Originally posted by emr But Marc, aren't there actually fairly many lenses that come very close?
Depends on what you mean by close, I guess. The only small primes in this range that I know are long out of production and none that I am aware of have built in hoods. Most are of course MF. As far as I know, there are no 24mm lenses with 49mm filter size (?), and I'd give that up if I could *everything* else (but the existence of the DA21 gives me hope).
Quote: What is the current lens close to these specs that you find the best for you?
I know the Pentax M & A 28/2's are relatively small and they do take a 49mm filter. If they released a DA Limited WR version of the same basic formula, that would be fine by me, and having it f/2 would satisfy those who say there's no point to a prime that isn't f/2 (for me, there is: size).
The K & A 24/2.8's are more or less the same size, although they do go to 52mm filters, as does the Sigma 24/2.8. So obviously going wider can mean a larger front even for a slower lens.
Which is why I sort of suspect a 26/2.4 would be doable compromise if someone were to want to go wider than 28.
Anyhow, right now, I'm using the M28/2.8, and I like it well enough. If it were a mm or two wider I wouldn't complain. I could try to scare up an FA28/2.8 or another smallish AF 28/2.8, but the M28/2.8 is actually holding me over just fine. I'd gladly replace it with the lens I've described, though - perhaps just slightly wider, hopefully a little faster, but with AF, WR, and that integrated hood.