[ftpaddict]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Some think the A* is a superior lens. Wonder how much that one costs?

[lithos]

Actually, the reason why most FA lenses where withdrawn from the European market, is because of the lead soldering used in the electronics. And no, it's not that simple to change lead soldering to non lead soldering, which meant Pentax abbondend the FA line altogether...

Silver or tin/antimony solders really suck. I lost a Dell laptop after the internal connection to the power jack came loose from the motherboard. Repairman said they couldn't repair it, as it was "special" solder that they didn't have and couldn't get the right equipment to repair. Before you ask, it was a secondhand notebook that was perfectly fine in every other respect.

So, instead of a small amount of lead getting into the environment, there's now a whole lot of polycarbonate, copper and other things getting into the environment...

It is a damn shame. I like to think they had to change because Pentax aren't the sort of company that can afford to build a thousand different lenses at once, but really I think that Pentax changes to suit the mood, as most companies would. More zooms, essentially. And now, as the trend is toward larger zooms, like the 18-250mm Tamron, final IQ is sacrificed, as build may be to keep the lens at an affordable cost, because this wide range tend to appeal only to the consumer-level shooters.

Hell, Pentax didn't design or make the first "pro" DA* SDM pair themselves. They're just rebadged Tokinas. (And, as you know, buying one of the 16-45's is a game of Russian roulette in itself.)

I miss the age of the fast normal. I'd love to see an SDM f1.2 50mm lens from the A-series. With aperture ring. Or a 28mm equivalent of that - with the same wide-open aperture.

[k100d]

Some think the A* is a superior lens. Wonder how much that one costs?

SMC PENTAX-A* 85mm 1:1.4 lens legendary for K20D BIN - (eBay.ca item 310041888153 end time 16-May-08 11:11:32 EDT)
snap it up before it's too late

the A85 and FA77 are actually very similar
Two Brothers and a Cousin - the A* 85/1.4, FA 77, and FA* 85/1.4: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

[Mechan1k]

Craziness ... what i hate is people who have bidding wars when there is still 6 days to go.
It's bloody annoying when you see the price skyrocket and there's still ages to go.
It's a Seller's market on eBay ... as the morons out there go crazy.

[Miserere]

They can sell all of the 77mm f/1.8s they can make. Why re-introduce a lens that's 8mm longer and 1/6 of stop faster?

If I may be so anal, the difference between them is 0.73 stops.

[Confused]

Hi lithos

As the trend is toward larger zooms, like the 18-250mm Tamron, final IQ is sacrificed, as build may be to keep the lens at an affordable cost, because this wide range tend to appeal only to the consumer-level shooters.

Having risen from humble beginnings and slowly but surely clambered up the "greasy-pole" of social standing to the exalted position of "consumer-level shooter", it's finally dawned on me that I've clearly moved further along the 'food-chain' than I had first realised......Blimey !!
Nevertheless I seem to have transgressed the rarified tenets to which you adhere, so to avoid causing further offence, I will naturally do the decent thing & take myself off to an appropriate site in order to commit ritual hara-kiri (切腹).....!!
I humbly apologise without reservation for having had the brass-necked temerity to purchase such a lens, so Sayonara &
farewell, baby !! BTW, to whom should I endow my "consumer-level" collection of Linhof, Mamiya MF & Olympus OM equipment ?

Best regards
Richard

P.S. No offence taken, honest !

[kurious0]

oh my gosh, so far no buyers yet. phew! give me a couple more years to save up for this beast.

[Tom S.]

You are saving up for a "red X"?

[lithos]

BTW, to whom should I endow my "consumer-level" collection of Linhof, Mamiya MF & Olympus OM equipment ?

All that gear and you're still insecure when someone makes throws out an idea for the Pentax lens lineup. Which only, oh, let's say, a couple of hundred other people have done on this forum in the past several years or so.

Poor diddums. I see my talking of lenses is no match for your pissing competition with camera bodies. You should get a Leica - it's what Cartier-Bresson used, after all! You'd then be well on your way to brand name-dropping, camera-wank nirvana. And a Rolleiflex! Lotta famous photographers used them - therefore, simply buying one should firmly engrave your name ("Confused," which seems utterly appropriate) deeply in the annals of photographic history. Oh, and a scratched Nikon F4 - you know, from all the times you had to hit the dirt when you were covering Gulf War One.

Make sure you go "logo-free" when you design your Leica through Leica à la carte website - it says on there that's the proffessional choice.

Having all those camera bodies doesn't necessarily make you a photographer. It just makes you a collector.

I do sincerely hope you recognise the irony of responding to the claim that Pentax should make more primes which are both easier to design and cheaper to produce than a zoom of a equivalent by saying "I own me a bunch expensive and fancy cameras, so I'm more qualified than any of you because a person's spending habits and choice of equipment are directly proportional to their worth to society, to say nothing of how good a photographer they are."

Of course, I should have added to my above post, that now that Pentax is part of Hoya, it should be getting high quality optical glass on the cheap. I know, as someone else mentioned, that the Hoya optical glass manufacturing division is separate from the imaging division, but I'd be willing to bet that would be solely for tax reasons.

I'm fairly certain that Pentax wouldn't be paying full price for good glass now. I hope not, but correct me if I'm wrong. If my theory holds, then Pentax should now be able to crank out all manner of glass across the spectrum, the same number of lenses, hopefully, that they had back in '82, according to the little "PENTAX LENSES AND ACCESSORIES" booklet that came with my ME Super (they had two 35mm lenses!)

[Confused]

Hi again lithos

I'd like to pose a very simple question. Did it ever occur to you why Pentax went to the trouble of obtaining the original design & manufacturing rights for Tamron's 18-250mm Di11 super-zoom in the first place ?? The sales figures clearly revealed that this company were successfully shifting huge numbers of the 18-250mm Di11 and because Pentax didn't have a similar model in their current line-up (which is another subject altogether), their boardroom wisely decided that it would be a profitable move to rapidly capture a sizeable chunk of this revenue stream. The phrase "Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" springs to mind !!
Anyhow, the money derived from such sales will hopefully contribute towards better & improved products in the future, so I really can't see what your problem is ? Furthermore, I have to take issue with your disparaging and inaccurate comments that:

final IQ is sacrificed

Do you really think that if Pentax's Board of Directors had had the slightest doubt about any aspect of this design, that they would still have 'signed-off' on it's production ? Reputation takes many years to earn and can be lost in an instant. I readily admit that there is some minimal 'barrel-distortion' at the extreme wide-end (18mm) but I knew about this well before I purchased the lens. So what ! This distortion is very dependant upon the type of subject one is photographing and such matters are easily corrected nowadays using editing software.

And lastly:

Having all those camera bodies doesn't necessarily make you a photographer. It just makes you a collector.......I see my talking of lenses is no match for your pissing competition with camera bodies.

You'd then be well on your way to brand name-dropping, camera-wank nirvana.

What utter balderdash ! Despite your ill-informed & condescending remarks, I have no intention of getting involved in some kind of informal slanging-match. I've been taking photos for over 40 years and continue to use ALL of my equipment on a regular basis. I am not and have never been a collector just for the sake of it, so if you believe I was 'brand-name dropping', then I'm afraid you are sadly mistaken. Furthermore, I have never once claimed they made me a photographer (Good or Bad) !
It strikes me that any insecurity is firmly in your court, so may I tactfully suggest that you 'get off your high-horse' for a moment and calm down a bit, before you burst a blood-vessel !

Best regards
Richard

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

If you think that is madness, take a look at this

Pentax-A *SMC 85/1.4 ........... V.Rare/MINT US$ 1,750.00!!!

PENTAX SMC A* 135MM F1.8, STAR 135/1.8, RARE!!! US$ 2,500.00!!!

I have used both lenses, own the 135, my brother owns the 85. I have no scientific comparison with anything else, but I can tell you that my impression is that both these lenses are fantastic. Opened up they look incredible. There is nothing there to stop the light! Of course they are a bit soft at 1.8 and 1.4, anything else would be impossible, but not so much that they can't be used. I've used the 135 to cover the wedding ceremony for several good friends who did not wanted to have a lot of slamming camera engines and flashes during this precious moment, so they banned cameras, except for me. And from the back of the church with a silent film camera with no motor I've been able to get the ring, the yes and the kiss perfectly at full open aperture (usually our churches are rather dark here in Sweden). Not a sound that disturbed, but great pictures. The 85 is absolutely the best portrait lens I ever tried.

So where is the real madness?

I say that it is not those who might pay these prices for such lenses who are mad. If they just can afford it they will not be dissapointed. Had the lenses had a more prestigeous names on them than Pentax no one would have questioned it. I say the real madness is that Pentax don't make them any more, with or without autofocus!

OK, I can buy that they don't make the 85 yet with the 77 limited in existence and the coming 55/1.4 going to cover the same purpose for the DSLRs. But the 135 would correspond to a film-age 200 mm, which was in the past a common length in many camera systems including Pentax. And that is how I use it today. And yet, the 85 would be simpler to produce I assume since it was in existence as an autofocus, a smaller technological gap to cover.

We get these mad e-bay prices on Pentax lenses because there is a large demand and a limited, slowly decreasing supply of many great Pentax lenses. And as Falconeye pointed out above, the lead thing is a myth. Make them again, Pentax! Please!


The 135/1.8 used as a 200 mm on the *istD.


The 135/1.8 is also great for macro with an extension tube on it, here used on the K20D, no tripod.

Buy it now price $2,500!!! Wow! That lens must be dang awsome! (or not?)

Hey Tom, I just saw a voigtlander for Nikon going for 1900 USD the other day on ebay. Remember me when you make your 1000USD profit when you sell it

Coming back to the topic, I think that collectors with money doesnt mind to pay 2000USD for an item they crave just to save the long weeks of research that you would need to get those lenses at an "affordable" price. Besides, I dont see the point of being condescendent with collectors. If I had the money I will surely make myself with an A* collection presto, thought I think I couldnt resist the temptation of using them.

[MrApollinax]

PENTAX 400MM Lens 400 mm ED(IF) 67 Pentax 6x7 67II USED - eBay (item 230250036080 end time May-12-08 13:03:26 PDT)

Does this qualify as ebay insanity? It looks like it is for a medium format camera.... might have been one of those "by-the-pound" lenses? Current bidding price $2,225.00 but this includes a 6x7 polaroid body!