Originally posted by Marc Sabatella *On average*, yes. Some of the lenses that were *way* underpriced like the 50/1.4 - priced about $150 less than what anyone else sold theirs for - went up more. Some lenses went up far less or not at all.
If you have stats to prove my assertions inaccurate, feel free to produce them. But I've actually run the numbers.
Hey Marc,
If you have stats to prove your assertion that the Fa 50 1.4 was "way underpriced" I would love to see those. I just think that kind of assertation is being pulled out of some dark nether region. It is at best, an ok $200 lens IMHO.
It is a good, 'plastic', screwdrive AF lens, that needs to be stopped down to F2/F2.8 to look good. Just like the 100 dollar-ish 1.8's from canikon.
P.S. it also PF's like a mo wide open. But that is another argument for another day.
This is the entry level prime lens from Pentax, the one a new camera owner used to be able to afford as their first prime, and it has gone up 80% in a year! Are you honestly saying that you feel this truly a $350 dollar lens? If so, I will happily sell you mine.
Now I could care less if you have "run the numbers" and averaged the cost increase of every lens available in the pentax line up to come up with your 20% number... Most of those damn lenses are $650 to $1400 dollars... so of course they did not go 80 percent as they were already priced very high in the first place.
Hoya/Pentax who used to be the envy with their Prime Lenses Line up, has now priced the newbie and many of the rest of us out the market...
Shall we list the cost of the DA 35, the new 50 1.4, the 85mm (oops there is no 85)
Welcome to Pentax, with your great new $600 Kx... can I interest you in a $600 prime?
This is all just my opinion of course... and admittedly I am being Snarky as my K20 waits to be repaired...
Nothing but love to you Marc...