[lytrytyr]

Look, I think that if pentax released a classically styled, all metal, 18mm f2 and a 35mm 1.4 for a little less than 600 dollars that performed as well or better than the Fujis people would be pretty damn excited.

With 15mm and 21mm primes in the current lineup,
I don't think we'll see a new 18mm prime from Pentax, fast or slow.
Don't forget the 14/2.8, though, which is fast for its focal length.

An update of the FA31 might be more likely,
even if the mythical LX-D never appears.

[Giklab]

A thought crossed my mind: Maybe Pentax is relying on legacy glass? Everyone points at the backwards compatibility as an important feature, so maybe they think you're satisfied with them and focuses on other things.

[lytrytyr]

Like Sony with the NEX?

[snake]

Why does nearly every company out there, particularly the mirrorless makers, have fast, small primes on the wide end of things and Pentax doesn't?

Canon has a F2 35mm eq pancake in the M line.

The best Pentax has is the FA* 24, which is discontinued, large, and expensive when one finds it.

At the least, it's inexcusable for any serious company to not have a fast 35mm eq lens at all, large or small. Sure, one can go with Sigma, though they aren't unanimously praised for size, nor performance.

[lytrytyr]

Why does nearly every company out there, particularly the mirrorless makers, have fast, small primes on the wide end of things and Pentax doesn't?

It's very hard (impossible?) to make a fast wide retrofocus lens in a small package.
The pancakes (DA 21, M20, Color-Skopar) are f/3.2 or slower.
Going slightly larger, the [F]A20/2.8 are as good as it gets.

[snake]

It's very hard (impossible?) to make a fast wide retrofocus lens in a small package.
The pancakes (DA 21, M20, Color-Skopar) are f/3.2 or slower.
Going slightly larger, the [F]A20/2.8 are as good as it gets.

Yeah, that FA is a tough find and expensive, too. I'm not paying 8-900 Euros for it. I wanted the DA14, but was recommended away from it on this forum, so just got a Tamron 17-50 and I'm done with it. We'll see how much I like it compared to a prime.

[lytrytyr]

just got a Tamron 17-50 and I'm done with it. We'll see how much I like it compared to a prime.

That Tamron is the only zoom I have
(apart from freebie kit lenses that came with my K-x cameras).
If you get it focused, it's a very good lens.

[snake]

So far the test shots are saying just that. Facebook compression, but I'm getting the idea. I just hope I don't start thinking that the DA14 might have been a better choice.

[Medium FormatPro]

The problem is that while a 31mm lens is decently wide on full frame, on APS-C it suddenly is a normal lens. And Pentax doesn't have anything faster than f2.8 that is wider than the FA 31

Sigma is kicking Pentax to the curb, on items such as quality, cost, range of focal lengths, and (as the op noticed) especially on aperature range. I would not be surprised if for the entire PK lens mounts - that Sigma isn't now outselling the Pentax label on lens'

[Rondec]

Sigma is kicking Pentax to the curb, on items such as quality, cost, range of focal lengths, and (as the op noticed) especially on aperature range. I would not be surprised if for the entire PK lens mounts - that Sigma isn't now outselling the Pentax label on lens'

Possibly for individual focal lengths, but probably not as a whole. People who buy into Pentax, often want small lenses and that is an anathema to Sigma. When I compare the Sigma 35 f1.4 to the FA 31, I see a lens that is twice as large, sharper, but with harsher bokeh. I'll keep my FA 31 for the time being.

That said, I do wish that Pentax didn't have such a focus on tiny lenses and was willing to let their lenses get a little larger in order to get a little more speed. If the DA 40 was f2, it would have been perfect, even if it had to be thicker. And that's true for most of the DA limiteds -- they would have gained a lot by being a half stop to stop faster than they are.

[Giklab]

I doubt the 40mm can be made faster. It's the limit of the design (of this size). Most (somewhat recent) 40mm's are 2.8: Pentax, Canon, [correction: Voigtlander, which is f/2 but bigger than the 40 ltd.].
Was thinking of the design, Zeiss Tessar.

PS the 40mm 1.4 Voigtlander doesn't count.

[lytrytyr]

If the DA 40 was f2, it would have been perfect, even if it had to be thicker. And that's true for most of the DA limiteds -- they would have gained a lot by being a half stop to stop faster than they are.

The FA Limited lenses already offer that choice:
FA 31/1.8 versus DA 35/2.8,
FA 43/1.9 versus DA 40/2.8,
and FA 77/1.8 versus DA 70/2.4.

Personally, I prefer smaller lenses like the DA 70 with faster AF
(alongside bigger, faster MF lenses).

[lytrytyr]

Most (somewhat recent) 40mm's are 2.8: Pentax, Canon, Zeiss etc.

40mm Zeiss?

Distagon T* 4/40 IF CFE

[Digitalis]

40mm Zeiss?

Distagon T* 4/40 IF CFE

That is a 6X6 medium format lens, what is being discussing here is 35mm and aps-c formats - though voigtlander make the Nokton 40mm f/1.4 ( for rangefinders) so there is some room for improvement in terms of speed for 40mm lenses.
The Nokton can produce some pretty harsh looking bokeh especially when there are bright highlights in the background at f/1.4. But when it is stopped down it is a superb lens, though it isn't a common focal length for RF cameras, so if you don't use the external viewfinder you have the dilemma of using the 35mm framelines or the 50mm ones.

[lytrytyr]

That is a 6X6 medium format lens, what is being discussing here is 35mm and aps-c formats

OP didn't actually specify which format, within this "SLR lens discussion."