Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-05-2010, 03:35 AM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 843
Question is wether the K-x will be Pentax last entry level DSLR without weather sealing or if the replacement will be weather sealed? Making a DA L 35 for only one camera seems a bit, well, odd. I believe more in a DA 35 WR but that would have higher costs and getting more complaints from users as being "more expensive than Canon"..

06-05-2010, 04:54 AM   #17
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,245
Mmm old fa35/2 reworked as cheap da-l OR reworked as DA WR (better construction) + a 30/1.4 as DA* would be OK IMO

cheap is not necessary to me but affordable would be a very welcome addition to pentax line up.
06-05-2010, 05:50 AM   #18
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
IMHO 35mm DA WR and DA* 30mm would be too close. Both, price and application wise.

I think a FAST (may be bigger [than ltd's], more plastic - rubber ring, hood bayonet etc and WR, but at least F1.8) ~30mm is a requirement. Otherwise the APS-C DA system lacks designated normal prime an is VERY incomplete. Slow or expensive limited, obsolete and overpriced second hand FA's doesn't cut it.

So a DA* 30/1.4 is very likely. Then not to have too much overlap in high-end segment (DA*'s/Limiteds), the other one has to be the cheap f1.8..2 workhorse.
06-05-2010, 09:18 AM   #19
Veteran Member
omega leader's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Niagara Region, Ontario Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 417
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
he's actually an open contradiction. he criticizes Pentax so much and dissatisfied, yet he continues to look or post new articles concerning Pentax everytime. if I was his Canon gear which he loves very much to death, I would be extremely jealous for the lack of attention I'm getting from him.
And now he doesn't even have any "critical" analysis he just links to things. At least Ken discussed stuff.

06-05-2010, 10:13 AM   #20
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,211
QuoteOriginally posted by nextimelah Quote
sounds like this Ricehigh guy has got quite a reputation here!
He's very popular here. The Lead Moderator likes him a lot. sarcasm
06-05-2010, 10:15 AM   #21
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,211
I don't see the logic of bring back the FA 35mm f2 with a plastic mount. The retail price of the FA 35mm f2 was $299 at the end of 2008. If Hoya wanted to show their genius, they would bring back the FA at THAT price.

Edit: Maybe they are working on a DA* 35mm f2 based on the FA or a DA* 35mm f1.4 based on the M 35mm f1.4 prototype.

Last edited by Blue; 06-05-2010 at 10:34 AM.
06-05-2010, 01:41 PM   #22
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
I don't see the logic of bring back the FA 35mm f2 with a plastic mount. The retail price of the FA 35mm f2 was $299 at the end of 2008. If Hoya wanted to show their genius, they would bring back the FA at THAT price.

Edit: Maybe they are working on a DA* 35mm f2 based on the FA or a DA* 35mm f1.4 based on the M 35mm f1.4 prototype.
If you remove the aperture ring, metal mount, don't include hood you can probably sell it for 200$. If, as always, it comes to Europe at approx. the same price in euros and has nice pop to images because of the digital coatings, many would buy it in a moment.
Practically i'm sure it will never happen.
Most likely it will be slow (2..2.4), overpriced DA* that lacks many expected properties (screw drive AF for example), has some problems in it's first batches and is useful only to some rich or overly enthusiastic people.
06-08-2010, 03:03 PM   #23
Site Supporter
kiwi_jono's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,076
I'm a Hobbiest Photographer

I can't be alone in having a very limited "hobby" budget???

It leaves me quite jealous of the latest Nikkor offering:
Nikkor AF-S DX 35mm f/1.8G lens review: design, build, coverage, focusing | Cameralabs

For $199 and good performance like this , I would actually buy this lense if it was a K mount. And this is with an inbuilt focus motor so is there potential for further cost saving?

As it is I'm still looking around for a good MF 35mm lense (but at this focal length even old lenses are often relatively pricey).

06-08-2010, 03:16 PM   #24
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Basic things like this, makes me think if my next basic upgrade to basic kit wont be pentax anymore.
Limiteds, fullframes and 600mm lenses are nice to have, but are not the things that get the job done for my basic needs.
06-09-2010, 01:32 AM   #25
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,386
18-55 II WR is already a small, water resistant lens that is sharp wide open (about F4.5) at 35mm and fast to focus.
Being devil's advocate: Why would a K-X user actually buy a faster lens in this focal range, given the camera's much celebrated low noise performance and shake reduction? This will be even more true in the future with new camera bodies. I think everyone still thinks in terms of film where maybe you were stuck with ISO 400 until you finished the roll, so a fast lens was more useful. For 'bokeh', well use a longer focal length.... such as 55mm.
06-09-2010, 02:27 AM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Umeň, Sweden
Posts: 755
QuoteOriginally posted by calsan Quote
18-55 II WR is already a small, water resistant lens that is sharp wide open (about F4.5) at 35mm and fast to focus.
Being devil's advocate: Why would a K-X user actually buy a faster lens in this focal range, given the camera's much celebrated low noise performance and shake reduction? This will be even more true in the future with new camera bodies. I think everyone still thinks in terms of film where maybe you were stuck with ISO 400 until you finished the roll, so a fast lens was more useful. For 'bokeh', well use a longer focal length.... such as 55mm.
Why does anyone buy anything? If what you said was true, Pentax could reduce their lens lineup to the 18-55 and 55-300 and discontinue everything else, and everyone would be as happy. Fast lenses are always useful. It doesn't matter if I have ISO 409600, f/4.5 is still f/4.5 and not f/2.
06-09-2010, 02:48 AM   #27
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,245
I'd position myself between you both.
Yep, fast lens is useful, for light but for DOF control as well.

Now, IMO, it is less critical than before since we can use things like Iso1600 without problem (IMO, again). But it doesn't make fast lens useless, no: it is less of an absolute necessity e.g. someone could absolutely have a 50 macro and use it for low light. It will be OK. On film, it wouldn't have been.

Note: this is not taking into account AF performance, nor DOF issues.
06-09-2010, 03:30 AM   #28
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,512
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
e.g. someone could absolutely have a 50 macro and use it for low light. It will be OK. On film, it wouldn't have been.
Well, I'm not quite sure about that. A 50mm at f/2.8 gives you pretty thin DOF on film. Even in quite low light I often stopped my 50mms (1.7 and 1.8) down to 2.8 in order to have a reasonable DOF to work with.
06-09-2010, 04:40 AM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Var, South of France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,071
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
Well, I'm not quite sure about that. A 50mm at f/2.8 gives you pretty thin DOF on film. Even in quite low light I often stopped my 50mms (1.7 and 1.8) down to 2.8 in order to have a reasonable DOF to work with.
Yep, but even at f/2.8, it translates roughly to a 35mm f/1.4 (DOF-wise), so we won't have those creamy backgrounds anymore (or will they go all the way to f/0.7???).
06-09-2010, 04:51 AM   #30
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,512
QuoteOriginally posted by dlacouture Quote
Yep, but even at f/2.8, it translates roughly to a 35mm f/1.4 (DOF-wise), so we won't have those creamy backgrounds anymore (or will they go all the way to f/0.7???).
It's closer to a 35mm 1.8. But that wasn't really the point here.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
da-l, pentax news, pentax rumors, rumor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wanted - Acquired: Pentax SMC 35mm/2, 35mm/3.5 andersju Sold Items 4 05-16-2010 06:23 PM
Wanted - Acquired: SMC Pentax FA 35mm f2 AL / Samsung D-Xenogon 35mm f2 bcmjr Sold Items 1 04-28-2010 03:21 PM
For Sale - Sold: Samsung D-Xenogon 35mm f/2 (Pentax SMCP-FA 35mm f/2.0) (US) waterhouse8800 Sold Items 1 04-25-2010 09:21 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax SMC K 35mm/2 35mm F2 Rare Collector's Item, w/ Metal Hood (Worldwide) frank Sold Items 16 04-07-2010 05:03 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K 24mm/2.8; A 28mm/2.8; M 35mm/2 for a FA 35mm/2 Curbster54 Sold Items 1 12-04-2009 12:54 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:40 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top