[creampuff]

With all due respect, Gus (and Class A), Pentax doesn't make the FA50/1.4 anymore, and hasn't for several years.

Where in the world did you get this information?
Or is this just conjecture on your part?

[monochrome]

Where in the world did you get this information?
Or is this just conjecture on your part?

I believe it is fairly well established [EDIT: there is significant conjecture] on this Forum that the FA50/1.4 is no longer manufactured and that Pentax is running off old stock, manufactured some time ago, and held in warehouses.

B. Dimitrov entry for FA50/1.4 = Years of Production = 1991-2004

Perhaps "not discontinued, but no longer manufactured" is a better statement - which supports my ideas that they are running off old stock. Maybe assembled in Vietnam, but even that is not "still in manufacture" for certain.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/848532-post110.html

For goodness' sake, I bought mine in March of 2008 after reading here at that time the lens was no longer in manufacture and would eventually be sold out.

Same exact statements [EDIT: may be true] for the FA35/2 - although there remains some doubt here (vis. Mark Sabatella's recent post) that it is ACTUALLY no longer being manufactured.

FA35 Discontinued?

If I am mistaken I will track down every post I have made since I started this theme (Hoya/Pentax financing future with Cash Flow from existing sales -. lens price increases) and EDIT them to correct my error.

[Marc Sabatella]

Note I don't claim to *know* the production status of the FA50 or FA35. But I do find the suggestion that they have probably both ceased production and are being sold from existing stock - with the FA35 basically nearing depletion - to be plausible.

[monochrome]

Same exact statements for the FA35/2 - although there remains some doubt here (vis. Mark Sabatella's recent post) that it is ACTUALLY no longer being manufactured.

Note I don't claim to *know* the production status of the FA50 or FA35. But I do find the suggestion that they have probably both ceased production and are being sold from existing stock - with the FA35 basically nearing depletion - to be plausible.

Hope I made it clear that you DON'T claim to *know* the FA35/2 is no longer manufactured. That was the intent of your comment on the other thread.

It is a sad day if first the FA 35 and soon FA 50 are soon longer available.

That leaves the DA35 2.8 and Da55 1.4 as the entry level first prime options??? Or I guess the little Pancake DA 40 at F2.8???

So no fast AF prime options below $500... ? Marc, am I missing something?

[Marc Sabatella]

It is a sad day if first the FA 35 and soon FA 50 are soon longer available.

That leaves the DA35 2.8 and Da55 1.4 as the entry level first prime options??? Or I guess the little Pancake DA 40 at F2.8???

So no fast AF prime options below $500... ? Marc, am I missing something?

Well, I can only conjecture as well, but my assumption based on the available evidence is that while stock of the FA35/2 may be drying up, the FA50/1.4 is probably still available in decent quantity and will remain the cheapest "fast" for a while. Who knows how long until supply runs out, or whether Pentax will be putting out another low priced prime before that happens - I have no crystal ball here. But I personally am not overly worried about the possibility of the FA50/14 disappearing with no replacement.

Of course, the DA40 is also well below $500, but I assume you are not counting that because it isn't fast enough? This is another area where we probably disagree, but I find on a Pentax DSLR - with SR and usable ISO 1600 - f/2.8 is really fast enough for most purposes. The times when I really feel the desire for a larger aperture tend to be the times when I'm most likely to be OK with or even prefer manual focus.

Well, I can only conjecture as well, but my assumption based on the available evidence is that while stock of the FA35/2 may be drying up, the FA50/1.4 is probably still available in decent quantity and will remain the cheapest "fast" for a while. Who knows how long until supply runs out, or whether Pentax will be putting out another low priced prime before that happens - I have no crystal ball here. But I personally am not overly worried about the possibility of the FA50/14 disappearing with no replacement.

Of course, the DA40 is also well below $500, but I assume you are not counting that because it isn't fast enough? This is another area where we probably disagree, but I find on a Pentax DSLR - with SR and usable ISO 1600 - f/2.8 is really fast enough for most purposes. The times when I really feel the desire for a larger aperture tend to be the times when I'm most likely to be OK with or even prefer manual focus.

We dont completely disagree about 2.8 and iso 1600... On indoor shots with a little window light it can work... not on the kid shots, as I need a bit more shutterspeed than I can get with 2.8/1600 but for stationary stuff or adults that can hold still.... I would still prefer the F2 of the FA 35 though... it is that close for me as to whether or not a shot of the kids works... even squeezing that last little .8 can help sometimes.

And with the nice High iso of the K-x, the 2.8 of the da 40 would be nice I bet!



But it would be sad if the only options for a fast AF is the DA 55 1.4. As that lens is crazy high priced. That is all I am saying. As much as I would never spend 360 on a fa 50 1.4 it is at least an option folks richer than I.


It would be nice to know if Hoya really is not gonna make any more of them. A cheap plastic DA 50 1.8 would be good! And a cheap plastic 30 1.8!!!!! Thats all I want for Christmas... unless of course Santa hits the motherlode and brings me a 31 or 77 ltd...

[Class A]

Watching you two cuddle up so happily, I thought I'd spoil the party a bit and mention that f/2.8 on APS-C corresponds to f/4.3 on FF. Suddenly that DA 40/2.8 looks even slooooower than it had before.

Transformed into FF land that lens would have to be a 62/4.3. Sounds sexy? Naah. But that's what we have to make do with a 40/2.8 on APS-C.

I'm more than fine with a zoom that "slow" but a prime should give me more options, even if I don't use them all the time. I know, that 40 has the pancake thing going for it, but I'd personally rather have lens I can not mistake with a body cap on my camera and precious few new primes in the Pentax line up are faster than f/2.8.

[brecklundin]

Thank goodness for that... if the Fa 50 had Pentax's legendary SDM in it, you could add another $200 dollars to your original cost, to pay for the repair in the second year you owned it!

Wow I am really 'Snarky' of late!

but it doesn't mean you are wrong...get your "snark-on" dude!!

[brecklundin]

I shoulda bought 100 shares of Pentax FA 50 1.4 at $200 each.
I coulda had $16,000 profit.

We all need to remember that this was yesterday. Today is a different time and market condition.

One could have bought FA Limiteds for much less before also.

Bottom line: is it a preposterous price? IMHO I don't think so. Remember that with capitalism, the market is king when it comes to setting a price.
Keep in mind that with Pentax we have more choices, including heritage lenses with M42.

That last part is a complete fallacy as I am assuming you are, probably w/o actually stopping to think it through (I know until recently that idea never drilled it's way through my thick skull... )...why? because you can get an M42/M39 adapter for about any mount made today, or yesterday for that matter so there is nothing stopping a person using a different brand from mounting an SMC M42 or whatever brand, of course this is within a few limits due to register to mirror issues on some body-lense combo's. But the ability to use M42/M39 lenses is hardly some special ability of Pentax bodies alone.

[WerTicus]

given the DA* 55 is out id not be surprised if the FA 50 is not being made anymore.

[roverlr3]

It's been some time since I have purchased any new len's and was looking at the 50mm 1.4 the other day and was surprised to find the price hike. Then I went and looked at prices on the limited's I had bought as little as 10-11 months ago. Makes me very glad I picked them up then. Since the purchase of the limited's I rarely have a wide/zoom on my camera anymore. Even with the price increase, I'm thinking I'll be taking the hit on the fast 50.
Jeff

[Ben_Edict]

Watching you two cuddle up so happily, I thought I'd spoil the party a bit and mention that f/2.8 on APS-C corresponds to f/4.3 on FF. Suddenly that DA 40/2.8 looks even slooooower than it had before.

??? why is that? Why would the aperture be transformed? To my knowledge aperture is simply calculated from focal length/entrance pupil, both of which are lens properties and do not change with film/sensor format.

I guess, you have reason for that claim, so please enlighten me.

Ben

It's been some time since I have purchased any new len's and was looking at the 50mm 1.4 the other day and was surprised to find the price hike. Then I went and looked at prices on the limited's I had bought as little as 10-11 months ago. Makes me very glad I picked them up then. Since the purchase of the limited's I rarely have a wide/zoom on my camera anymore. Even with the price increase, I'm thinking I'll be taking the hit on the fast 50.
Jeff

Jeff, do still have your FA43? If so, why on earth would you even be considering throwing money away on the "Plastic Craptastic" (just kidding of course)? Surely it is not for speed, as the 1.4 -2.0 is inconsistent at best. And soft as puddin' at worst

With your lens collection, if speed is what you are looking for... spending that money on a cosina 55 1.2 or any of the Pentax 50 1.2... or even cheaper a Smc tak 50 1.4... Or A50 1.4 would be a good option

Unless of course money is absolutely no object for you. If so, disregard my comments.

Do you have the FA 77 yet? Look at me, I am spending your money for you.

Those with money, do... Those without, dream...

[wallyb]

Watching you two cuddle up so happily, I thought I'd spoil the party a bit and mention that f/2.8 on APS-C corresponds to f/4.3 on FF. Suddenly that DA 40/2.8 looks even slooooower than it had before.

Transformed into FF land that lens would have to be a 62/4.3. Sounds sexy? Naah. But that's what we have to make do with a 40/2.8 on APS-C.

I'm more than fine with a zoom that "slow" but a prime should give me more options, even if I don't use them all the time. I know, that 40 has the pancake thing going for it, but I'd personally rather have lens I can not mistake with a body cap on my camera and precious few new primes in the Pentax line up are faster than f/2.8.

The aperture speed, actual or rated/apparent, doesn't change at all. The same amount of light hits the sensor, just in a smaller area. I don't know where you got this from.