[aleonx3]

And with the DA L 35mm f2.4 being their "answer", it would take a pretty knowledgable shopkeep to explain why its not a f1.8, and why 35mm is better for you than 50.

Unfortunately, you will not find this person in your local bestbuy, blacks, or whatever. The place where Canon and Nikon make a majority of their entry-level sales.

For us, we know that 35mm is the focal length better suited for APS-C than 50mm. But when you asked these folks who bought the cheap plastic 50/1.8 about the usability of 50mm, they have no idea.

People don't want to be told that they made a mistake of buying into Canikon and also people don't want to admit that you are lack of skills. I don't discuss with them how good my lenses (even my cheap MF lenses) are. But they do know that my pictures are far better than theirs (sharper, contrasty with color closer to the truth). I just tell them that I shoot Pentax.

You can often tell the knowledgeable Canikon from the ones who don't when you see someone holding a 5D MKII shooting without a lens hood in bright sunny day.

---

Last edited by aleonx3; 07-29-2011 at 05:52 PM.

[paperbag846]

For Pentax to gain market share, they need to be cautious and attack the niche market first. Need to give the entry level Canikon folks to think that Pentax is high-end, not low-end products.

This is a good point. Hopefully they can win over some established photographers.

Unfortunately, they have positioned themselves in a funny way. They have great "prosumer" gear, but nothing an actual "pro" would prefer over the top-end stuff offered by Nikon or Canon... at least not regularly. The size advantage might impress some wildlife photographers but I would imagine most pros would prefer a 20mm f2.8 and a full frame camera over a 15mm f4 on a crop.

In other words, they can't apparently compete at the bottom, or the top. Just the middle.

Well, I'm not so sure I agree. The KX is largely responsible for the influx of Pentax users over the last few years... not the K5.

I don't really want a 50 1.8. I do think it would be good for business though. And that business would lead Pentax to develop my DA 55 f2 limited, and my DA 24 f2.8 limited .

[aleonx3]

This is a good point. Hopefully they can win over some established photographers.

Unfortunately, they have positioned themselves in a funny way. They have great "prosumer" gear, but nothing an actual "pro" would prefer over the top-end stuff offered by Nikon or Canon... at least not regularly. The size advantage might impress some wildlife photographers but I would imagine most pros would prefer a 20mm f2.8 and a full frame camera over a 15mm f4 on a crop.

In other words, they can't apparently compete at the bottom, or the top. Just the middle.

Well, I'm not so sure I agree. The KX is largely responsible for the influx of Pentax users over the last few years... not the K5.

I don't really want a 50 1.8. I do think it would be good for business though. And that business would lead Pentax to develop my DA 55 f2 limited, and my DA 24 f2.8 limited .

Don't forgot you can not grow the market share with just one "great" product, you need the whole system and infrastructure to elevate the product image . At the moment, If Pentax can sell everything they produce from existing manufacture plants without excessive unsold inventory, they are already making progress. They do have 3 solid lines - k-r, k-5 and 645D.

Back to the original question, I simply think that making a cheap 50/1.8 AF lens is just not good strategy to entice newbie folks to join this camp as oppose to the other. With Ricoh taking over Pentax, it would be interesting to see how things unfold in the next few years. I am cautiously optimistic... hey, you never know, perhaps if FF is in the cards. Although, I had a friendly chat with another photog in a wedding, he still prefer the 7D over the 5D coming from the other camp; it just shows that APS-C will be around for a little while.

[bob13bob]

market share shrinking, not worth keeping cheap lenses in production. =/. I wonder if Ricoh will continue the kmount

[Docrwm]

market share shrinking, not worth keeping cheap lenses in production. =/. I wonder if Ricoh will continue the kmount

Geez, not again. There is an entire thread for conjecture and flights of fancy related to this issue:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/150827-facts-about-pen...ml#post1567428

[dave sz]

Most of the Nikon folks I know stop at 3. They don't care or don't know better. These folks have the D90, D300(s) and some D7k with the 18-200mm superzoom and that is their only lens.

That seems to be the case for the Nikon shooters I know too. They seem to love their 18-200 or 18-105 slow as hell zooms. I can't understand it, but then I don't shoot Nikon.

It's the same type of people that starts out with a d40 or Ti and after a month of owning the body they feel like they need to move onto a d7k or 5dmk2 because their current camera "can't do what others are showing on the internet."
It's funny.

[RioRico]

market share shrinking, not worth keeping cheap lenses in production. =/. I wonder if Ricoh will continue the kmount

Market share is increasing, not shrinking.

In other words, don't sweat it.