[robbiec]

We all want new and different lens but I'm trying to be realistic. The 50 Macro is a stand out optically and it sits in the range sticking out like a sore thumb. We know that the DA*16-50 is coming after being redone from scratch (the SDM version being the runt of the DA* litter), the D FA21 Limited is also a brand new design and will expand the FA Limited line. There is also a wide ala f/1.4-2.0) DFA* prime coming along and a D FA zoom sitting below the 150-450 and sitting perhaps as a stablemate to the 28-105.The FA100/2.8 Macro got redone in a WR body, the FA35 & FA50 were redone into cheaper DA's (FA35/2 into DA35/2.4 & FA50/1.7 into DA50/1.8) and also got redone coating wise (HD) and from a tactile perspective.
The Uber 50 is the DFA*, no problem with that, I have one and it deserves its moniker but the FA or DFA 50/2.8 is not that far off except it can go way closer
I did quip that they could redo it as a DFA* but that would be a redesign and they would need to target f/2.0 if following the DFA* design statement of wide aperture, best optical perf and superior weather sealing whereas a rebody with HD coatings, aluminium body with WR and a DC motor would bring it back into the pack nicely while cutting down on optical research.
Bang for buck and I'd argue quite forcefully that the FA50/2.8 Macro is overall the best lens in the whole Pentax line up.

[vijaykishan]

Absolutely or give it the DFA* look with a soft tipped hood like the 85. Has to be metal bodied though. I have the FA variant and it's fabulous but I won't upgrade until they rebody. But if the go DFA* then it'll be a HD D FA*50/2 ED DC AW MACRO and cost 1500 - interesting though.

IF they ever make a DFA* 50mm 2.8 Macro with no field curvature, no CA, no flare and Pin sharp from centre to corners from F8 - F16 : they WILL have my money. This would be a killer lens for travel photography - esp if one is into panos.

[jatrax]

Quite a few lenses are fine at the wider apertures but will do the hotspot thing when stopping down, esp. beyond F8. Most of the modern Pentax lenses I've tested don't do well stopped down.

No "hot spots"...

Thanks!

[wstruth]

My wants are simple: just the new 16-50 for now.

[Belnan]

I'd like to see a full frame D FA zoom around 100-400mm on par with the crop sensor DA 55-300mm plm.

I would like to see the 55-300 be a Full frame lens. You can actually use 55 indoors, 100 is pushing it but would be great strictly outside.

[Bertrand3000]

The 50 Macro is a stand out optically and it sits in the range sticking out like a sore thumb.

I have the DFA 50 Macro. Yes, its style does not match the more recent DFA 100, but I find it beautiful (unlike the non-updated FA lenses which are ugly to my opinion). It could be WR, but I would hate to see its Clamp disappear ; it is what happened when the DFA 100 Macro was updated. Before the update, this lens had the same style as the DFA 50.

[robbiec]

I have the DFA 50 Macro. Yes, its style does not match the more recent DFA 100, but I find it beautiful (unlike the non-updated FA lenses which are ugly to my opinion). It could be WR, but I would hate to see its Clamp disappear ; it is what happened when the DFA 100 Macro was updated. Before the update, this lens had the same style as the DFA 50.

Numerous newer lens have focus locks or focus limiters since the DFA100WR, 11-18, 150-450, 70-200 immediately spring to mind.

---------- Post added 04-20-21 at 05:38 PM ----------

My wants are simple: just the new 16-50 for now.

Already on its way Bill

[Imp]

A small APS-C 28mm 1.8 limited, although I know the FA 31mm is too close for that to ever happen!

[stevebrot]

No money...plenty of lenses...no roadmap needed...

(I know...boring...)


Steve

[5ks]

Hoping for a good full frame diagonal fisheye - not necessarily a zoom like DA 10-17. Based on reviews, I understand that e.g. Samyang FF fisheye 12 mm is not as good as the 3,5/8 mm for APS-C. The latter has been one of my favourite lenses since 2010.

[stevebrot]

No money...plenty of lenses...no roadmap needed...

Ok...I relent...it would be good to see a non-*, non=limited, FF 28/2.8 on the roadmap.


Steve

(...similar 135/2.8 too?...)

[Wheatfield]

Simple really, a HD D FA50/2.8 DC WR MACRO. This lens is begging for a rebody. Optically sublime already, just redo the body. What say you?

I'd rather see them flesh out the focal lengths before reinventing their various wheels. We have a 21 on the way, how about a 105 or 135? Probably a 135 as 105 is pretty close to the 85. A new 24 would also be nice, as would a 15mm.

[robbiec]

I'd rather see them flesh out the focal lengths before reinventing their various wheels. We have a 21 on the way, how about a 105 or 135? Probably a 135 as 105 is pretty close to the 85. A new 24 would also be nice, as would a 15mm.

Doesn't the 70-200/2.8 or 70-210/4 cover those at the moment? Let's suppose that something in the 105 to 135 is in design, will they go via the Limited series like a 120/2.4 or DFA* and a no holds barred 105/1.4 or 135/2 - which would be a better halo product? because that's what these are.

Agree completely that a 24 prime was needed, until the 21 Limited was announced. We've a couple of zooms touching 24 and a Limited that also covers it so the heat is off that focal length.

I'm not seeing std primes coming out anymore other than run outs or value focused offerings. I think it will be Limited, D(F)A* or Macro series from here on in. So going back to my original proposition HD D FA50/2.8 DC WR MACRO to be perhaps followed by the HD D FA*200/4 ED DC AW MACRO to finish off the trifecta of FF Macros as being a realistic addition to the lens road map.

[Wheatfield]

Doesn't the 70-200/2.8 or 70-210/4 cover those at the moment? Let's suppose that something in the 105 to 135 is in design, will they go via the Limited series like a 120/2.4 or DFA* and a no holds barred 105/1.4 or 135/2 - which would be a better halo product? because that's what these are.

Agree completely that a 24 prime was needed, until the 21 Limited was announced. We've a couple of zooms touching 24 and a Limited that also covers it so the heat is off that focal length.

I'm not seeing std primes coming out anymore other than run outs or value focused offerings. I think it will be Limited, D(F)A* or Macro series from here on in. So going back to my original proposition HD D FA50/2.8 DC WR MACRO to be perhaps followed by the HD D FA*200/4 ED DC AW MACRO to finish off the trifecta of FF Macros as being a realistic addition to the lens road map.

If they do premium (DFA*) lenses, and I suspect that is the likely route given recent developments, then we would be seeing maximum apertures in the f/1.8 range with a 105 or 135.
A 24mm is still needed. There is quite a bit of difference between 21mm and 24mm, nearly 8º if I recall correctly. A DFA*24/2 would be a logical focal length and build. Heck, even though I consider it to be a useless focal length, a DFA*28 f/? would be a better choice for fleshing out the lens line.
As far as focal lengths being covered by zooms, that just doesn't cut it. As big as the 85/1.4 is, it is dwarfed by the 20-200/2.8, and is two stops faster. It's not that much different in size from the 70-210/4, but is 3 stops faster.
The 50/1.4 is covered by the 24-70, and there is still the FA50/1.4 and the 43 in the line, so what was the point of the new 50?

If you are talking about the heat being off a particular focal length, there already is a perfectly workable 50mm f/2.8 macro in the line up. There are lots of better places for them to put their resources than in lenses that they already have.

As an aside, I can pick up a new DFA50 macro for under Can$400.00 (under US$320.00). is it worth doing?

[robbiec]

I'm not making my point clear
43 | 77 | 31....... 21
40 | 70 | 21... 35... 15
50 | 85...35?... 24?? or 135???

Can you see any correlation above? Normal, telephoto, wide, wider. As with the FA Limited's, will also be with the DFA* - I would bet that the 21 is used as a stepping stone / learner lens to a DFA* around that range, presumably a 24. The 21 is nearly finished, the 35 is probably being prototyped optically.

What I'm suggesting is something the mechanical engineers and manufacturing engineers can handle and thus easier to get signed off and into production without needing too much optical engineering input.
And yes, it is a great offer (400 Canadian) but I think the optics deserve a better body, more in keeping with the current range and better aligned to the brand vision. You have a magnesium bodied FF and APSC DSLR's that are weathersealed, a set of optics that are universally rated as being exceptional, wrapped in a cheap plastic shell that you can't take out in the rain! Doesn't make sense.