:50 PM   #74
Veteran Member
fikkser's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Borlänge, Sweden
Posts: 373
A Swedish store got it for pre ordering at like 273 dollars. I hate that the prices are higher in europe.
09-11-2010, 09:41 PM   #75
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Brisbane, QLD, AUS
Posts: 3,262
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
I like to shoot portraits between 55 - 100, as it gives you much more control over DOF and lets you stand back far enough to get a nice shot with no distortions.
A portrait lens is one helluva a specific lens. Not as versatile as a 35mm. That's why the kit prime is 35mm. 50mm equivalent.

You might as well ask for a 1:2 macro kit or 12mm fisheye.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
judgement, k-mount, lens, move, pentax lens, people, quality, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A Spring Perspective IowaBoy Post Your Photos! 1 04-28-2009 10:10 AM
Perspective vs. FOV Chaoron Pentax DSLR Discussion 34 09-29-2008 02:29 AM
urban perspective.... JrPentax Photographic Technique 8 03-27-2008 05:21 PM
Perspective.... clarenceclose Post Your Photos! 6 02-16-2007 05:00 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:37 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top