[Conqueror]

24 f/2 an update of the FA*

That would pretty awesome, especially if it had AW/WR

[UncleVanya]

That would pretty awesome, especially if it had AW/WR

I agree. It might also have a DC or SDM type motor and that would be fine if they kept it not much larger than existing FA* lens designs. Hard to know if this is feasible.

[Na Horuk]

24mm. Beyond that, you start getting a lot of distortion.

Come on, its 2015! I bet there is technology for high quality projections at FF 24mm, especially if it will be slower than f2
But I do agree that Pentax needs 24 and 28 mm primes, for FF as well as APSC. How they do it, FF, WR, * or Ltd, I do not know. But I need something between 21 and 31 mm, with a reasonable price tag and modern features.

[reeftool]

24 and 28mm primes were popular wide lenses in the film days so I would think they will return to the line up if the FF line is successful.

[Bondezire]

I'd like a 35 f/2 SOFT, and *24 f/1.4

[JPT]

Here are some possibilities that Ricoh is considering.

20mm f1.8
24mm f1.4
24mm f1.8
28mm f1.4
28mm f1.8

These are on a lens survey I was sent direct from Ricoh Japan, because I've bought from their web store in the past. It strikes me that if it's on that, it is at least thought to be feasible and under consideration.

If you want to see the whole extensive list, you can see the thread I started last week.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/304127-rico...ns-survey.html

[biz-engineer]

I like the field of view of the DA15 Ltd that does not work on FF.
So, the equivalent prime FL on FF would be 21mm I suppose.
Zeiss has one 21mm, but not in K mount. A 20mm would be nice to have, well , between 15mm and 30mm basically.

[interested_observer]

I like the field of view of the DA15 Ltd that does not work on FF.
So, the equivalent prime FL on FF would be 21mm I suppose.
Zeiss has one 21mm, but not in K mount. A 20mm would be nice to have, well , between 15mm and 30mm basically.

Zeiss has their 18/f3.5 in the ZK version - discontinued, but you can still find it used. You can also find an old Contax Zeiss in the C/Y mount and remount it using the Leitax.com mount kit.

[Sandy Hancock]

The cornerstone wide prime would have to be 24mm.
f/1.8 would be nice, but f/2.0 would be acceptable as long as it is properly usable wide open.
DFA* standard build and weather resistance and I would upgrade from my FA*24 in a flash.

[pathdoc]

The cornerstone wide prime would have to be 24mm.

The only problem I see with this is that it's the exact same focal length the new D-FA 24-70/2.8 zoom starts at. There's only one stop separating that and your putative D-FA 24/2.0, and if the FF really is the outstanding low-light, high-ISO, low-noise beast we all want it to be, that might leave many users saying "Why bother buying this for just one extra stop?" Granted, true aficionados might appreciate differences in rendering, and the prime enthusiasts will appreciate the smaller size, but if you're a Ricoh bean-counter then you want a broader market than that. Seems to me that an 18mm or 20mm focal length would be wiser, to differentiate it a little more from the wide end of the standard zoom. That's not to say that a D-FA* or D-FA Limited 24/2.0 wouldn't sell - it almost certainly would - but it seems to make sense to separate the first wide D-FA prime from the wide zoom just a bit. And you definitely want it to be fast (1.8 or 2.0, as you say) to give added incentive to buyers who are staying with APS-C for now, who want something faster than the 21 Limited (and future-proof if they ever shift to FF) and are prepared to pay for it.

By all means, though, make it WR/AW.

[Sandy Hancock]

The 24-70 is an event lens. I would expect a 24mm prime would be optimised for landscape (including astrophotography) use, where flare resistance, coma, corner sharpness and infinity focus performance will set it apart. If the wide zoom can do all that at f/2.8 I would agree the prime would need to be exceptional.

[fwcetus]

28mm, where it was before APS-C thinking set in.

[pathdoc]

28mm, where it was before APS-C thinking set in.

Historically, we have had wider primes (even 15mm rectilinear) going back to the Takumar days. And while it might be nice to have a D update for the FA28/2.8 prime, it would have to significantly outperform its film-era predecessor in matters of handling, IQ and possibly speed. I have the FA28/2.8, and as it gives me more than acceptable results, I won't be buying a D-FA iteration in any great hurry without a really compelling reason to do so.

[TaoMaas]

Come on, its 2015! I bet there is technology for high quality projections at FF 24mm, especially if it will be slower than f2.

Yeah, you could be right. I think even 'back in the day' Pentax made rectilinear primes wider than 24mm.

[Mattox]

If they know that they are doing primes should be a 20mm, 24mm, and the all time classic 35mm. I already have the 35mm f2 and I am very excited to use it with FF. I am sure that who treasures landscape photography and is critical about there image a 24mm 1.8-2 would be a perfect companion