[Rondec]

I think the FA 50 and 35 are bad examples, because I am firmly convinced that Pentax is working on a full frame camera and wants to price up and eventually get rid of old full frame lenses to make way for the new stock of DFA lenses or whatever they will be called.

I agree that very old lens models should be cheaper. However, Canon and Nikon also sell some very old lens designs and consistently raise prices on them year by year. It is called inflation when it happens gradually, price gouging when it happens quickly.

[Class A]

However, Canon and Nikon also sell some very old lens designs and consistently raise prices on them year by year.

I agree with a lot of what you've said but this comparison doesn't make 100% sense to me because Canikon have a lot going for them which Pentax currently cannot match. So if Pentax were just to copy Canikon -- here regarding (old) lens pricing -- in everything but in the areas where they cannot match Canikon what would be the reasons to decide pro Pentax?

[Wheatfield]

It is called inflation when it happens gradually, price gouging when it happens quickly.

It can also be the company being bought by new owners who, once they get somewhat of a handle on the costs associated with the product line realize that the old owners had devalued the product line by selling at too low a price so they make an adjustment.
Sometimes said adjustment can be rather severe. The old Pentax company undervalued their products to the point that the company was facing bankruptcy and was taken over by a much larger company who, BTW, didn't even want the camera division.
The new owners have, apparently, decided that they want the camera division to earn it's own keep, with the consequence being that we, the end user, are going to pay rather a hefty premium.
I would suggest that if this harsh reality isn't satisfactory because the new paradigm is that Pentax is no longer for the cheap and cheerful user, said disatisfied users should sell their Pentax kit and look elsewhere, either for a different manufacturer that is making a go of it by undervaluing their product, or by taking up a different hobby.
This constant bitching about the pricing is getting really old really fast, and people are really starting to sound like a bunch of sniveling children who think Hoya owes them something.
Pentax is a business, not a welfare state.

[stevebrot]

You also said: "...I will take today's pricing over what we suffered with in the 60s and 70s when a decent lens meant a half-month's salary at minimum wage!"

I gave you 1/2 of a months pay at minimum wage. Again, I ask where the disparity is. In my opinion the closet thing we have to "decent lenses" today is the FA limited series. How many lenses can you buy new in the FA limited line for $464?

The half-month's pay figure I gave you ($126) is gross in 1974 dollars. At that time a SMC Takumar 135mm was about $200 list with a somewhat lower street price. A zoom, any zoom, any brand, in 1974 would have been twice that.

So, lets take today's dollars and today's wages (gross).

$8.55 (my local min wage) * 2080 (hours in year) / 24 = $741

Sort of makes the FA 50/1.4 and FA 35/2 look cheap.

Steve

[jboyde]

It can also be the company being bought by new owners who, once they get somewhat of a handle on the costs associated with the product line realize that the old owners had devalued the product line by selling at too low a price so they make an adjustment.
Sometimes said adjustment can be rather severe. The old Pentax company undervalued their products to the point that the company was facing bankruptcy and was taken over by a much larger company who, BTW, didn't even want the camera division.
The new owners have, apparently, decided that they want the camera division to earn it's own keep, with the consequence being that we, the end user, are going to pay rather a hefty premium.
I would suggest that if this harsh reality isn't satisfactory because the new paradigm is that Pentax is no longer for the cheap and cheerful user, said disatisfied users should sell their Pentax kit and look elsewhere, either for a different manufacturer that is making a go of it by undervaluing their product, or by taking up a different hobby.
This constant bitching about the pricing is getting really old really fast, and people are really starting to sound like a bunch of sniveling children who think Hoya owes them something.
Pentax is a business, not a welfare state.

I've had enough of people whining about other people whining about these price spikes. This is a FORUM! A means to where people can voice their opinions, which YOU seem to have no problem doing! Unless a poster is abusive, using foul language or violating some code of conduct, that person has a right to vent about what's bothering them. Especially when the sentiment is shared among many other people. It won't change the price hikes but at least they can get the frustration out of their system!
As YOU like to comment, rather condecendingly at times, in posts. That is YOUR choice. I will be exercising MY choice and put you on "ignore". In my opinion, you are a non-helpful addition to this site.

[stevebrot]

...I think it is sad that some lenses just disappeared into "out of reach" land for many Pentax shooters...

To be honest, I think it is sad as well. I put off my purchase of the FA 35/2 for about a year at the old $299 price and would not have been pleased if the price suddenly jumped at the time when I was ready to buy.

What I think is ironic is that people are complaining about the high prices of the FA limiteds! I would expect that top-of-the-line goods would fetch top-of-line prices. As for the less exclusive lenses, if I had a penny for every time I have read posts that read "I only paid $xxx new for my Pentax nnn/n.n. The comparable lens from Xxxxx would have been twice to three times more."

I also think that is ironic to hear people in the U.S. complaining about a few hundred dollars here and there when the good folks in Europe have been paying those higher prices all along.

Get a grip people! The price is the price! If you don't like the price, vote with your pocket book! If the less expensive options don't appeal to you, find a new hobby.

Steve

(Has very little current glass...too cheap to buy that plastic stuff...)

[stevebrot]

...However, Canon and Nikon also sell some very old lens designs and consistently raise prices on them year by year. It is called inflation when it happens gradually, price gouging when it happens quickly.

This is a very valid point. For some reason, Pentax chose to not do periodic bumps to some of their lens prices to reflect market value. Interesting that you mention Nikon. I was surprised to find that they currently sell three 50/1.4 prime lenses. The most expensive is the old manual focus 50/1.4 AIS.

Steve

[Wheatfield]

I've had enough of people whining about other people whining about these price spikes. This is a FORUM! A means to where people can voice their opinions, which YOU seem to have no problem doing! Unless a poster is abusive, using foul language or violating some code of conduct, that person has a right to vent about what's bothering them. Especially when the sentiment is shared among many other people. It won't change the price hikes but at least they can get the frustration out of their system!
As YOU like to comment, rather condecendingly at times, in posts. That is YOUR choice. I will be exercising MY choice and put you on "ignore". In my opinion, you are a non-helpful addition to this site.

My work appears to be done....

[Marc Sabatella]

There are two world views. One view is that there has not been much price increase on wide angle Pentax lenses in general and on 12-24mm in particular. The other view is the opposite.

I happened to be in the second camp. Is the price increase a fact or an illusion?

An illusion, as I have proven already. I don't care which "camp" you are in - if that camp is located in the US, then there has *not* been a large price increase in the price of the 12-24. The story might be different in other countries, and I have no insight into how much so or why that might be, but since you are in the US, I can tell you flat out: you are wrong in your claims about the 12-24.

I do not care about the answer because it is too academic and I only care about my wallet.

Right. And your wallet would have paid almost exactly as much for the 12-24 two years ago as today. That's a fact, not an opinion. You can't rationalize this away by saying you don't care if it's just an illusion. If it's an illusion, that means you are wrong, period. And that is the case here.

Yes, there *have* been *some* increases in *some* lenses. When I've checked across the whole range of lenses, I've found increases of about 20% on average, which some lenses going up a bit more, and others going up less. The 12-24 happens to be one that has *not* gone up even as much as 20%.

Given that 20% is also the amount the dollar has slid against the yen, it seems silly to blame Pentax for this. You might as well blame them for global warming while you're at it.

The only thing that is a matter of opinion here is whether an average increase of 20% - the same amount the dollar has slid against the yen - counts as an "astronomical" increase or not. You're welcome to consider it so; I don't. But thats really not the issue, because as I said, the 12-24 hasn't *not* gone up 20%. It's sitting pretty much right exactly where it's always sat.

As said, some people may be perfectly happy. That is fine. BUT I am not one of them and I would like to tell Pentax about this.

Fine, go ahead and write them and tell them you are unhappy that the 12-24 costs virtually exactly the same as it did two years ago. Because that's the truth of the matter. Or do you mean, you wish to tell Pentax a lie?

BTW, I use FA 50mm f1.4 as an additional piece of supporting evidence of the pricing policy.

Right, but you blamed this "pricing policy" on the Tokina alliance. Clearly, the fact that the 50/1.4 was being sold practically at a loss in the past and now is finally being sold for what everyone else has always sold 50/1.4's for has nothing to do with Tokina. No one is denying that some US lens prices have gone up slightly - 20% or so on average - over the last couple of years. The issue isn't whether there has been an increase; it's how *large* n increase it has been, and whether there is any connection to Tokina. You're quite simply mistaken on both counts.

[Marc Sabatella]

Thank god, Pentax put that wrong underpricing right!

Marc, excuse the sarcasm but doesn't someone who chose Pentax for their great lens prices and now has to witness one of the biggest pluses going for Pentax (or was it the AF or high ISO performance or sports lenses and frame rates? Ah, sarcasm again...) disappear, deserve a little empathy?

Yes, but only to the extent they don't resort to out and out fabrication, and then getting defensive when called on it.

I agree, it's frustrating pentax doesn't have any truly cheap primes, and I think they should put out a DA50/1.7 and DA35/2 (or D-FA). But the Op was going much, much further than that, and making outlandish claims that deserved rebuttal.

I'm still a happy Pentax camper. Just not sure anymore if I could still recommend the brand for its underpriced lenses anymore.

If that recommendation was based only on th FA50, though, what kind of recommendation was that? Take that one anomaly out of the picture and I don't see how 20%-ish price hikes should change anyone's recommendation.

[Marc Sabatella]

I've had enough of people whining about other people whining about these price spikes. This is a FORUM! A means to where people can voice their opinions

And correct blatant misrepresentations of fact, too.

[snofox]

It suddenly struck me that if Pentax were as avaricious and conniving as some think they are, it would be a smart move to make all new camera models with mounts that would not accept old glass, thereby forcing us to buy the new lenses. Then, according to the laws of economics (which of course, always work, don't they?) the volume of sales will allow the lenses to be sold at a cheaper price, and the cost to the consumer will eventually come down. It's called the invisible hand. But watch out for the invisible finger!

Now, where is that application form for a position at Pentax Canada?

[yyyzzz]

Here is more evidence.

The blue lines are representing market prices from known Internet vendors. The green lines represent the prices from places such as EBay and the prices of the items that might not be new.


Pentax Zoom Fisheye to Super Wide-Angle SMCP-DA 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 ED IF
Autofocus Lens for Digital SLR (21580)


Pentax SMC DA* Series 16-50mm f/2.8 ED AL IF SDM (21650)


Pentax DA 50-135mm F2.8 ED IF SDM telephoto zoom (21660)


Pentax P-DA 12-24mm F4.0 ED/AL IF Auto Focus Zoom Lens (21577)


Look at how Tokina is priced!!!!

Tokina fisheye


Tokina 16mm - 50mm F/2.8 Pro DX Autofocus Zoom Lens


Tokina 12-24mm


Tokina 50-135mm


Here is Tokina 11-18mm


Let us stop arguing what percent increase in a year constitutes "astronomical." That is personal opinion. But I cannot understand why some would argue that the foundations of the economy are strong. While I have no quarrel with the freedom of speech, I happened to disagree with the statement.

[jsherman999]

I've had enough of people whining about other people whining about these price spikes. This is a FORUM! A means to where people can voice their opinions, which YOU seem to have no problem doing! Unless a poster is abusive, using foul language or violating some code of conduct, that person has a right to vent about what's bothering them. Especially when the sentiment is shared among many other people. It won't change the price hikes but at least they can get the frustration out of their system!
As YOU like to comment, rather condecendingly at times, in posts. That is YOUR choice. I will be exercising MY choice and put you on "ignore". In my opinion, you are a non-helpful addition to this site.

.

jboyde,

Wheatfield may seem grumpy at times, but he has a wealth of knowledge about photography in general and Pentax in particular. He's a pretty valuable member of the forum because of this. You'd be better served taking him off ignore and learning something form him from time to time - I know I have!


.

[stevebrot]

.

jboyde,

Wheatfield may seem grumpy at times, but he has a wealth of knowledge about photography in general and Pentax in particular. He's a pretty valuable member of the forum because of this. You'd be better served taking him off ignore and learning something form him from time to time - I know I have!


.

X2...

Consider his post count. He is an active contributor, has been around awhile on this forum and while "grumpy" at times, he does not troll or bait or flame (per se). (Unlike myself...I am grumpy all the time and have been know to be sarcastic just for the hang of it.)

Just a suggestion.

Steve