New Lensline: Pentax DM-WR, manual focus only!

**Pål Jensen** · 06-09-2011, 05:27 PM

Originally posted by Blue

Actually, the seeming cranked out a batch of A 50mm/1.2 from thin air. 980.

This is an old lens long paid for. It is also from the days before just-in-time parts delivery. Pentax had huge stocks of this lens and it took them a decade or more to clear it. The newer batches are probably from assembling from existing parts bin.

Blue · 06-09-2011, 05:36 PM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

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.

Here YOU go again.

I didn't make any cost estimates. Secondly, we already clarified that those A* fast lenses above 100mm are huge which is indicative of high prices in and of itself. Lastly, I never new and engineer that new their arse from a hot rock when it came to actually running production assembly lines. We aren't talking about 645 or 6x7 lenses either. The K 28/2 would be a relatively expensive lens regardless so what. It and the Zeiss Distagon were designed together. The A 50/1.2 has already shown the people will buy new stock of it and that is the 1st lenses that RonHendriks1966 and discussed. The third one I suggested was the A* 85/1.4.

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

This is an old lens long paid for. It is also from the days before just-in-time parts delivery. Pentax had huge stocks of this lens and it took them a decade or more to clear it. The newer batches are probably from assembling from existing parts bin.

If you go back and look at my posts on the subject, you will see that I stated that as a possibility. Apparently you and Laurentiu Cristofor think that pentax should just keep given us warmed over DA 35 f2.4 plastibody lenses and be done with it. I don't run Pentax bodies to use Tammy af Zooms or Sigma lenses. Its the Pentax and Asahi Glass.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 06-10-2011, 12:12 AM

Originally posted by Blue

Apparently you and Laurentiu Cristofor think that pentax should just keep given us warmed over DA 35 f2.4 plastibody lenses and be done with it. I don't run Pentax bodies to use Tammy af Zooms or Sigma lenses. Its the Pentax and Asahi Glass.

Oh boy, this is what happens when you inhale too much fungus that grew on the surface of thoriated lens elements...

RonHendriks1966 · 06-10-2011, 01:56 AM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

Oh boy, this is what happens when you inhale too much fungus that grew on the surface of thoriated lens elements...

This one is actually very funny

But I do agree with Blue that I want Pentax glass on my camera. I'm different in that way that I don't run on old glass. So why I thought up of a new lens (DA*135-270mm/f2.8) to fitt my bill (and probably some others) and noth having to buy a Sigma lens in future.

Then again all of these, wheater it is new DA*, DA-L or DM, have to be designed, produced and sold and make on long run (starting a lens costs money and you earn that back over a time and calculated number of lenssales) for HOYA a return on investment. Keeping that in mind will make room for some new lenses, but for everything we would want. Making choices of what we want/ask is important in that matter.

**Pål Jensen** · 06-10-2011, 03:28 AM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

Then again all of these, wheater it is new DA*, DA-L or DM, have to be designed, produced and sold and make on long run (starting a lens costs money and you earn that back over a time and calculated number of lenssales) for HOYA a return on investment. Keeping that in mind will make room for some new lenses, but for everything we would want. Making choices of what we want/ask is important in that matter.

My impression is not that people want choice; it is that people want all kinds of exotic lenses but for for "free". When Pentax do release a cheap, optically good lens, then they complain that it isn't built like a tank. And when it is built like a thank they complain that it cost more than a Sigma lens...

freewheeler · 06-10-2011, 04:20 AM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

My impression is not that people want choice; it is that people want all kinds of exotic lenses but for for "free". When Pentax do release a cheap, optically good lens, then they complain that it isn't built like a tank. And when it is built like a thank they complain that it cost more than a Sigma lens...

Nobody is asking in this thread for cheap MF lenses.
Just not zeiss price and bulkiness.
And yes, it is about choices.
To chose between AF and MF,
between plastic and metal.
The question is wether or not there is a market for modern MF lenses.
Voigtlander produced lenses of around 500$ for PKA but doesn't anymore.
Good quality, reasonable price.
Could and would Pentax do that also is the question.
And more importantly: is there enough demand for it to justify such a lens line?

Blue · 06-10-2011, 06:36 AM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

Oh boy, this is what happens when you inhale too much fungus that grew on the surface of thoriated lens elements...

Except my 8-element version of the Super Tak 50/1.4 doesn't have thoriated elements nor does my 2 versions of the first 28mm Super Tak.

IO do have an S-M-C 50/1.4 but it stays in the gun safe on the Spot F next to the 1911A1.

Last edited by Blue; 06-10-2011 at 06:42 AM.

Clavius · 06-10-2011, 07:43 AM

I don't think I would ever invest in such a DM-WR lens. Not as long as there is old manual glass on the market. Especially the cheap Russian glass. Ok, it's not weather sealed, but I really don't care, because the lenses are old anyway.

You can get 135mm f2.8 for peanuts. (Jupiter, Tair, etc..) My Jupiter 11 was 15 USD. I honestly don't care if it gets wet. Why would I buy a new DM 135 f2.8 WR for the 20x of that price?

Blue · 06-10-2011, 08:13 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

I don't think I would ever invest in such a DM-WR lens. Not as long as there is old manual glass on the market. Especially the cheap Russian glass. Ok, it's not weather sealed, but I really don't care, because the lenses are old anyway.

You can get 135mm f2.8 for peanuts. (Jupiter, Tair, etc..) My Jupiter 11 was 15 USD. I honestly don't care if it gets wet. Why would I buy a new DM 135 f2.8 WR for the 20x of that price?

No one has brought up "cheap" 135/2.8 lenses nor average lenses. However, the A* 135/1.8 mentioned earlier is a horse of another color. We have been mainly referring to the best, the Legends. K15, K28/2, A 50/1.2, A* 85/1.4 for example. Maybe even the K 8.4mm/2.8 Fisheye.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 06-10-2011, 09:53 PM

Originally posted by freewheeler

Nobody is asking in this thread for cheap MF lenses.

Nobody asks for cheap lenses, just for budget lenses:

Originally posted by Blue

I was just pointing out that the Cosina/Voightlander lenses aren't a budget option . . . well maybe compared to the Zeiss line they are.

Originally posted by freewheeler

Voigtlander produced lenses of around 500$ for PKA but doesn't anymore.
Good quality, reasonable price.

Some argue the prices were ridiculous:

Originally posted by Blue

The reason Cosina can get the ridiculous prices for their lenses is that Pentax isn't producing many mf lenses anymore.

Go figure this stuff out.

Blue · 06-10-2011, 10:05 PM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

Nobody asks for cheap lenses, just for budget lenses:

Some argue the prices were ridiculous:

Go figure this stuff out.

You go figure out what you are talking about. You have demonstrated you can cut and paste. However, where did I request a budget lens? You were implying that Cosina was a budget alternative

Existing New Voightlander PKA stock:

pentax voigtlander - Adorama.com

Steve Gandy has some as well including the 58/1.4.

http://www.cameraquest.com/Voigt_SL2.htm

However, the $599 of the 90mm is closing in on the price of an FA 77 ltd and more than a DA 70 ltd and it is slower than both but it does have that cool close focus accy lens.

I like Voightlander lenses but don't be telling me they were/are a cheap option.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 06-10-2011, 11:06 PM

Originally posted by Blue

You go figure out what you are talking about. You have demonstrated you can cut and paste. However, where did I request a budget lens? You were implying that Cosina was a budget alternative

I guess it's time for you to show that you can read, understand, cut and paste, and quote. I'll be looking forward to your effort.

Blue · 06-10-2011, 11:08 PM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

I guess it's time for you to show that you can read, understand, cut and paste, and quote. I'll be looking forward to your effort.

freewheeler · 06-10-2011, 11:20 PM

DA40/2.8 $500 versus VL40/2.0 $409

DA*55/1.4 $800 versus VL58/1.4 $500

Yes, I call that reasonable prices for quality MF lenses.
I'd like Pentax to do that. But then again I own 3 VL's alleady.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 06-10-2011, 11:24 PM

Originally posted by Blue

However, the $599 of the 90mm is closing in on the price of an FA 77 ltd and more than a DA 70 ltd and it is slower than both but it does have that cool close focus accy lens.

You forget that the 90mm is an APO lens, and as a result it is not surprising it is more expensive than what its specs may indicate if you're just looking at focal length and aperture.

Originally posted by Blue

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

I guess it's time for you to show that you can read, understand, cut and paste, and quote. I'll be looking forward to your effort.

:rabbit:

You win 1 point for participating!

Just to help you out, this is what I actually said:

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

I'm not sure how Pentax could provide same quality cheaper than the Cosina Z/V series (thus selling more)

I never said Voigtlander were cheap or budget, I just said that I can't see Pentax providing the same build quality at a cheaper price.

It is fine to disagree, but you should make sure first that you understand what you are disagreeing on.

06-10-2011, 03:28 AM	#50
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 Then again all of these, wheater it is new DA, DA-L or DM, have to be designed, produced and sold and make on long run (starting a lens costs money and you earn that back over a time and calculated number of lenssales) for HOYA a return on investment. Keeping that in mind will make room for some new lenses, but for everything we would want. Making choices of what we want/ask is important in that matter. My impression is not that people want choice; it is that people want all kinds of exotic lenses but for for "free". When Pentax do release a cheap, optically good lens, then they complain that it isn't built like a tank. And when it is built like a thank they complain that it cost more than a Sigma lens... Last edited by Pål Jensen; 06-10-2011 at 03:34 AM.*

06-10-2011, 10:05 PM	#56
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Nobody asks for cheap lenses, just for budget lenses: Some argue the prices were ridiculous: Go figure this stuff out. You go figure out what you are talking about. You have demonstrated you can cut and paste. However, where did I request a budget lens? You were implying that Cosina was a budget alternative Existing New Voightlander PKA stock: pentax voigtlander - Adorama.com Steve Gandy has some as well including the 58/1.4. http://www.cameraquest.com/Voigt_SL2.htm However, the $599 of the 90mm is closing in on the price of an FA 77 ltd and more than a DA 70 ltd and it is slower than both but it does have that cool close focus accy lens. I like Voightlander lenses but don't be telling me they were/are a cheap option. Last edited by Blue; 06-10-2011 at 10:24 PM.

06-10-2011, 11:20 PM	#59
freewheeler Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: amsterdam Posts: 130	DA40/2.8 $500 versus VL40/2.0 $409 DA55/1.4 $800 versus VL58/1.4 $500 Yes, I call that reasonable prices for quality MF lenses. I'd like Pentax to do that. But then again I own 3 VL's alleady. Last edited by freewheeler; 06-10-2011 at 11:35 PM.*

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

06-09-2011, 05:27 PM	#46
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by Blue Actually, the seeming cranked out a batch of A 50mm/1.2 from thin air. 980. This is an old lens long paid for. It is also from the days before just-in-time parts delivery. Pentax had huge stocks of this lens and it took them a decade or more to clear it. The newer batches are probably from assembling from existing parts bin.

06-09-2011, 05:36 PM	#47
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Pål Jensen 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. Here YOU go again. I didn't make any cost estimates. Secondly, we already clarified that those A* fast lenses above 100mm are huge which is indicative of high prices in and of itself. Lastly, I never new and engineer that new their arse from a hot rock when it came to actually running production assembly lines. We aren't talking about 645 or 6x7 lenses either. The K 28/2 would be a relatively expensive lens regardless so what. It and the Zeiss Distagon were designed together. The A 50/1.2 has already shown the people will buy new stock of it and that is the 1st lenses that RonHendriks1966 and discussed. The third one I suggested was the A* 85/1.4. Originally posted by Pål Jensen This is an old lens long paid for. It is also from the days before just-in-time parts delivery. Pentax had huge stocks of this lens and it took them a decade or more to clear it. The newer batches are probably from assembling from existing parts bin. If you go back and look at my posts on the subject, you will see that I stated that as a possibility. Apparently you and Laurentiu Cristofor think that pentax should just keep given us warmed over DA 35 f2.4 plastibody lenses and be done with it. I don't run Pentax bodies to use Tammy af Zooms or Sigma lenses. *Its the Pentax and Asahi Glass.*

06-10-2011, 12:12 AM	#48
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by Blue Apparently you and Laurentiu Cristofor think that pentax should just keep given us warmed over DA 35 f2.4 plastibody lenses and be done with it. I don't run Pentax bodies to use Tammy af Zooms or Sigma lenses. *Its the Pentax and Asahi Glass.* Oh boy, this is what happens when you inhale too much fungus that grew on the surface of thoriated lens elements...

06-10-2011, 01:56 AM	#49
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675 Original Poster	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Oh boy, this is what happens when you inhale too much fungus that grew on the surface of thoriated lens elements... This one is actually very funny But I do agree with Blue that I want Pentax glass on my camera. I'm different in that way that I don't run on old glass. So why I thought up of a new lens (DA135-270mm/f2.8) to fitt my bill (and probably some others) and noth having to buy a Sigma lens in future. Then again all of these, wheater it is new DA, DA-L or DM, have to be designed, produced and sold and make on long run (starting a lens costs money and you earn that back over a time and calculated number of lenssales) for HOYA a return on investment. Keeping that in mind will make room for some new lenses, but for everything we would want. Making choices of what we want/ask is important in that matter.

06-10-2011, 04:20 AM	#51
freewheeler Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: amsterdam Posts: 130	Originally posted by Pål Jensen My impression is not that people want choice; it is that people want all kinds of exotic lenses but for for "free". When Pentax do release a cheap, optically good lens, then they complain that it isn't built like a tank. And when it is built like a thank they complain that it cost more than a Sigma lens... Nobody is asking in this thread for cheap MF lenses. Just not zeiss price and bulkiness. And yes, it is about choices. To chose between AF and MF, between plastic and metal. The question is wether or not there is a market for modern MF lenses. Voigtlander produced lenses of around 500$ for PKA but doesn't anymore. Good quality, reasonable price. Could and would Pentax do that also is the question. And more importantly: is there enough demand for it to justify such a lens line?

06-10-2011, 06:36 AM	#52
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Oh boy, this is what happens when you inhale too much fungus that grew on the surface of thoriated lens elements... Except my 8-element version of the Super Tak 50/1.4 doesn't have thoriated elements nor does my 2 versions of the first 28mm Super Tak. IO do have an S-M-C 50/1.4 but it stays in the gun safe on the Spot F next to the 1911A1. Last edited by Blue; 06-10-2011 at 06:42 AM.

06-10-2011, 07:43 AM	#53
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	I don't think I would ever invest in such a DM-WR lens. Not as long as there is old manual glass on the market. Especially the cheap Russian glass. Ok, it's not weather sealed, but I really don't care, because the lenses are old anyway. You can get 135mm f2.8 for peanuts. (Jupiter, Tair, etc..) My Jupiter 11 was 15 USD. I honestly don't care if it gets wet. Why would I buy a new DM 135 f2.8 WR for the 20x of that price?

06-10-2011, 08:13 AM	#54
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Clavius I don't think I would ever invest in such a DM-WR lens. Not as long as there is old manual glass on the market. Especially the cheap Russian glass. Ok, it's not weather sealed, but I really don't care, because the lenses are old anyway. You can get 135mm f2.8 for peanuts. (Jupiter, Tair, etc..) My Jupiter 11 was 15 USD. I honestly don't care if it gets wet. Why would I buy a new DM 135 f2.8 WR for the 20x of that price? No one has brought up "cheap" 135/2.8 lenses nor average lenses. However, the A* 135/1.8 mentioned earlier is a horse of another color. We have been mainly referring to the best, the Legends. K15, K28/2, A 50/1.2, A* 85/1.4 for example. Maybe even the K 8.4mm/2.8 Fisheye.

06-10-2011, 09:53 PM	#55
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by freewheeler Nobody is asking in this thread for cheap MF lenses. Nobody asks for cheap lenses, just for budget lenses: Originally posted by Blue I was just pointing out that the Cosina/Voightlander lenses aren't a budget option . . . well maybe compared to the Zeiss line they are. Originally posted by freewheeler Voigtlander produced lenses of around 500$ for PKA but doesn't anymore. Good quality, reasonable price. Some argue the prices were ridiculous: Originally posted by Blue The reason Cosina can get the ridiculous prices for their lenses is that Pentax isn't producing many mf lenses anymore. Go figure this stuff out.

06-10-2011, 11:06 PM	#57
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by Blue You go figure out what you are talking about. You have demonstrated you can cut and paste. However, where did I request a budget lens? You were implying that Cosina was a budget alternative I guess it's time for you to show that you can read, understand, cut and paste, and quote. I'll be looking forward to your effort.

06-10-2011, 11:08 PM	#58
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor I guess it's time for you to show that you can read, understand, cut and paste, and quote. I'll be looking forward to your effort.

06-10-2011, 11:24 PM	#60
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by Blue However, the $599 of the 90mm is closing in on the price of an FA 77 ltd and more than a DA 70 ltd and it is slower than both but it does have that cool close focus accy lens. You forget that the 90mm is an APO lens, and as a result it is not surprising it is more expensive than what its specs may indicate if you're just looking at focal length and aperture. Originally posted by Blue Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor I guess it's time for you to show that you can read, understand, cut and paste, and quote. I'll be looking forward to your effort. :rabbit: You win 1 point for participating! Just to help you out, this is what I actually said: Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor I'm not sure how Pentax could provide same quality cheaper than the Cosina Z/V series (thus selling more) I never said Voigtlander were cheap or budget, I just said that I can't see Pentax providing the same build quality at a cheaper price. It is fine to disagree, but you should make sure first that you understand what you are disagreeing on.