Originally posted by normhead
I've heard the M or K 20 is the best in that range if you can come up with one.
Not so sure.
The M version is worth its weight in gold, considering it can use cheap, small filters and it is so petite... but i think that the A version is definitely better. Can't compare on digital cause i sold the M version to buy the A long time ago, when the only option was film

I bet the Samyang would do much better, unfortunately it's almost impossible to find second hand, and with all the lenses i already have in the 19/24mm range i can't justify the expense of a brand new one.
To be sincere, i could... if i were capable to sell one or two of my expensive objectives. Unfortunately it seems to go against my own nature, so i have to come to term with (financial) reality and do what i can without complaining

I love recent Samyang lenses though, and i just found a nice second-hand 24mm for a great price.
It will proudly take its place among its wide-angle FF relatives (14mm and 35mm), that proved to be great lenses despite their rather cheap build.
If i can afford to shoot stopped down, using the green button procedure (preferably on tripod), and i want relatively small lenses with great build, the first line of PK lenses (SMC Pentax) are still a great option. They are sooo well built! Almost at the level of the best of the best (Super-Multi-Coated line), with the ease of use of the bayonet mount.
At the time of the Super-A i sold most K and M lenses to buy the new A's with electric contacts with linear (vs logarithmic) diaphragm actuation. Now i'm buying them back, especially the K line, cause some later optical designs with a simplified layout are not at the same level.
I'd be happy to see a modern version of the 3.5/24mm, 3.5/28mm and 3.5/35mm, but i am afraid we'll never see anything like that.
Btw, if Pentax decided to release a replica with the same characteristics the price would be proportionally much higher than in the mid seventies. I guess they would cost more than a recent Cosina/Voigtlander MF prime, which are in no way cheap themselves... and people would still complain that the build is not on par with the vintage ones, even if wide open IQ, vignetting, distortion and coma were much better than the originals. After all, the best vintage lenses are not VISIBLY (with reasonable print size) worse than modern optics, if stopped down at their sweet spot.
Pixel peeping is a whole different story, but it's not the kind of movie i like

I'm sorry, Norman. I agree with most of your points but i don't see much chances. Your desires would probably never be fulfilled.
I know, having a choice is always good. The more of it, the better. Unfortunately pentaxians don't have so much of it, since quite long. On full frame the lack of choice has cut the wings of the K-1. Price vs quality/features the camera was so good when released that it could have won some market share, instead of mainly catering to loyalists (like me).
Let's come to term with reality, while Ricoh announced two new primes that will be hopefully released when the K-1 will be approaching the end of its commercial life, the smallish Samyang has taken a few serious steps forward. It's not about potential, it's about commercial policy.
Without innovative choices Ricoh will soon get less and less relevant, at least as lens maker.
Some ideas just need some courage, not money.
What about releasing the Pentax PKAF specs to public domain?
What about trashing the agreements that very, very likely prevent Tokina and Tamron from releasing PKAF lenses?
If you want to sell optics, you need to sell cameras. If you want to sell cameras, as good as they might be, you need a decent choice of compatible lenses (preferably with fast AF). If the company don't want (or can't) go all-in, why don't pave the way to other subjects, which could give the choices that are currently severely lacking?
If the choices of AF and MF lenses were as diverse as we had at the time of the Z-1 or the MZ line, don't you think that the K-1 would have sold much, much more? I guess that probably the OEM lenses would have done a little better too.
cheers
Paolo
Last edited by cyberjunkie; 12-23-2017 at 05:34 AM.