[RolloR]

i mean there are tried, tested, very sharp wide-open and reasonably priced 18-50 and 28-75 f2.8 zooms out there.

heck, the kit lens at 28mm f4 (wide open) is pretty damn good.

it's not really about speed, since I can just raise the ISO of the camera on a kit lens.

it's not really about IQ, because honestly, almost all new lenses have VERY good IQ (as long as you get proper focus lol).

for me, the need for f2.0 or faster is really about the DOF it produces. Well, as long as it's not TOO soft wide open

[Aristophanes]

Less expensive to manufactor or the buy for you and me?

Both. Lenses are pricier now because the Yen is at record highs and fears of structural deflation are forcing manufacturers to charge premiums to set a high starting point for price declines.

[wonderer]

I recently convinced my brother to get a k-x kit as an upgrade from his Fuji point and shoot. However now that he has bought the setup I am no longer sure if I made the right recommendation. I recommended the k-x to him for the best-in-class high ISO performance and "bang for the buck" as someone mentioned above. He got the two lens kit (18-55mm and 55-300mm) for a very good price.

However I don't think the k-x+18-55mm kit lens offers him significantly more over his fuji specially in indoor situations. The couple of extra stops of high-iso are offset to an extent by the slower aperture of the kit lens. Plus I was disappointed to see that light sources like lamps etc causes the kit lens to flare badly. Incidentally I have a Canon 18-55mm IS lens with me these days and comparing it to the Penatx kit lens, it had no flare at all in similar conditions and held its contrast and sharpness much better. Even the Fuji point and shoot had much less flare!

So I am convinced he needs a fast'ish prime in 30-40mm range to augment or replace his kit lens (2.8 zooms are out of price range). However I don't see any such affordable lens in Pentax lineup. And the more I look at Pentax Lineup the more I realize that with current Pentax lens prices you either have to stick with basic kit lens zooms or go all the way up to expensive exotic glass. There is not much of a middle ground.

I don't understand the people who dismiss the cheaper primes as being "cheap-platisc", low quality etc. Even the cheapest primes are optically superior and faster than the kit lenses or even the more expensive zooms. There need to be offerings between the ultra-cheap kit level stuff and the high-end limited / FA* etc lenses. The "all-or-nothing" approach to lens quality can work for companies like Leica but for general systems used by people with varying degree of fanancial means, "affordable quality" is very important

[alan_smithee_photos]

All Pentax primes will be three times faster and three times more valuable on a new body with several extra clear f-stops gained from capable sensor alone.

I'm cool with this logic, just show me the sensor! I love my Pentax glass, I'm happy with the build quality, ergonomics and features of my K-7 but I'm not impressed with the sensor. I'd love a FF option but I'd be satisfied with APS-C if the sensor was truly competitive.

[Aristophanes]

I recently convinced my brother to get a k-x kit as an upgrade from his Fuji point and shoot. However now that he has bought the setup I am no longer sure if I made the right recommendation. I recommended the k-x to him for the best-in-class high ISO performance and "bang for the buck" as someone mentioned above. He got the two lens kit (18-55mm and 55-300mm) for a very good price.

However I don't think the k-x+18-55mm kit lens offers him significantly more over his fuji specially in indoor situations. The couple of extra stops of high-iso are offset to an extent by the slower aperture of the kit lens. Plus I was disappointed to see that light sources like lamps etc causes the kit lens to flare badly. Incidentally I have a Canon 18-55mm IS lens with me these days and comparing it to the Penatx kit lens, it had no flare at all in similar conditions and held its contrast and sharpness much better. Even the Fuji point and shoot had much less flare!

So I am convinced he needs a fast'ish prime in 30-40mm range to augment or replace his kit lens (2.8 zooms are out of price range). However I don't see any such affordable lens in Pentax lineup. And the more I look at Pentax Lineup the more I realize that with current Pentax lens prices you either have to stick with basic kit lens zooms or go all the way up to expensive exotic glass. There is not much of a middle ground.

I don't understand the people who dismiss the cheaper primes as being "cheap-platisc", low quality etc. Even the cheapest primes are optically superior and faster than the kit lenses or even the more expensive zooms. There need to be offerings between the ultra-cheap kit level stuff and the high-end limited / FA* etc lenses. The "all-or-nothing" approach to lens quality can work for companies like Leica but for general systems used by people with varying degree of fanancial means, "affordable quality" is very important

The middle ground is a zoom like the $350 Tamron 17-50/2.8, an absolutely excellent and versatile short zoom.

The DAL 55-300 is another excellent piece of glass. The optics for the price are bang on fantastic. I do not think there has ever been a long tele retaining this much value.

As for primes, yes, you've hit the sore spot. You'll see an announcement of a DAL prime in the FL you are looking for. This will be affordable with excellent optical quality. it is hard NOT to make an optically excellent lens in this FL nowadays and I expect Pentax to do right by their pedigree and customers here.

[ogl]

DA35/2.4 AL is true and it's funny....
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/113787-first-pictures-k-r.html

[Rory]

Being that it's not DA-L, does that give us a slight chance of quick shift?

[JoepLX3]

Both. Lenses are pricier now because the Yen is at record highs and fears of structural deflation are forcing manufacturers to charge premiums to set a high starting point for price declines.

I currently get mainly paid in Yen, so you don't hear me complain on the exchange rate, because I still spend less than 50% on lenses...

[Blue]

Being that it's not DA-L, does that give us a slight chance of quick shift?

Unfortunately, it is DA L 35/2.4 AL.

smc PENTAX DA L 35mm F2.4 AL - Official PENTAX Imaging Web Site

It has SP. Everything else is a down grade from the FA 35/2.

[janneman]

Unfortunately, it is DA L 35/2.4 AL.


It has SP. Everything else is a down grade from the FA 35/2.

hmm maybe with increased material pricing and labor cost, the FA35/2.0 was too expensive to continue as a cheap prime

[Blue]

hmm maybe with increased material pricing and labor cost, the FA35/2.0 was too expensive to continue as a cheap prime

What makes you think labor costs are any cheaper? Furthermore, the metal lens mount didn't add significantly to the final cost. Therefore, I guess you are speculating that Pentax went to a cheaper plastic.

[wonderer]

The middle ground is a zoom like the $350 Tamron 17-50/2.8, an absolutely excellent and versatile short zoom.

The DAL 55-300 is another excellent piece of glass. The optics for the price are bang on fantastic. I do not think there has ever been a long tele retaining this much value.

As for primes, yes, you've hit the sore spot. You'll see an announcement of a DAL prime in the FL you are looking for. This will be affordable with excellent optical quality. it is hard NOT to make an optically excellent lens in this FL nowadays and I expect Pentax to do right by their pedigree and customers here.

I agree about the DAL 55-300 - that's one part of my brother's k-x kit which I am happy with.

As for the Tamron 17-50 lens - I agree that it is one viable middle ground (though even that's courtesy of Tamron). However personally I find the primes to be better bang for the buck. When I used the Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 a few ago, I mostly found it not fast enough for indoor shots and not able to create enough blur for the portrait style shots. On the other hand the Nikon 35mm 1.8 which I used for over a year gave me great image quality and speed for only around $175. Even the canon 50mm 1.8 which I used for a while and which cost only $70 was able to produce great results if used within its limits. I also liked my canon 85mm 1.8 which is again very good optically, very fast focusing and fast aperture all for around $300 used. Then there are lenses like 135mm 2.8 and so on.

The recently announced 35mm 2.4 is a good sign - I seems Pentax has started to realize that the new users they have acquired through the k-x need lower cost upgrade paths once they outgrow the kit zooms.

[HeavyD]

If Pentax doesn't come out with the 18-125mm in WR I'm ditching Pentax for a Lumix GH-1, DMC-F100 or Nikon d3001. Auto AF in video is nice, something I wish the K7 did.

[yeatzee]

If Pentax doesn't come out with the 18-125mm in WR I'm ditching Pentax for a Lumix GH-1, DMC-F100 or Nikon d3001. Auto AF in video is nice, something I wish the K7 did.

That seems like an odd lens to jump ship because of

[Blue]

That seems like an odd lens to jump ship because of

Its a bit of a random zoom range. If they don't come out with a DA 27mm/2 ltd WR, I'm jumping ship.