[pres589]

.... the plastic 35 and 50 cover full frame. If they were made APS-C only, they wouldn't shrink by 50%. That's not how this works. DA*55 half as big and half the weight? Yes, please, sign me up!

[Rondec]

What makes anyone think a newly designed HD DA / D-FA Limited WR DC lens of any focal length would cost $600 street? Ricoh’s R&D and process engineering costs for ALL Limiteds was amortized years ago. They are 100% free cash flow now.

I do wonder about this aspect. At 700 dollars the benefit of a 28mm f2.8 over the FA 31 is some savings with regard to price, but maybe not enough to make up for the stop and a half difference in aperture. To have it be the cheap lens that everyone is seeming to ask for in this thread, you would need to have a build that is mostly plastic, probably no sealing. Basically a wider version of the DA 35. But the DA 35 is already pretty small, pretty sharp, covers full frame and is faster than what is mentioned at f2.4. It just isn't quite as wide, but step back two steps and you're there.

[monochrome]

I do wonder about this aspect. At 700 dollars the benefit of a 28mm f2.8 over the FA 31 is some savings with regard to price, but maybe not enough to make up for the stop and a half difference in aperture. To have it be the cheap lens that everyone is seeming to ask for in this thread, you would need to have a build that is mostly plastic, probably no sealing. Basically a wider version of the DA 35. But the DA 35 is already pretty small, pretty sharp, covers full frame and is faster than what is mentioned at f2.4. It just isn't quite as wide, but step back two steps and you're there.

They might be able to market a straight D FA 28/2.8 at the 28~105 build standard for $499 launch price. They could probably build a complete set of very good standard prime focal lengths at that construction standard around that price (using some molded poly elements).

[Rondec]

They might be able to market a straight D FA 28/2.8 at the 28~105 build standard for $499 launch price. They could probably build a complete set of very good standard prime focal lengths at that construction standard around that price (using some molded poly elements).

Maybe so. If they are going to do a 20mm full frame prime, I would prefer one a bit wider -- closer to 20mm than to 30mm. I would be fine with slower aperture -- f2.8 or even f4, as long as it was pretty sharp wide open.

[monochrome]

Maybe so. If they are going to do a 20mm full frame prime, I would prefer one a bit wider -- closer to 20mm than to 30mm. I would be fine with slower aperture -- f2.8 or even f4, as long as it was pretty sharp wide open.

Sure, my A20/2.8 is a wonderful lens around daybreak and dusk, but my K20/4 is also very good, and probably less expensive to update. However (with no knowledge of optical engineering) I have to wonder how much slide rule lens design information can be transferred to CAD.

One assumes Ricoh has at least some embedded optical assumptions from which to start; but are those assumptions even marginally useful when taking into account modern glass properties, lens blank machining tools, manufacturing assembly processes and component availability?

Maybe they have to start from scratch anyway.

.:

[sergeremy]

What makes anyone think a newly designed HD DA / D-FA Limited WR DC lens of any focal length would cost $600 street? Ricoh’s R&D and process engineering costs for ALL Limiteds was amortized years ago. They are 100% free cash flow now.

This may be the crux of the matter. Yet that must hold true for the FA31 also, or am I mistaken? And it is WAY more expensive than the DA limiteds.

What I see here is that there is no modern 28 or30mm prime for Pentax, ltd or not, DA or FA, at a price point well under a french month's minimum wage (around 1200€). I'll grudgingly accept the idea it's unfeasible for a brand new ltd design. But a modern plastic fantastic 28 (or slightly better)? I would definitely look into that!

[Gimbeley]

Sorry, but this is exactly what you said - except not in those words. But, I wasn't quoting you so it's fine.

Make up your mind. Is it "exactly" what I said, or isn't it?

You're going out of your way to attack Ricoh Imaging's decision of making high end D FA lenses. A perfect match for "I don't want them to make this", don't you think?

No, Kunzite. Criticizing a product isn't an expectation that the product's designers exist to serve the critic, and your use of the word "attack" is erroneous at best and diminishing of my ability to formulate a dispassionate opinion at worst. Everybody has a right to criticize another person's actions. A critique is not an attack. I can criticize the fact that you have continued to put words in my mouth and misrepresent my argument in this conversation despite me already clarifying for you, and I can call your actions rude, but I don't have a right to criticize or attack who you are as a person, just because you did that. That would be irrelevant to the material fact of your actions. I don't know these people who work at Ricoh, but I can see what they've done and talk about what they've done. Their actions are not above criticism.

And finally, please stop with the sarcastic winking emoji. It's incredibly annoying because it's like you're trying to imply that you know that I know something that I'm not saying, which is wrong.

[monochrome]

This may be the crux of the matter. Yet that must hold true for the FA31 also, or am I mistaken? And it is WAY more expensive than the DA limiteds.

What I see here is that there is no modern 28 or30mm prime for Pentax, ltd or not, DA or FA, at a price point well under a french month's minimum wage (around 1200€). I'll grudgingly accept the idea it's unfeasible for a brand new ltd design. But a modern plastic fantastic 28 (or slightly better)? I would definitely look into that!

The FA31 was released in 2001. R&D and engineering expense are fully amortized. The current Retail Price reflects cost of materials + cost of assembly + cost of holding inventory + profit to Ricoh = Factory Price, then Markup at regional Distributors + Markup at retailer = Retail Price.

Ricoh sets a MAP price the market will bear, at which they continue to sell lenses. We don’t Know the materials and assembly cost for FA31, and whether the eventual Retail Price includes a substantial reputation premium (largest profit margin and lower volume than other Limiteds).

It is unclear whether the batch run begun January, 2016 (for K-1 release) is complete, or ongoing. It seems unlikely any FA Limited lens would be updated before current inventory is exhausted, if then.

[Kunzite]

@Gimbeley:
You're seeing too much behind a simple wink. Or rather, you're seeing what you want to see despite it? How about... "hey, let's not take this too seriously, it's just a disagreement!"?

On another thread, 29 people already said they'll buy the first D FA* prime on release. You say that I'm rude; OTOH saying that there is no reason to make that lens, and the subsequent "there are reasons for madness" and "pile of crap" could be seen as rude towards the potential customers.
Or we could decide to not take this too seriously; it's not too late.

[sergeremy]

The FA31 was released in 2001. R&D and engineering expense are fully amortized.

That's what I thought. So they don't have any reason to design another limited lens around the 28-30mm mark, as long as the 31 keeps selling at it's current price.

I'm just wondering then, why not a cheaper version around that same FL, for those of us who can't afford the 31? Not the OP's original wish, but I think it might sell - there's nothing modern, at a reasonable price (that's subjective, I know) between the 21mm and 35mm primes. To me, on aps-c that's a big gap. So I see where the OP is coming from.

[Gimbeley]

Kunzite, Last time I'm doing this. I didn't say "no reason to make that lens," in reference to the D FA* 50/1.4 or any other lens. I said there's no reason the new D FA lenses need to be so big and expensive in general. I further clarified the comment by framing it in the context of a comparison with Canon's premium lenses, which are good enough designs to be lauded as the standards in their niches, yet are often lighter and less expensive than their equivalent D FA's. What's not to understand here? I feel like I've explained myself forwards and backwards and upside-down already, but you keep finding ways to put words in my mouth. Re-read my earlier posts if you still don't understand.

In regard to the DA FA* 50/1.4, in the same focal length, Canon's L lens equivalent is 8 ounces lighter, according to the weight of the D FA* 50mm that you cited earlier. The Canon 50/1.2L is also a half stop faster than the Pentax and the image quality is so good that it's doubtful, to me, that Pentax could out-of-the-blue bring a design to market that just happens to be that much better optically to justify the added weight.

[pres589]

That's what I thought. So they don't have any reason to design another limited lens around the 28-30mm mark, as long as the 31 keeps selling at it's current price.

I'm just wondering then, why not a cheaper version around that same FL, for those of us who can't afford the 31? Not the OP's original wish, but I think it might sell - there's nothing modern, at a reasonable price (that's subjective, I know) between the 21mm and 35mm primes. To me, on aps-c that's a big gap. So I see where the OP is coming from.

This is how I ended up with a Sigma 28 EX matched with my K-5 II; faster than f2.8 max, and with the edges removed via shooting a full frame lens on crop, the performance is pretty good.

You sound like someone that would vote for my many times previously mentioned idea, a 26mm f2.4 plastic and metal lens styled like the plastic 35. There's nowhere to steal the optics design from though so it wouldn't be nearly as cheap to engineer as, say, the DA 50 1.8. Would you pay, say, $350 USD street prices for such a lens, or at least be interested? I would. Screw drive, no WR, just give me quick shift and a distance scale.

[Kunzite]

@Gimbeley:
There is no Canon L equivalent for the D FA* 50mm f/1.4. The closest lens currently available might be the Sigma Art - which is about the same size and weight. Or the Zeiss Otus.

You won't be reading this about the D FA*:
"Technically the EF 50mm f/1.2 USM L is a mediocre performer with respect to its resolution characteristic." Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 USM L (full format) - Review / Test Report - Analysis

[sergeremy]

This is how I ended up with a Sigma 28 EX matched with my K-5 II

Edit: this is all from an APS-C perspective.

That's too big a lens for me. I chose Pentax because I knew I could play with decent compact legacy lenses for cheap until I found my favorite focal length(s), and that there were some pretty nice compact DA limiteds I could upgrade to when I did. Alas, my preferred FL is definitely 28mm, and that is in the middle of the DA ltd gap between 21 and 35. Neither of those is "close enough", to me. I make do with my M28 F3.5, but yes I would definitely consider:

a 26mm f2.4 plastic and metal lens styled like the plastic 35 [...] $350 USD street prices. Screw drive, no WR, just give me quick shift and a distance scale.

[Gimbeley]

@Gimbeley:
There is no Canon L equivalent for the D FA* 50mm f/1.4.

L = Canon's premium/professional tier with highly corrected optics, latest focus motor, weather sealing, all the bells and whistles.
D FA* = Pentax's premium/professional tier with highly corrected optics, latest focus motor, weather sealing, all the bells and whistles, but somehow it isn't equivalent at all to the Canon L series because kunzite said so.