[ogl]

Then buy a Sony! Or wait for the $1,200 APS-C K-5 street price.

You DO know that the MSRP prices are for the taxman and accountants, right? They're not "real" prices from the distribution channel to the consumer?

You do know that, right?

Hmmm....I'd like FF Pentax with my FA lenses. Why Sony??? I don't like SONY

[pxpaulx]

Hmmm....I'd like FF Pentax with my FA lenses. Why Sony??? I don't like SONY

Why Sony? The implication here OGL is that a $1,800 FF camera from Pentax is, and always will be, a pipe dream (that means it won't happen in the foreseeable future). Do you understand that? Your saying it does not make it happen.

Edit: ogl, I am disapointed in your text to smilie ratio, it has gone way down from what I remember. Make sure you punctuate every sentence with a smilie or wink smilie from now on, then you're more believable!

[ewalk]

So it's cheap plastic mount entry-level lenses that we're expected to be excited about? Talk about an anti-climax, if that's it.

It could be like Aristophanes suggested: Pentax is considering either a mirrorless interchangeable camera that requires new lenses due to the contrast-detect AF or a possible FF move and doesn't want people to spend significant $$$ on APS-C only lenses.

If the prime is a reasonable price ($199-$299) and it's a a focal length that's been missing for some time (28-35mm) I don't see why people *wouldn't* be excited. It would be a modern day 'plastic fantastic.'

To be perfectly honest though, I'd even be up for an 80-85mm f/1.8 to f/2.

[illdefined]

Not WR. DA L. Modest apertures. Very low prices. 1 prime, 1 zoom, maybe another.

Hint to those of you looking for FF. Pentax looks to be releasing what I will term "non-investment glass" all DA L.

from what I hear, the K-5 is a modest K-7 upgrade, the K-r as well. If you're looking for fast glass or WR, not there, not from Pentax. My read is pretty simple: until they see the FF sensors and price points and can see a way into that game, little "investment glass" will be forthcoming. Their line is mostly done for the APS-C crowd. What is coming out is inexpensive "filler" glass for the consumer crowd.

that would be terrible.

when every other camera maker in the world will be showing progress at Photokina, Pentax will be showing their commodification and desperate appeal to the mass market. it may not be the intent of such a move, but trust me, that will be the narrative.

current pentaxians will suddenly feel like they've invested in a "no-investment" brand, and want nothing to do with the new "L Pentax". have you ever held a DA - L lens? far from inspiring, especially considering how well-built Pentax bodies and lenses have been thus far. the L will stand for something else.

taking all their lenses to their basest level, will murder the image of Pentax as a high-quality enthusiast niche brand, and will transform it (fully) into a "discount" brand. even if sales erupt, selling at Wal-Mart and Best Buys, the prestige will be gone.

as a pentaxian, i really hope you're wrong, even if it brings Hoya tons of money, I'd personally rather see Pentax go the (admittedly much harder) way of Leica than of Radio Shack.

if Pentax does indeed go this route, they must temper it with something truly competitive and upmarket. the K-7 Super Duper and 645D alone won't cut it.

[ogl]

a lot of new DA L is catastrophe

[Boris]

Ogl, a lot of new DA L lenses is logical response of Pentax to most recent offerings from Nikon and Canon and also Sony who introduced a number of cropped image circle cheap prime lenses. It makes sense from marketing department point of view. As usual with any such move, it will attract some users and potentially repel some others. I see no way in which it can be catastrophe as you put it.

[Vaikis_]

Ogl, a lot of new DA L lenses is logical response of Pentax to most recent offerings from Nikon and Canon and also Sony who introduced a number of cropped image circle cheap prime lenses. It makes sense from marketing department point of view. As usual with any such move, it will attract some users and potentially repel some others. I see no way in which it can be catastrophe as you put it.

there won't be any DA L lenses, stop joking.

[stormcloud]

ironically i'm alwys reading about people demanding cheap fast primes like nikon and canon now we gonna get them people are complaining

i dont mind if they bring out some cheap glass but i think they also need to bring out some new quality glass seriously why is pentax without a 70-200mm f2.8 lens?? anyway all that said i would much rather hear them announce a new SDM system as after i hear all the horror stories i dont think i would buy a pentax sdm lens so that means i'm either contemplating a new system or buying sigma lenses if i want silent fast focusing (and i do)

[Aristophanes]

If the K-5 starts at $1499 and drops to around $1200 in about 6 months, I still think that's pretty good.


it's my answer to this POST. I'm not ready to pay $1499 for APS-C camera.
But I'm ready to pay $1800 for FF.

Hmmm....I'd like FF Pentax with my FA lenses. Why Sony??? I don't like SONY

a lot of new DA L is catastrophe

Not for those who bought a K-x or the upcoming K-r.

Makes a lot of sense if there is no ability or price problems moving to FF.

And, in case you haven't noticed, there is a worldwide economic problem. Cheap is in.

[illdefined]

ironically i'm alwys reading about people demanding cheap fast primes like nikon and canon now we gonna get them people are complaining

i dont mind if they bring out some cheap glass but i think they also need to bring out some new quality glass seriously why is pentax without a 70-200mm f2.8 lens?? anyway all that said i would much rather hear them announce a new SDM system as after i hear all the horror stories i dont think i would buy a pentax sdm lens so that means i'm either contemplating a new system or buying sigma lenses if i want silent fast focusing (and i do)

they can certainly release some cheap glass, it just can't be *all* their doing.

and isn't the 50-135mm DA* 2.8 the lens you're looking for? its the APS-C equivalent to 70-200mm (and has SDM), do you use film? why do you need the FF focal length?

[illdefined]

Not for those who bought a K-x or the upcoming K-r.

Makes a lot of sense if there is no ability or price problems moving to FF.

And, in case you haven't notice, there is a worldwide economic problem. Cheap is in.

the new WR versions of the 18-55mm and 50-200mm are cheap. it didnt cost Pentax much to add some seals, adding a market distinctive feature as well as value. this is the direction Pentax should go with older lenses, not DA - L.

[Boris]

there won't be any DA L lenses, stop joking.

I am absolutely not joking. Assuming (<-- the key word) there will be some DA L lenses, I can see why they actually will be. If not, so much the better.

[glanglois]

they can certainly release some cheap glass, it just can't be *all* their doing.

and isn't the 50-135mm DA* 2.8 the lens you're looking for? its the APS-C equivalent to 70-200mm (and has SDM), do you use film? why do you need the FF focal length?

I didn't start this but I'll note that I don't need a FF-equivalent of 200mm. I could use the equivalent of about 300mm - hence the 70-200 on an APS-C K-7.

I'm not convinced that I'd get a lot of value from in-lens stabilization or a somewhat faster internal motor. But that's where Sigma, for example, is taking us - and for a great deal of money!

It's to bad that Pentax/Hoya has ceded the zoom market to companies targeting C&N users (no screw drive, no in-body stabilization, pricing based on no more than beating C&N's bloated numbers). Worse yet, we still see that some capabilities were cut from the Pentax-mount lenses without a corresponding price cut.

OK - end of rant. 135mm = 200mm for us. 200mm = 300mm for us. Big difference.

[rparmar]

With all due respect, I am thinking that this WR thing is getting way overrated. Consider this. FA77 is/was initially produced as a portrait lens. It is therefore not uncommon to think that it would be used even in the studio conditions for, well, portraiture.

I am not limited in my way of thinking by what a lens may have been designed for. My FA77 is my number one go-to lens and I use it for just about everything. I even have a screw-on adapter for great macro shots. Being light and small it is perfect to throw on a camera and pop in a bag. I carry it everywhere. If I was only concerned about studio shots, I'd get an FA85 instead.

I am not personally that interested in WR. But it is a strength of Pentax and they have shown they want to retrofit older lenses in this way. So why not the FA77, FA43, FA31?

Me, I would rather see Limiteds in 24/2, 28/2, 135/2 and a tilt/shift adapter for 645 lenses.

[Russell-Evans]

Why do you want Pentax to survive and in the same time you want them to give away their cameras?

We all just want value for our money spent. Although Pentax can set the price, we the buyers, determine the value. That's the reason street prices are what they are. That's the way it is with all products. It is Pentax' job provide value, whether real, or not, for their products. They survive based on that and that alone. It is nothing personal and it is nothing new.

Thank you
Russell