[ryan s]

They would sell boatloads at ~$125.

How many beginner threads are there (no matter the camera brand) about which lens to get next...and the first recommendation is a fast 50? How many Canon/Nikon crop owners have a 50/1.8?

Personally, if they made an L version, I don't think it would step on any other lens' toes. The FA43 and DA*55 are in a totally different league and price bracket. The DA40 is f/2.8 only. The DA35/2.4 is still a 35mm lens (I don't pay attention to "a xxmm lens is yymm in crop terms" because focal length = focal length. Discussing field of view is boring anyway...).

Make it a DA-L 50/1.7 WR for $150 and they would be on the gravy train, IMO

[farfisa]

Maybe a reissue of the 50 2.0 then?

Simply put, the 50 1.7 is *too good* at what it does (flat field sharpness).

You've got a deal!

I also agree about the 1.7 vs. 1.4--the 50/1.7 is wicked sharp, but I like the look of the 1.4 better.

They could also do what they did with the 35--reuse the FA 35/2 optics, but restrict the aperture to f/2.

[SpecialK]

I've seen this mentioned a few times on forums lately, but wonder if it's accurate. It's still listed on pentaximaging.com as part of their current lens lineup. Not calling anyone out, just curious.

FA 50/1.4 is still showing as in-stock at Adorama and B&H, plus almost daily in the Marketplace.

[taiweitai]

You're one of the few, I think. It's quite well regarded.
Pentax SMC DA 35mm f/2.4 AL - Review / Lens Test - Sample Images & Verdict
SMC Pentax-DA 35mm F2.4 AL Reviews - Pentax Lens Reviews & Pentax Lens Database

Maybe i was just sold to the FA 31 Ltd long before that, lol

Sure its a good start for Pentax to think about us, those who cant afford something like the FA 31

[Lowell Goudge]

isn't there already a da 55F1.4?

also there is still the FA 50F1.4 what purpose would the 1.7 serve.

The 1.7 lenses were introduced at a time when prime kit lenses were cheap and chearful 50mmF2.0 lenses, an F1.4 was still quite expensive and the F1.7 was an upgrade of sorts at a relitively small cost.

they went away when kit lenses became zooms. they can stay away as far as I care,

I would prefer to see an F1.2 lens.

[spystyle]

I stumbled upon this from Google, but it's a good point 35mm f/2.4 lens for about $200. I'm going to get one for my K-X It's the "nifty fifty" of today

In the good old days when you started photography 50mm were abundand and cheap because they were standard lenses covering the "normal" FOV. Since all Pentax DSLRs are using APSC format sensor the FOV of 50mm relates to 75/77 mm lens mounted on film camera. In other words short portrait tele. And how many of those came cheap with your 80's SLRs?!? None! So why on earth would you suddenly expect them to start doing so! There is DA*55, exactly as intented to be, short fast portrait prime. At premium price. Exactly as 77/85 mm lenses even back in good old days. If you want normal FOV for your DSLR, look at DA L35/2.4AL. It's exactly what cheap 50s would have been 25 years ago. Cheap, small normal FOV prime!

[Verglace]

Yeah I wish pentax would make more cheap primes like teh DA 35/2.4 AL, they could be the budget limiteds. Something like a wide (current 14mm) normal (the current 35) a 70 and a telephoto (maybe a 100?) set would be great stepping stones towards the limiteds.

[spystyle]

True ! Why not a DA L 135/2.8 ?

I have a theory - lens manufacturers drag their feet at making modern fast primes because they want us to buy their expensive 2.8 zoom lenses. Or maybe manufacturers estimate the average shooter wouldn't like lenses that don't zoom ?

[pinholecam]

A down spec or relaxed spec of a FA50/1.7 would be nice. Maybe it even makes sense like the DA35/2.4

So a 'new' DA50/2 that is actually the same as a FA50/1.7 but with cheaper more plastic body and relaxed test specifications.
Maybe Pentax already has that in mind.....

[SpecialK]

How many beginner threads are there (no matter the camera brand) about which lens to get next...and the first recommendation is a fast 50?

Too many. Some people swear by them, though. The "fast 50" was about my 12th lens (because you just have to have one), and while it is OK, it is only OK. I would not recommend it before just about anything else.

[sterretje]

Fast fifties are (mostly) popular because they gave us a cheap way to get a fast lens with good quality. Some people might still have a need for them from a FOV perspective.

I love using a SuperTak 55/1.8 at occasion outdoors where I have space to move around for composition; I'm basically forced in that case as I don't have anything wider (with good quality) in my M42 kit

[debian6]

I don't know about the Canon, but Nikon's sub-$150 F1.8 lens is definitely not a beginner item: it would autofous only on a Nikon body with an internal AF motor, which excludes the entry-level cameras like D3100, D5000, D3000, etc. I'm done with my SMC 50mm F1.4 which I found more of a specialty lens than a general purpose on an APS-C camera and would like to try a 35mm prime instead. Or just stick with the kit zoom for now....

[spystyle]

Your 18-55mm lens, if stuck at 35mm with tape, is about 2 stops slower than the 35/2.4 (versus 35/4.5)

I figured that out last night

And the 35/2.4 is small. 45mm length, versus the 18-55 DAL which is about 68mm length, when at 35mm focal length (I measured mine)

So it's about 1 inch shorter

2 stops can mean the difference between ISO 1600 and ISO 6000

See this chart :

http://www.photographyuncapped.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/Ken-Storch-The...eds-Fstops.gif

The depth of field and bokeh difference is probably noticeable too ...

I'll compare the two when I have both

But if 2 stops and 1 inch don't matter much to you, I suppose it's worth skipping.

[loco]

Just want to add my support to the OP's feelings. As a newbie to dSLR, I already made my first lens purchase - the DA L 55-300 to go with my 18-55 kit lens.

Now, I'm focusing on which prime to get first. I am overwhelmed by the choices of primes available. But since my budget is very limited right now, anything over $200 is out of the question. Sadly, there's just not a lot available at that price, at least not new lenses, from Pentax. So, my focus is on the DA 35/2.4 or one of the older manual focus A lenses, like the 50/1.7 already mentioned.

Sure wish I had more newer affordable autofocus primes to choose from!!

[ryan s]

Or maybe manufacturers estimate the average shooter wouldn't like lenses that don't zoom ?

Too many. Some people swear by them, though. The "fast 50" was about my 12th lens (because you just have to have one), and while it is OK, it is only OK. I would not recommend it before just about anything else.

That's the beauty of choice. I love 50mm lenses. I see you have 28-75 and 70-200 zooms...two lenses I'll never have a desire to own