Will Pentax make a "DA 28mm f2.8"?

Pentaxor · 05-30-2011, 01:01 PM

Originally posted by paperbag846

I think it has a lot to do with him owning the 31...

I much prefer the FL of 28mm over 35mm, for "normal" work.

he did mentioned both, otherwise he would've mentioned one lens only. and it wouldn't had made sense mentioning both if one lens only has a major influence over the other.

although I do agree that a 28mm would be great for normal work, but not with what Pentax had to offer it it's previous AF line-up.

Pentaxor · 05-30-2011, 01:14 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

My argument is that people buy the F 28mm over the FA 35mm because of price, among other things. How is that hard to get? The rest is "IMO"

I see. so this has nothing to do with focal length and IQ preference. if that was the case, then I'm pretty sure that the DAL 35/2.4 at $200 brand new, will be pretty much up to that task with respect to pricing.

see, it's not that hard to get from my perspective, but rather if pricing/budget was an issue, Pentax did provide that by selling the DAL 35. that's why I asked the question and justify if it would make sense to build a new 28mm for a budget price considering the existence of an already affordable 35mm?

if that works for you of having a new budget 28mm for the sake of having that focal length and with no apparent difference or improvement over the budget 35mm, then go for it. but I personally wouldn't get one if that was the case. my criterion would be it should be atleast f2 with some significant rendering difference. if you would read Marc's point of view of what he would like in 28mm, it is the same as mine.

yeatzee · 05-30-2011, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

I see. so this has nothing to do with focal length and IQ preference. if that was the case, then I'm pretty sure that the DAL 35/2.4 at $200 brand new, will be pretty much up to that task with respect to pricing.

see, it's not that hard to get from my perspective, but rather if pricing/budget was an issue, Pentax did provide that by selling the DAL 35. that's why I asked the question and justify if it would make sense to build a new 28mm for a budget price considering the existence of an already affordable 35mm?

if that works for you of having a new budget 28mm for the sake of having that focal length and with no apparent difference or improvement over the budget 35mm, then go for it. but I personally wouldn't get one if that was the case. my criterion would be it should be atleast f2 with some significant rendering difference. if you would read Marc's point of view of what he would like in 28mm, it is the same as mine.

Originally posted by yeatzee

My argument is that people buy the F 28mm over the FA 35mm because of price, among other things. How is that hard to get? The rest is "IMO"

come on.....

Pentaxor · 05-30-2011, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

come on.....

yeah, and read all my posts, and you "might" understand. c'mon.

yeatzee · 05-30-2011, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

yeah, and read all my posts, and you "might" understand. c'mon.

Im not talking about a new 28mm anywhere in my posts, just talking about the F 28mm.

If you'd like to know, it would have to be F/2 and sharp for me to consider a DA version.

Pentaxor · 05-30-2011, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

If you'd like to know, it would have to be F/2 and sharp for me to consider a DA version.

this is exactly the point of the discussion we were talking about. justifying buying a new 28mm. as you said yourself, your criteria involves something different from that of any previous existing Pentax AF 28mm lenses. oh, and I still don't like the F28's bokeh and color.

yeatzee · 05-30-2011, 02:01 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

justifying buying a new 28mm. as you said yourself, your criteria involves something different from that of any previous existing Pentax AF 28mm lenses. oh, and I still don't like the F28's bokeh and color.

Yeah, or it wouldn't be new.....

And I still think the FA 35mm is way overpriced, and delivers mediocre bokeh with lifeless color from what I've seen. To each their own.

**Deimos** · 05-30-2011, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

My argument is that people buy the F 28mm over the FA 35mm because of price, among other things. How is that hard to get? The rest is "IMO"

Price difference isnt huge, a mint F28 is ~$300, its more the fact that it is 28mm and not 35mm

I almost bought the FA35 but it is a little too long for my everyday walkaround

Originally posted by Pentaxor

your criteria involves something different from that of any previous existing Pentax AF 28mm lenses. oh, and I still don't like the F28's bokeh and color.

Well we may as well ask for pie in the sky considering this is a "wish" thread for a nonexistant lens

If they made a DA28 2.8 people would still buy it if it was any good, and if they put "Limited" on it, people would buy it even if it wasnt

paperbag846 · 05-30-2011, 03:16 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

if that works for you of having a new budget 28mm for the sake of having that focal length and with no apparent difference or improvement over the budget 35mm, then go for it. but I personally wouldn't get one if that was the case. my criterion would be it should be atleast f2 with some significant rendering difference. if you would read Marc's point of view of what he would like in 28mm, it is the same as mine.

On further thought, and looking at the price of an F28, I think I would go for the Tamron 28-75 before the 28mm 2.8 prime. For an extra 100, I would have access to many other useful focal lengths!

paperbag846 · 05-30-2011, 03:21 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

And I still think the FA 35mm is way overpriced, and delivers mediocre bokeh with lifeless color from what I've seen. To each their own.

I agree. Nothing special about the FA 35... at least when it's compared to the much more affordable DA L 35. I think it's mostly hype at work there.

Fact is, most lenses don't have colour that "wows" me. The exception to this is the DA ltds. The FA primes, and earlier, are all hit or miss... and can be adjusted in post. I tend to look for contrast and bokeh.

So perhaps we are looking for different things. I don't see anything about the bokeh of the 28mm that I would not find with a similar wide-angle lens (zoom or not). The 35mm DA L has nice bokeh (but the FA 35 does not, really). In general, too, the 28mm lenses aren't really about bokeh, anyways.

For me, it would be about having a nice small prime for my camera that gives me a nice FOV for general "spontaneous" photography. This is why a reasonably-priced prime in this range would be desirable over a zoom or 35mm.

Marc's lens is ideal... but we don't work for Pentax. Maybe we should

.

I've yet to try a 24mm lens because they are so damn expensive, but the DA 21 ltd does not exactly have killer bokeh, either.

Pentaxor · 05-30-2011, 03:50 PM

Originally posted by Deimos

Price difference isnt huge, a mint F28 is ~$300, its more the fact that it is 28mm and not 35mm

true. it's funny how people would state price as a main excuse and elaborately whine about the FA35mm doesn't cost as much.

oh and it's Pentax's fault or anybody who sells the FA35 for the price that some people can't or willing to afford or blame the buyers who buy them for more money than those who don't want to buy them. mind as well shoot those who sell and buy the FA31 for $900 and above.

Pentaxor · 05-30-2011, 03:59 PM

Originally posted by paperbag846

On further thought, and looking at the price of an F28, I think I would go for the Tamron 28-75 before the 28mm 2.8 prime. For an extra 100, I would have access to many other useful focal lengths!

I believe that would be the best choice when considering a lens with a 28/2.8 focal length. choosing between the Tammy zoom and F28 is a no brainer and I would choose the Tammy any day of the week over the F28, not just because it is versatile/flexible for being a zoom, but I like it's rendering way better than the F could ever produce. too bad it is just not f2 which would I had liked for a 28mm.

Pentaxor · 05-30-2011, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by paperbag846

I agree. Nothing special about the FA 35... at least when it's compared to the much more affordable DA L 35. I think it's mostly hype at work there.

I would have to agree to some extent except for corner sharpness and wide aperture speed usability. and I also don't like how Pentax removed some of the essentials on the DAL. plastic mount is eeeekkk! and some features that would had been handy to use.

Quote:

the 28mm lenses aren't really about bokeh, anyways.

with the exception of the f2 28mm's. since in general 28mm are not suppose to be about bokeh, it's the same with most of the wides, including the 35mm's with the exception of the FA31 and Sigma 30. that's why a clamor for a fast 28mm is more favorable than having to have the usual deeper DOF on wide lenses.

yeatzee · 05-30-2011, 04:42 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

true. it's funny how people would state price as a main excuse and elaborately whine about the FA35mm doesn't cost as much.

oh and it's Pentax's fault or anybody who sells the FA35 for the price that some people can't or willing to afford or blame the buyers who buy them for more money than those who don't want to buy them. mind as well shoot those who sell and buy the FA31 for $900 and above.

Do me a favor and point me in the direction of this fabled $300 F 28mm

Looking at Keh.com, a "EX+" (mint?) FA 35mm for $415. Judging by ebay prices and ones sold on here thats about right price wise.

Even *IF* there was a $300 F 28mm, thats still over $100 difference! To me at least, that isn't some small amount. In addition, I've yet to even see a $300 F 28mm

I got mine for ~$250, Dgais fairly recently sold one for $260 in excellent condition, etc.

Oh and nice try pentaxor, but I never blamed anyone for the price increase. I just stated its disgustingly overpriced compared to what it used to be IMO.

Pentaxor · 05-30-2011, 04:52 PM

Originally posted by yeatzee

Do me a favor and point me in the direction of this fabled $300 F 28mm

Looking at Keh.com, a "EX+" (mint?) FA 35mm for $415. Judging by ebay prices and ones sold on here thats about right price wise.

Even *IF* there was a $300 F 28mm, thats still over $100 difference! To me at least, that isn't some small amount. In addition, I've yet to even see a $300 F 28mm

I got mine for ~$250, Dgais fairly recently sold one for $260 in excellent condition, etc.

Oh and nice try pentaxor, but I never blamed anyone for the price increase. I just stated its disgustingly overpriced compared to what it used to be IMO.

probably you are just not looking hard enough !

I mean how many times had you looked at the prices of either lenses, or are you just selectively looking? if you really are serious about it, you don't need others to pinpoint you where to look for prices and how frequent you do it. it takes personal vigilance to find a good deal. this does not only apply to one particular lens but others as well. tricks of the trade, you should know that by now.

05-30-2011, 03:00 PM	#83
Deimos Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Kingdom of Wonder Posts: 1,777	Originally posted by yeatzee My argument is that people buy the F 28mm over the FA 35mm because of price, among other things. How is that hard to get? The rest is "IMO" Price difference isnt huge, a mint F28 is ~$300, its more the fact that it is 28mm and not 35mm I almost bought the FA35 but it is a little too long for my everyday walkaround Originally posted by Pentaxor your criteria involves something different from that of any previous existing Pentax AF 28mm lenses. oh, and I still don't like the F28's bokeh and color. Well we may as well ask for pie in the sky considering this is a "wish" thread for a nonexistant lens If they made a DA28 2.8 people would still buy it if it was any good, and if they put "Limited" on it, people would buy it even if it wasnt Last edited by Deimos; 05-30-2011 at 03:11 PM.

05-30-2011, 03:50 PM	#86
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Deimos Price difference isnt huge, a mint F28 is ~$300, its more the fact that it is 28mm and not 35mm true. it's funny how people would state price as a main excuse and elaborately whine about the FA35mm doesn't cost as much. oh and it's Pentax's fault or anybody who sells the FA35 for the price that some people can't or willing to afford or blame the buyers who buy them for more money than those who don't want to buy them. mind as well shoot those who sell and buy the FA31 for $900 and above. Last edited by Pentaxor; 05-30-2011 at 04:16 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
INDUSTAR 69 28mm F2.8 - Is this lens "Pentax-able"	minahasa	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	02-08-2011 04:06 PM
moderator - pls make a thread about "new K-x has something loose/noise/etc." sticky?	yuwlyuwl	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	7	03-09-2010 04:44 AM
Wanted - Acquired: Cheap "donor" KA-mount 28mm f/2.8 lens - any make	panoguy	Sold Items	2	03-04-2010 08:02 PM
For Sale - Sold: [SOLD]SMC PENTAX "K" 1:3.5/28mm (Hard to Find)	Curbster54	Sold Items	7	02-26-2010 03:53 PM
K-x - "make it or break it" for Pentax	gubak	Pentax DSLR Discussion	75	09-22-2009 10:31 AM

05-30-2011, 01:01 PM	#76
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by paperbag846 I think it has a lot to do with him owning the 31... I much prefer the FL of 28mm over 35mm, for "normal" work. he did mentioned both, otherwise he would've mentioned one lens only. and it wouldn't had made sense mentioning both if one lens only has a major influence over the other. although I do agree that a 28mm would be great for normal work, but not with what Pentax had to offer it it's previous AF line-up.

05-30-2011, 01:14 PM	#77
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by yeatzee My argument is that people buy the F 28mm over the FA 35mm because of price, among other things. How is that hard to get? The rest is "IMO" I see. so this has nothing to do with focal length and IQ preference. if that was the case, then I'm pretty sure that the DAL 35/2.4 at $200 brand new, will be pretty much up to that task with respect to pricing. see, it's not that hard to get from my perspective, but rather if pricing/budget was an issue, Pentax did provide that by selling the DAL 35. that's why I asked the question and justify if it would make sense to build a new 28mm for a budget price considering the existence of an already affordable 35mm? if that works for you of having a new budget 28mm for the sake of having that focal length and with no apparent difference or improvement over the budget 35mm, then go for it. but I personally wouldn't get one if that was the case. my criterion would be it should be atleast f2 with some significant rendering difference. if you would read Marc's point of view of what he would like in 28mm, it is the same as mine.

05-30-2011, 01:16 PM	#78
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Originally posted by Pentaxor I see. so this has nothing to do with focal length and IQ preference. if that was the case, then I'm pretty sure that the DAL 35/2.4 at $200 brand new, will be pretty much up to that task with respect to pricing. see, it's not that hard to get from my perspective, but rather if pricing/budget was an issue, Pentax did provide that by selling the DAL 35. that's why I asked the question and justify if it would make sense to build a new 28mm for a budget price considering the existence of an already affordable 35mm? if that works for you of having a new budget 28mm for the sake of having that focal length and with no apparent difference or improvement over the budget 35mm, then go for it. but I personally wouldn't get one if that was the case. my criterion would be it should be atleast f2 with some significant rendering difference. if you would read Marc's point of view of what he would like in 28mm, it is the same as mine. Originally posted by yeatzee My argument is that people buy the F 28mm over the FA 35mm because of price, *among other things.* How is that hard to get? The rest is "IMO" come on.....

05-30-2011, 01:40 PM	#79
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by yeatzee come on..... yeah, and read all my posts, and you "might" understand. c'mon.

05-30-2011, 01:43 PM	#80
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Originally posted by Pentaxor yeah, and read all my posts, and you "might" understand. c'mon. Im not talking about a new 28mm anywhere in my posts, just talking about the F 28mm. If you'd like to know, it would have to be F/2 and sharp for me to consider a DA version.

05-30-2011, 01:50 PM	#81
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by yeatzee *If you'd like to know, it would have to be F/2 and sharp for me to consider a DA version.* this is exactly the point of the discussion we were talking about. justifying buying a new 28mm. as you said yourself, your criteria involves something different from that of any previous existing Pentax AF 28mm lenses. oh, and I still don't like the F28's bokeh and color.

05-30-2011, 02:01 PM	#82
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Originally posted by Pentaxor justifying buying a new 28mm. as you said yourself, your criteria involves something different from that of any previous existing Pentax AF 28mm lenses. oh, and I still don't like the F28's bokeh and color. Yeah, or it wouldn't be new..... And I still think the FA 35mm is way overpriced, and delivers mediocre bokeh with lifeless color from what I've seen. To each their own.

05-30-2011, 03:16 PM	#84
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by Pentaxor if that works for you of having a new budget 28mm for the sake of having that focal length and with no apparent difference or improvement over the budget 35mm, then go for it. but I personally wouldn't get one if that was the case. my criterion would be it should be atleast f2 with some significant rendering difference. if you would read Marc's point of view of what he would like in 28mm, it is the same as mine. On further thought, and looking at the price of an F28, I think I would go for the Tamron 28-75 before the 28mm 2.8 prime. For an extra 100, I would have access to many other useful focal lengths!

05-30-2011, 03:21 PM	#85
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by yeatzee And I still think the FA 35mm is way overpriced, and delivers mediocre bokeh with lifeless color from what I've seen. To each their own. I agree. Nothing special about the FA 35... at least when it's compared to the much more affordable DA L 35. I think it's mostly hype at work there. Fact is, most lenses don't have colour that "wows" me. The exception to this is the DA ltds. The FA primes, and earlier, are all hit or miss... and can be adjusted in post. I tend to look for contrast and bokeh. So perhaps we are looking for different things. I don't see anything about the bokeh of the 28mm that I would not find with a similar wide-angle lens (zoom or not). The 35mm DA L has nice bokeh (but the FA 35 does not, really). In general, too, the 28mm lenses aren't really about bokeh, anyways. For me, it would be about having a nice small prime for my camera that gives me a nice FOV for general "spontaneous" photography. This is why a reasonably-priced prime in this range would be desirable over a zoom or 35mm. Marc's lens is ideal... but we don't work for Pentax. Maybe we should . I've yet to try a 24mm lens because they are so damn expensive, but the DA 21 ltd does not exactly have killer bokeh, either.

05-30-2011, 03:59 PM	#87
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by paperbag846 On further thought, and looking at the price of an F28, I think I would go for the Tamron 28-75 before the 28mm 2.8 prime. For an extra 100, I would have access to many other useful focal lengths! I believe that would be the best choice when considering a lens with a 28/2.8 focal length. choosing between the Tammy zoom and F28 is a no brainer and I would choose the Tammy any day of the week over the F28, not just because it is versatile/flexible for being a zoom, but I like it's rendering way better than the F could ever produce. too bad it is just not f2 which would I had liked for a 28mm.

05-30-2011, 04:10 PM	#88
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by paperbag846 I agree. Nothing special about the FA 35... at least when it's compared to the much more affordable DA L 35. I think it's mostly hype at work there. I would have to agree to some extent except for corner sharpness and wide aperture speed usability. and I also don't like how Pentax removed some of the essentials on the DAL. plastic mount is eeeekkk! and some features that would had been handy to use. Quote: the 28mm lenses aren't really about bokeh, anyways. with the exception of the f2 28mm's. since in general 28mm are not suppose to be about bokeh, it's the same with most of the wides, including the 35mm's with the exception of the FA31 and Sigma 30. that's why a clamor for a fast 28mm is more favorable than having to have the usual deeper DOF on wide lenses.

05-30-2011, 04:42 PM	#89
yeatzee Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Temecula Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,675	Originally posted by Pentaxor true. it's funny how people would state price as a main excuse and elaborately whine about the FA35mm doesn't cost as much. oh and it's Pentax's fault or anybody who sells the FA35 for the price that some people can't or willing to afford or blame the buyers who buy them for more money than those who don't want to buy them. mind as well shoot those who sell and buy the FA31 for $900 and above. Do me a favor and point me in the direction of this fabled $300 F 28mm Looking at Keh.com, a "EX+" (mint?) FA 35mm for $415. Judging by ebay prices and ones sold on here thats about right price wise. Even IF there was a $300 F 28mm, thats still over $100 difference! To me at least, that isn't some small amount. In addition, I've yet to even see a $300 F 28mm I got mine for ~$250, Dgais fairly recently sold one for $260 in excellent condition, etc. Oh and nice try pentaxor, but I never blamed anyone for the price increase. I just stated its disgustingly overpriced compared to what it used to be IMO.

05-30-2011, 04:52 PM	#90
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by yeatzee Do me a favor and point me in the direction of this fabled $300 F 28mm Looking at Keh.com, a "EX+" (mint?) FA 35mm for $415. Judging by ebay prices and ones sold on here thats about right price wise. Even IF there was a $300 F 28mm, thats still over $100 difference! To me at least, that isn't some small amount. In addition, I've yet to even see a $300 F 28mm I got mine for ~$250, Dgais fairly recently sold one for $260 in excellent condition, etc. Oh and nice try pentaxor, but I never blamed anyone for the price increase. I just stated its disgustingly overpriced compared to what it used to be IMO. probably you are just not looking hard enough ! I mean how many times had you looked at the prices of either lenses, or are you just selectively looking? if you really are serious about it, you don't need others to pinpoint you where to look for prices and how frequent you do it. it takes personal vigilance to find a good deal. this does not only apply to one particular lens but others as well. tricks of the trade, you should know that by now.