Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-09-2011, 11:04 AM   #31
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
The reason Cosina can get the ridiculous prices for their lenses is that Pentax isn't producing many mf lenses anymore. And Samyang can't really go head to head with the lenses mentioned previously in this thread. I would rather use a 45 year old Tak (Tak, Auto, Super, SMC) as to even bother with a Samwhang.
Actually, the Voigtlander lenses were well priced. The Nokton was about the price of the FA 50, post hike and is a better lens optically. The others weren't expensive either - within range of DA Limiteds - people mainly complained about lack of AF not about their price when you brought them in a discussion.

The Zeiss were expensive but their coatings can hold their own against the Pentax ones. And if you look at the FA Limited prices, they do not trail far behind the Zeiss.

If you can point me to someone making less expensive lenses than Samyang, I'd appreciate it. Their 85 can go head to head with any 85. And I mentioned them because they set the bar for manual lens prices - if they could sell their models cheaper, they would. No one will beat them on price. They're a good reality check for how low prices would be.

Old Takumars are irrelevant - we're talking about a new line here - you don't expect new lenses from Pentax to sell for the price of old Takumars. Bringing up the Takumars is in fact the best argument against the DM-WR line.

A manual focus line from Pentax cannot be less expensive than Samyang. If it goes for the Voigtlander quality, it won't be cheaper than that either. And people didn't kill themselves buying Voigtlander because they wanted AF. Add WR and you get more expensive lenses than Voigtlander and closer to Zeiss prices. FA limiteds are already pretty expensive. How much market would there be for a DM-WR line? Not much I'm afraid.

06-09-2011, 11:07 AM   #32
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by freewheeler Quote
The reason why most manufacturers exclusively focus on AF lenses is perhaps
that it would be possibly explained as implicid admitting that AF is not always better than MF.
There is a small market and it's costly to keep two lines of lenses - one MF, one AF. Think about consumer confusion as well. Very few people (you and I included) want MF lenses.
06-09-2011, 11:14 AM   #33
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
There is a small market and it's costly to keep two lines of lenses - one MF, one AF. Think about consumer confusion as well. Very few people (you and I included) want MF lenses.
Well when you look at it Pentax already holds more lenslines: FA Ltd and DA Ltd have for some grade their own fanbase of users who want the complete series. Question is, wheater there is enough demand to start an extra lensline (DM) that will have it's own userbase.

I don't think I will ever buy one, but then again Pentax is more then myself
06-09-2011, 11:46 AM   #34
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
Actually, the Voigtlander lenses were well priced. The Nokton was about the price of the FA 50, post hike and is a better lens optically. The others weren't expensive either - within range of DA Limiteds - people mainly complained about lack of AF not about their price when you brought them in a discussion.

The Zeiss were expensive but their coatings can hold their own against the Pentax ones. And if you look at the FA Limited prices, they do not trail far behind the Zeiss.

If you can point me to someone making less expensive lenses than Samyang, I'd appreciate it. Their 85 can go head to head with any 85. And I mentioned them because they set the bar for manual lens prices - if they could sell their models cheaper, they would. No one will beat them on price. They're a good reality check for how low prices would be.

Old Takumars are irrelevant - we're talking about a new line here - you don't expect new lenses from Pentax to sell for the price of old Takumars. Bringing up the Takumars is in fact the best argument against the DM-WR line.

A manual focus line from Pentax cannot be less expensive than Samyang. If it goes for the Voigtlander quality, it won't be cheaper than that either. And people didn't kill themselves buying Voigtlander because they wanted AF. Add WR and you get more expensive lenses than Voigtlander and closer to Zeiss prices. FA limiteds are already pretty expensive. How much market would there be for a DM-WR line? Not much I'm afraid.
The FA Ltd series is an AF lens line. We aren't talking about an af ltd lens line, we are talking about re-releasing some legends from the mf A, M and k series. As you pointed out about "Cosina" is they 'were' priced but they weren't exactly cheap. Go to Adorama and look at the remaining Voightlander lenses in K-mount and you will see what I mean. The Ultron 40mm/2 SL-II is nearly $100 more than the DA 40/2.8 Ltd. The 90mm Apo-Lanthar II is $599. The 20mm Skopar is also $599 which is more than the DA 21mm Ltd. Those aren't budget lenses. Ador has a used Voightlander 58/1.4 in D condition for $414. That is a lot more than I paid for my A 50/1.2 in similar condition.


Last edited by Blue; 06-09-2011 at 05:42 PM.
06-09-2011, 12:03 PM   #35
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well when you look at it Pentax already holds more lenslines: FA Ltd and DA Ltd have for some grade their own fanbase of users who want the complete series. Question is, wheater there is enough demand to start an extra lensline (DM) that will have it's own userbase.

I don't think I will ever buy one, but then again Pentax is more then myself
FA Ltd is an old series dating back to film era. No new models have been added to it. It is one thing to keep around an old model you designed and produced already, it is a different one to set up a production line from scratch.
06-09-2011, 12:09 PM   #36
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
FA Ltd is an old series dating back to film era. No new models have been added to it. It is one thing to keep around an old model you designed and produced already, it is a different one to set up a production line from scratch.
Actually, the seeming cranked out a batch of A 50mm/1.2 from thin air. Furthermore, it isn't that difficult to run a line on these things. We aren't talking about cranking our 5000 Toyotas a day here. Its funny you think those guys at Cosina can do it but Pentax can't. Hysterical The big glass like FA* 600mm/4 and 250-500 do take a while to hand assemble. However, that is the way those limited lines, and DA* lines, FA 50/1.4, FA 35/2 lines work anyway . . . by hand. The glass making is a different process and should be more cost effective now than 1980.
06-09-2011, 12:12 PM   #37
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
The FA Ltd series is an AF lens line. We aren't talking about an af ltd lens line, we are talking about re-releasing some legends from the mf A, M and k series.
What makes you think a WR MF series would be significantly cheaper than the AF Ltds? Price of old lenses isn't indicative of the price of new ones.

QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
As you pointed out about "Cosina" is they 'were' priced but they weren't exactly cheap. Go to Adorama and look at the remaining Voightlander lenses in K-mount and you will see what I mean. The Ultron 40mm/2 SL-II is nearly $100 more than the DA 40/2.8 Ltd. The 90mm Apo-Lanthar II is $599. The 20mm Skopar is also $599 which is more than the DA 21mm Ltd. Those aren't budget lenses.
They're not budget, but neither are the DA Ltds you're comparing them with. Are you expecting a DM-WR line to be a budget line on top of targeting a niche market? Niche products are expensive, not cheap.


QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Ador has a used Voightlander 58/1.4 in D condition for $414. That is a lot more than I paid for my A 50/1.2 in similar condition. [/SIZE]
The 58/1.4 used to be available for the same price for which the FA 50/1.4 was available, when both were being produced. With the Voigtlander being out of production, it's not surprising that used prices might have gone up. But used prices also fluctuate, so the price one lens is being offered at is not really indicative of anything. Can you still find an A 50/1.2 for $414 in D condition today? I don't think so - you got a great deal on your A, but don't rub it in now
06-09-2011, 12:14 PM   #38
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Actually, the seeming cranked out a batch of A 50mm/1.2 from thin air.
With WR? If you're just asking for a reissue of old models, it's one thing, if you're asking for a new line with new features, then it's a new line requiring new design work.

06-09-2011, 12:19 PM   #39
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
With WR? If you're just asking for a reissue of old models, it's one thing, if you're asking for a new line with new features, then it's a new line requiring new design work.
I was using that as an example of running a batch of mf lenses down the assembly line.
06-09-2011, 12:20 PM   #40
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
What makes you think a WR MF series would be significantly cheaper than the AF Ltds? Price of old lenses isn't indicative of the price of new ones.



They're not budget, but neither are the DA Ltds you're comparing them with. Are you expecting a DM-WR line to be a budget line on top of targeting a niche market? Niche products are expensive, not cheap.




The 58/1.4 used to be available for the same price for which the FA 50/1.4 was available, when both were being produced. With the Voigtlander being out of production, it's not surprising that used prices might have gone up. But used prices also fluctuate, so the price one lens is being offered at is not really indicative of anything. Can you still find an A 50/1.2 for $414 in D condition today? I don't think so - you got a great deal on your A, but don't rub it in now
I was just pointing out that the Cosina/Voightlander lenses aren't a budget option . . . well maybe compared to the Zeiss line they are.
06-09-2011, 01:42 PM   #41
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
I was using that as an example of running a batch of mf lenses down the assembly line.
Yes, but if that's all they would make, the reaction of the price conscious Pentax user would be: "Gee, why should I pay X for a lens that is identical to an old model and has no improvements when I can get the old one for half the price on the used market!"

People will buy an old lens and put up with its shortcomings because it was old and they got it for cheap. But if they have to pay new price for a new old lens, they'll be much more critical of what they're getting. The old gem will become the new ridiculously overpriced product.
06-09-2011, 04:00 PM   #42
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
Yes, but if that's all they would make, the reaction of the price conscious Pentax user would be: "Gee, why should I pay X for a lens that is identical to an old model and has no improvements when I can get the old one for half the price on the used market!"

People will buy an old lens and put up with its shortcomings because it was old and they got it for cheap. But if they have to pay new price for a new old lens, they'll be much more critical of what they're getting. The old gem will become the new ridiculously overpriced product.
Here you go again. You seemed to have forgot about adding Ghostless Coating to the rear elements, SP to the front elements and an updated housing to allow the use of weather seals if feasible. In the K28/2, it may not be feasible to WR it. Another interesting thing would be an experiment comparing prototypes an A50/1.2 update with Ghostless Coating on the rear element, SP on the front with the regular SMC coatings and a prototype with the Aero Bright coatings used in the DA* 55mm and 60-250mm. The Aero Bright would probably create a whole new Beast.

Last edited by Blue; 06-09-2011 at 04:49 PM.
06-09-2011, 04:25 PM   #43
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Here you go again. You seemed to have forgot about adding Ghostless Coating to the rear elements, SP to the front elements and an updated housing to allow the use of weather seals if feasible. In the K28/2, it may not be feasible to WR it. Another interesting thing would be an experiment comparing prototypes an A50/1.2 update with Ghostless Coating on the rear element, SP on the front with the regular SMC coatings and a prototype with the Aero Bright coatings used in the DA* 55mm and 60-250mm. The Aero Bright would probably create a whole new Beast.
I'm starting to like these two options (K28/2 and A50/1.2), looking around for some pictures and see some perspective on them. Old lenses won't be around forever, so there will be a small group of new users with a newly updated version of them.

For me not in a fast way, but since I do have plans on converting one of my camera's in time to a IR only body, then would having such a lens may bring some new future.
06-09-2011, 05:05 PM   #44
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
I'm starting to like these two options (K28/2 and A50/1.2), looking around for some pictures and see some perspective on them. Old lenses won't be around forever, so there will be a small group of new users with a newly updated version of them.

For me not in a fast way, but since I do have plans on converting one of my camera's in time to a IR only body, then would having such a lens may bring some new future.
Check out the special edition silver A 50/1.2. The A* 85/1.4 would be the 3rd lens I would add to that list.

Google Translate
06-09-2011, 05:22 PM   #45
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,149
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Here you go again. You seemed to have forgot about adding Ghostless Coating to the rear elements, SP to the front elements and an updated housing to allow the use of weather seals if feasible. In the K28/2, it may not be feasible to WR it. Another interesting thing would be an experiment comparing prototypes an A50/1.2 update with Ghostless Coating on the rear element, SP on the front with the regular SMC coatings and a prototype with the Aero Bright coatings used in the DA* 55mm and 60-250mm. The Aero Bright would probably create a whole new Beast.
Your cost estimates are totally unrealistic. Keep a watch for the prices for the old 645 FA lenses when the are getting reintroduced..and the new coming ones. Most of them will be priced between $3000 - $5000 (except for the 75mm). Many of the classic A* lenses were more expensive when in production. The 645 lenses are example of lenses sold in relatively small volumes. New manual focus lenses will sell less. As I said; Hirakawa said that the A* 135/1.8 would cost $1600 in the late 90's. He also said that the AF lenses were cheaper to manufacture.
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!
aperture, camera, dm, k-mount, lens, lenses, lensline, pentax, pentax lens, series, slr lens, wich, zeiss
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Focus Ring on DA 35 macro makes a clicking noise; manual focus ... this normal? eadrian75 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 04-12-2011 12:51 AM
Pentax K-x, Manual Focus, and Glasses dmfw Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 10 10-12-2010 07:06 PM
pentax k-7 SR problem with manual focus lens lwsy711 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 4 07-17-2010 04:02 PM
How do you know when a pentax dslr is in focus with a manual lens? justtakingpics Pentax DSLR Discussion 19 05-22-2010 04:06 AM
K100D Super - Focus point locked to center in Manual Focus ? JGabr Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 01-25-2010 09:41 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:31 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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