[ManuH]

I want cheap DA35/2, DA 50/1.7, DA 85/1.8

It would be great but I don't think we'll see that. The main problem is that primes already exist in that range.

Around 35mm there are the FA 31, DA 35 Ltd, DA 40 Ltd and even the old FA 35/2. There's no place for a DA L 35/1.8 IMHO.

Around 50mm, there are 43 Ltd, 50 f/1.4 and 55 f/1.4, I think it's doable to update the old 50 f/1.7 as a DA L.

DA 85/1.8 would compete directly with the FA 77/1.8.

I would hope more for DA L 28/2 to be the normal lens (= about 43mm, closer to the "normal" FOV IMHO). I feel the DA 35 released by Nikon and Sony are a tad too long for a general purpose FL. 35mm = 54mm on film. And there are no other lenses in this range (except maybe the overexpensive FA 31 so it's not really a competitor).

[HeavyD]

I would like a DA WR in the 18-200mm range. I can't find an old DA 18-250mm anywhere.

[axl]

It would be great but I don't think we'll see that. The main problem is that primes already exist in that range.

Around 35mm there are the FA 31, DA 35 Ltd, DA 40 Ltd and even the old FA 35/2. There's no place for a DA L 35/1.8 IMHO.

Around 50mm, there are 43 Ltd, 50 f/1.4 and 55 f/1.4, I think it's doable to update the old 50 f/1.7 as a DA L.

DA 85/1.8 would compete directly with the FA 77/1.8.

I would hope more for DA L 28/2 to be the normal lens (= about 43mm, closer to the "normal" FOV IMHO). I feel the DA 35 released by Nikon and Sony are a tad too long for a general purpose FL. 35mm = 54mm on film. And there are no other lenses in this range (except maybe the overexpensive FA 31 so it's not really a competitor).

I see what you are saying but...
a) Pentax haven't made cheap primes since the age of DA lenses begun
b) 28/2 would not be cheap in any case IMHO.

Personally I think, if they will bring out 28mm it will be the rumored DA*28/2 to pair with DA*55. For the cheap(ish) option (if it were to happen) I think redesigned DA L 35/2 with plastic body and mount without quick shift and aperture ring would be the choice....

my 2p

[ManuH]

a) Pentax haven't made cheap primes since the age of DA lenses begun

That should be the big hint. Pentax never produced cheap lenses except kit lenses. Only the Da 40mm Ltd came close to being cheap at one point.

[DonDouglas]

Pentax will come out with a circa 28mm w.a. lens for the 645D. At present, they're the only MF digital camera maker which doesn't offer something in that vein. The offering of their most direct price competitor, Mamiya/Phase One, is quite expensive. Beating that would be a good thing.

[RonHendriks1966]

I still want a DA*135mm/f2.0 lens.

Great for concerts.

[brecklundin]

Please Hoya some reasonably priced primes. There must be loads of designs to work from in the Pentax design back catalogue. At the moment used FA primes are selling for more then the new version of Nikons.

Bring out a for fun inexpensive 50/1.2 heck make it all plastic if needed and don't add any ability to change the aperture just leave that bad-boy at 1.2 all the time so we can all afford to have some fun with a cool 1.2 lense... Anything but an $800 55/1.4 which is a nice lense just kinda spendy for what I want in a faster normal prime. Plus, darn it, I still want a 1.2 of some sort just because.

Ignore me as I am whining and window shopping, been a rough business year and things aren't looking brighter any time soon which is a very bad thing. With luck I'll croake before the marshals show up. hehehehe...just gallows humor.

[Braddokovik]

It would be great but I don't think we'll see that. The main problem is that primes already exist in that range.

Around 35mm there are the FA 31, DA 35 Ltd, DA 40 Ltd and even the old FA 35/2. There's no place for a DA L 35/1.8 IMHO.

Around 50mm, there are 43 Ltd, 50 f/1.4 and 55 f/1.4, I think it's doable to update the old 50 f/1.7 as a DA L.

DA 85/1.8 would compete directly with the FA 77/1.8.

I would hope more for DA L 28/2 to be the normal lens (= about 43mm, closer to the "normal" FOV IMHO). I feel the DA 35 released by Nikon and Sony are a tad too long for a general purpose FL. 35mm = 54mm on film. And there are no other lenses in this range (except maybe the overexpensive FA 31 so it's not really a competitor).

.

31mm too expensive
DA 40mm too slow
DA 35mm too slow

Pentax doesn't have an entry level option for low light photography! Nikon, Canon, Sony all have them! I can get a 50mm Canon 1.8 new for less than half the price of a 2nd hand F 50mm 1.7 thats probably 15+ years old!

'Having heaps in the focal range' is great , but when they are either too darned expensive (FA 31mm, FA 43mm, DA 55mm 1.4) or too slow (DA 40mm, 35mm limited) it doesn't really help. I came to Pentax from Canon because I thought (and still think) that they are a real photographers camera maker. But I find myself getting hot under the collar when I see brand new Canon 50mm 1.8's going for $100 delivered on ebay! I still haven't got a fast AF prime and at this rate it will be a long time until I can afford one...

[WerTicus]

Pentax doesn't have an entry level option for low light photography!...

A Kx + FA 50mm F1.4 + 18-55 kit costs $200 less than a 550d body only.

So there goes that argument. :P

[mawz]

Well, there were those old rumours for a 21/2 and 28/2.

What I'd like to see for primes from Pentax, note this is about a years worth of releases, if not more.

Cheap line (Launch at PMA):

DA 35/2
DA 50/1.7 with the latter replacing the FA 50/1.4 in the line (if you need f1.4, there's the DA* 55). essentially the old design in a new barrel. Both could be done as DA L lenses as well (comparable to Sony's DT designs or Nikon's new 35/1.8)

Mid-range:

DA 90/2.8

High-end:

DA* 21/2 or 20/1.4 (Pentax had a prototype 20/1.4 in 1976)
DA* 35/1.4 (replaces FA 31 Limited in line)
DA* 85/1.4 (based on A* optics)
DA* 135mm f1.8 (Based on A* optics)

The last three should cover 35mm, ideally all four should (Olympus's OM 21/2 shows that you can do a fast, good and compact 21/2).

What I'd li9ke to see in Zooms:

DA* 10-18mm f2.8 SDM (Sealed pro-level ultra-wide badly needed, 12-24 is overpriced, under spec and not wide enough)
DA 11-22/4-5.6 SDM (replaces old 12-24 at lower price as the consumer ultra-wide)

And in prep for a FF body (actually, I'd love to see the last two even on APS-C)

D-FA* 16-30mm f2.8 SDM
D-FA* 24-75mm f2.8 SDM
D-FA* 70-210mm f2.8 SDM

[gazonk]

I want cheap DA35/2, DA 50/1.7, DA 85/1.8

The first one is a must. Perhaps even as a 35/1.8. Doesn't have to cover FF.
Then a super zoom, plus a "semi super" kit lens alternative, eg 18-105.

I think they need these to compete in the consumer segment. In the high end, I see two urgent needs:
A long tele (eg 400mm) and a WR fast normal, eg a WR reissue of the FA31.

[youky63]

A Kx + FA 50mm F1.4 + 18-55 kit costs $200 less than a 550d body only.

So there goes that argument. :P

You are living in a lucky country (or a hell country for Canonists ), because in mine:
Kx (+18-55) + KA50 = 53.100+39.800 = 92.900 yens
Canon 550D/Kiss X4 (+18-55)= 71.100 yens

Of course prices for new equipments from the same shop (Yodobashi Camera)

By the way, the canon 550D is not exactly what I would call the "entry level" option in Canon. Must look at the 500D/KissX3 (+18-555) = 60.600 yens
Not so far from the Kx.

Edit:
and I would even add:
Canon 550D/Kiss X4 (+18-55) + EF50mm f/1.8II = 71.100 + 9.330 = 80.430 yens
Which is 150 dollars cheaper than the Kx set!

[mawz]

550D (T2i) + 18-55 kit: $899.95 USD at B&H
500D (T1i) + 18-55 kit: $689.95 USD at B&H
K-x + 18-55 kit: $499.95 USD at B&H
FA 50/1.4: $359.95 USD at B&H

So the K-X with 18-55 and FA 50 is cheaper than the T2i in addition to being smaller, faster (4.7fps) and with superior high ISO performance. Without the FA 50, it's almost $200 cheaper than the 500D and has an even bigger performance advantage. Note US pricing on the FA 50 is awful.

The Canon's would do better in comparison if they didn't have such awful per-pixel performance and detail-smearing NR. A K-x at ISO 6400 actually out resolves the 550D at ISO 6400 despite having 1/3 less pixels.

[axl]

Well, there were those old rumours for a 21/2 and 28/2.

What I'd like to see for primes from Pentax, note this is about a years worth of releases, if not more.

Cheap line (Launch at PMA):

DA 35/2
DA 50/1.7 with the latter replacing the FA 50/1.4 in the line (if you need f1.4, there's the DA* 55). essentially the old design in a new barrel. Both could be done as DA L lenses as well (comparable to Sony's DT designs or Nikon's new 35/1.8)

Mid-range:

DA 90/2.8

High-end:

DA* 21/2 or 20/1.4 (Pentax had a prototype 20/1.4 in 1976)
DA* 35/1.4 (replaces FA 31 Limited in line)
DA* 85/1.4 (based on A* optics)
DA* 135mm f1.8 (Based on A* optics)

The last three should cover 35mm, ideally all four should (Olympus's OM 21/2 shows that you can do a fast, good and compact 21/2).

What I'd li9ke to see in Zooms:

DA* 10-18mm f2.8 SDM (Sealed pro-level ultra-wide badly needed, 12-24 is overpriced, under spec and not wide enough)
DA 11-22/4-5.6 SDM (replaces old 12-24 at lower price as the consumer ultra-wide)

And in prep for a FF body (actually, I'd love to see the last two even on APS-C)

D-FA* 16-30mm f2.8 SDM
D-FA* 24-75mm f2.8 SDM
D-FA* 70-210mm f2.8 SDM

I see point of DA35/2....
but why the hell would they as APSC committed brand release 50/1.7??? as long as they won't announce FF 50mm doesn't make all that big sense. If you want normal lens, then yes, have 35/1.7 or 1.8 or 2... there has never been a budget portrait lens from Pentax, EVER, so why would they do one now?
Agree on the mid range DA90/2.8 would be attractive if well priced and good performer.
High end? well I agree on wide end, it needs to be sorted. DA*35/1.4 could be too but they would have to either make it APSC design only or kill off 31ltd because I don't think those two would coexist happily . I don't think they will be in rush for *85/1.4 (again unless they won't announce FF) and *135/1.8 would be nice indeed!
I agree on wide zoom. Something like 10-16/2.8 DA* would be nice... no need for the other one, just keep DA12-24 and lower the price a bit.... FF prep? not interested, thanks...

[mawz]

I see point of DA35/2....
but why the hell would they as APSC committed brand release 50/1.7??? as long as they won't announce FF 50mm doesn't make all that big sense. If you want normal lens, then yes, have 35/1.7 or 1.8 or 2... there has never been a budget portrait lens from Pentax, EVER, so why would they do one now?

SMC Pentax-M 85mm f2

Moderately fast 50's for APS-C are a major seller for everybody and Pentax is the only one of the remaining 4 DSLR brands which doesn't have a budget option here. It wasn't a problem back when you could get FA 50/1.4's new for $200 but they're $360USD now.

Agree on the mid range DA90/2.8 would be attractive if well priced and good performer.
High end? well I agree on wide end, it needs to be sorted. DA*35/1.4 could be too but they would have to either make it APSC design only or kill off 31ltd because I don't think those two would coexist happily . I don't think they will be in rush for *85/1.4 (again unless they won't announce FF) and *135/1.8 would be nice indeed!
I agree on wide zoom. Something like 10-16/2.8 DA* would be nice... no need for the other one, just keep DA12-24 and lower the price a bit.... FF prep? not interested, thanks...

The FA lenses, including the Limiteds, probably should be discontinued. The FA 31 has a poor physical design for APS-C use due to the integrated hood and is too slow for its cost.

I don't see Pentax dropping the price on the 12-24, which is why I suggested a variable-aperture lens as a consumer replacement (additionally an 11-22 would be wider to match the current fashion for 10-11mm on the wide end of UW APS-C zooms)