[Docrwm]

That might arguably have been true in the days of 35mm film, but is most certainly not true for APS-c DSLRs. The classic "normal" FOV is now obtained with a 35mm lens. BTW, note that a 35mm lens on APS-c delivers the equivalent FOV of a 53mm lens, and the so-called 50mm lens of the film era actually was about 52mm...

Regards, Jim

Jim,
Everyone who is into dSLRs says that but look at Nikon - 5 version of inexpensive introductory 50mm lenses for dSLRs. They know something about what leads people into more expensive lenses and its not that the 50 is out of date.

[lguckert79]

Do you mean in store pricing? Because their online site has the 60-250 for $1,874.94 which is pretty much in line with everyone else now and the 50-135 is "Currently Out of Stock".

yeah there in store pricing is wrong for some of the lenses they have on display you are right the online store is updated but the 50-135mm is still not right let people know. even if it is not as cheap as it was befor all this happened it is still better than 1600.00 its 1036.94 at ritz so if you were in the market for this lens get it while you can.

[jamesk8752]

Jim,
Everyone who is into dSLRs says that but look at Nikon - 5 version of inexpensive introductory 50mm lenses for dSLRs. They know something about what leads people into more expensive lenses and its not that the 50 is out of date.

I think it's a hangover from the film days rather than a considered choice by Nikon owners. But of course Nikon doesn't want to rock the boat and salespeople the world over don't want to do so either. "Sell 'em what they ask for, not what they need."

The 50mm lens is considered to be a short portrait lens on APS-c and its FOV is really a little narrow for general use. But your mileage may vary, as always...

Regards, Jim

[twitch]

I'd want a DA* Prime between 20-35 mm and F/2 or faster. I can understand for some, what is missing is the >300 mm FLs. I can understand that too. I was just curious if anyone else felt this need or if everyone wants something different or is 100% happy with what they have (cured of LBA)....

You are describing a lens a lot like the one below (on the right). Apart from lack of weather sealing it has a lot going for it. Even if Pentax came out with a DA 24/2 I don’t think I’d “upgrade” as the FA has the aperture ring and covers full frame. With recent DA ltd price increases, the FA*24 is looking good value too.

[top-quark]

Technology marches apace: your 35mm F2.x occupies the same niche as a film-era 50mm F1.x.

You lose 1 - 2 stops in aperture but in the meantime you've gained, what, four stops in sensitivity so you're quids in. Smaller max. aperture keeps cost and weight down.

[magkelly]

What's most frustrating to me is having cameras that can take technically better images than anything possible over the first century of photographic history, and hundreds of lenses to choose to in a variety of focal lengths, speeds, sizes, and prices, and then have people constantly complain that some particular piece of equipment they want isn't available. If you can't manage to take pictures with what *is* available, just what exactly does that say?

Particularly when Pentax actually does offer a decent line of somewhat pricey but very nice lenses. I concur. If you can't take pictures with a $300 plus lens then what "do" you need to take good pics?The most expensive lens I own cost me like $60. (It's not even my best lens at that.) A $300 plus lens is pretty much the stuff of daydreams around here. Most of my lenses $5-20 max. The way I see it people who can afford the lenses and cameras in the current Pentax line up should maybe be a bit more appreciative of what they can get and less anxious about what they haven't got, yet.

10 years ago I'll bet 90% of the people doing most of the grouching on this forum would have near killed for a DSLR like the K-5 and a few good WR lenses. I mean look at how far they have come in just that amount of time. Seriously, sometimes when it comes to wanting new gear I think some of you people are a little bat shiz crazy. It's not like they aren't busy giving us all new lenses once in a while and an even more wonderful new camera or two every year or so. Giving us options we've never had. No, they're not making all the gear some of us seem to want, but what they are giving us just gets better and better with time.

Take a long, realistic look back at what they've introduced in the past decade or so, at what's just coming out now. Think about what you were shooting with back then, the limitations that our equipment had back then and about how much we've actually gone past them today. (If you need a visual. Think about using an old 286 vs say top of the line PC or Mac. ) Now, do you still really feel justified in that need to grouch, REALLY? Or is that just the sound of your own impatience you're hearing?

Personally I think the K5 is a bloody miracle even if it's not FF and I would not turn my nose up at it or any WR lens I could get to go with it if I could actually afford to go there. Just the idea of having that high end of a DSLR and lenses that I can shoot in the rain, fog, sleet, snow, sand, surf, with? Compared to what I had 10 years ago? It completely blows my mind that anyone would not stop to enjoy that, to value all that.

Listening to some of the people on here? It's like driving a 15 year old beat up Ford and watching people driving around in a freakin brand spanking new Jaguar vetch about not having exactly the right matching leather seat trim that they wanted because they don't make it in the right color yet. I can't help it. You all just make me giggle my arse off sometimes at how much you all feel you're all entitled to and how utterly fast you always want it! Some people on here I swear even if they had the moon in terms of gear they'd still ask for even more. In fact I'd bet there are people out there who do have FF top of the line Nikons, Canons, et all who still find a reason to b- instead of just going out and using it all!!!

;P

[Ash]

In the end, we can complain all we want about the lack of cheap yet fast lenses, waiting for that $200 DA 50/1.2 to arrive, or we can save up for what already exists and does a reasonable job for the price: DA 35/2.4 - very cheap yet very good! FA 50/1.4 - still a cost effective way to satisfy the need for speed; DA 70 - brilliant lens, and fast enough for most applications for this focal length; FA 43 - worth every cent.

[lguckert79]

i do love my da35 f2.4 it is one of my favorit lenses in my bag and if it is fast glass i need i refer to that or my 50mm f2 A lens and i live with the fact that the most expensive lens i own is the DA 35/2.4 because im not that well off to even think about any thing else im happy to get a trift store lens now and then and that is if i have the money so you people that complain about the lack of try wearing my shoes and then start complaining

[Clavius]

In the end, we can complain all we want about the lack of cheap yet fast lenses, waiting for that $200 DA 50/1.2 to arrive, or we can save up for what already exists and does a reasonable job for the price: DA 35/2.4 - very cheap yet very good! FA 50/1.4 - still a cost effective way to satisfy the need for speed; DA 70 - brilliant lens, and fast enough for most applications for this focal length; FA 43 - worth every cent.

Neh, I would price a Pentax SMC DFA 50mm f1.2 WR DC ED IF ltd at 50 dollars higher. (That lens would be awesome though.)