If the new lenses are really the 35mm and the 18-125mm

frank · 09-06-2010, 12:27 AM

Originally posted by ogl

Slow APS-C lens - is it what we want? it's ridiculously....Everyone can afford FA35/2 for USD250, but marketing killed this lens.

Pentaxian need fast WR prime of 28-30 and cheap 50 mm lens and non-expensive 85/2.

Hmmm..If it's true, it's marketing idiocy of Hoya.

maybe 16.5-135?

Well, Sony also made a slow 85/2.8, haven't they

But I do think it should at least be a 35/2. And new guys really want a cheap 50, even a DA50/2 will do.

ogl · 09-06-2010, 12:32 AM

There was rumor about DA-L 35/2.1...
Where is the truth?

ogl · 09-06-2010, 12:37 AM

Originally posted by frank

Well, Sony also made a slow 85/2.8, haven't they

But I do think it should at least be a 35/2. And new guys really want a cheap 50, even a DA50/2 will do.

Why Canon, Nikon and Sony offer 50/1.8? And 35/1.8?

But Sony also offers 24/2...Not only 85/2.8. Pentax can't offer even 85/2.8.

Gimbal · 09-06-2010, 12:50 AM

Originally posted by ogl

Slow APS-C lens - is it what we want? it's ridiculously....Everyone can afford FA35/2 for USD250, but marketing killed this lens.

Sure, there is only one problem, the FA35/2 costs about 1052 USD in Sweden. Real cheap those Pentax lenses.

gazonk · 09-06-2010, 12:54 AM

Originally posted by twitch

What would be interesting would be a 24-120 F4 like Nikon has.

Has there been any tests yet of this lens? The variable-aperture predecessor was pretty bad, wasn't it?

Anyway, it's a nice range on FF, but strange on APS-C. And its range on FF gives you just a little bit more in both ends in terms of FOV than the 17-70/f4 gives you on APS-C. And the former weighs almost the double of the latter, and the cost is almost 3x!

In the US (Amazon) Nikon D700 + 24-120 costs more than e.g.:

K-7 + DA17-70 + DA60-250 + DA15 Ltd + DA35 Ltd

Christopher M.W.T · 09-06-2010, 12:55 AM

Originally posted by ogl

There was rumor about DA-L 35/2.1...
Where is the truth?

That is closer

ogl · 09-06-2010, 12:59 AM

Originally posted by Gimbal

Sure, there is only one problem, the FA35/2 costs about 1052 USD in Sweden. Real cheap those Pentax lenses.

They stopped FA35/2 and rised the prices...But FA35/2 was USD250.

ogl · 09-06-2010, 01:07 AM

Originally posted by Christopher M.W.T

That is closer

There is logic - to announce low-end body with low-end lenses together...
16.5-135 WR is good idea for WR body. Cheap price too...But, not 2.4...Please.

But, we'd like more pro-lenses and cameras on September, 20-21.

0144 · 09-06-2010, 01:07 AM

so, as i understand Hoya decided to have some fun and told everybody that they are going to release 35mm F/(your personal number) prime.

it basically says that nobody really knows if the number they got is real, or even if it's really a 35mm prime.

i guess we'll have to wait and see. personally i wish that they released 28mm F2 FF covering prime they patented not so long ago in DA* flavor

Christopher M.W.T · 09-06-2010, 01:11 AM

Originally posted by ogl

There is logic - to announce low-end body with low-end lenses together...
16.5-135 WR is good idea for WR body. Cheap price too...But, not 2.4...Please.

But, we'd like more pro-lenses and cameras on September, 20-21.

What I'd rather see is a WR & * quality flash unit.

That to me would just complete and fix the weak link in the Pentax chain.

THE FLASH! ThE DAMN FLASH!

RolloR · 09-06-2010, 02:36 AM

WHAT?! f 2.4?!

Very slow?

RBellavance · 09-06-2010, 04:49 AM

DA-L 35/2.4 would be a stupid move. A stop slower than what the competition offers. That would be an obvious "let's not kill the sales of the DA35/2.8 macro" move, IMHO.

The other rumour of a DA-L 30/2.1 is a better move, again IMHO. The focal length is different, and f/2.1 is only half a stop from f/1.8...

ogl · 09-06-2010, 05:10 AM

Originally posted by RBellavance

The other rumour of a DA-L 30/2.1 is a better move, again IMHO. The focal length is different, and f/2.1 is only half a stop from f/1.8...

We will see...DA-L30/2.1 - not bad.

zelovoc · 09-06-2010, 05:17 AM

it would be great if they will make a whole line of cheap L primes. i would definitely go for it.

Edvinas · 09-06-2010, 05:21 AM

None of them would interest me.

I still hope for DA* 16-50 f/2.8 II and DA* 50-135 f/2.8 II (both with proper SDM implementation) .

09-06-2010, 12:54 AM	#20
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by twitch What would be interesting would be a 24-120 F4 like Nikon has. Has there been any tests yet of this lens? The variable-aperture predecessor was pretty bad, wasn't it? Anyway, it's a nice range on FF, but strange on APS-C. And its range on FF gives you just a little bit more in both ends in terms of FOV than the 17-70/f4 gives you on APS-C. And the former weighs almost the double of the latter, and the cost is almost 3x! In the US (Amazon) Nikon D700 + 24-120 costs more than e.g.: K-7 + DA17-70 + DA60-250 + DA15 Ltd + DA35 Ltd Last edited by gazonk; 09-06-2010 at 01:02 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Are all DA 35mm macro lenses the same?	mtngal	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	04-25-2010 06:13 PM
35mm Film lenses on DSLRs?	NecroticSoldier	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	03-10-2010 09:39 AM
Rollei 35mm Lenses	Doorknob	General Talk	2	09-07-2009 01:31 PM
Interesting comparison - DA lenses on 35MM	straightshooter	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	08-12-2008 01:14 PM

09-06-2010, 12:27 AM	#16
frank Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,202	Originally posted by ogl Slow APS-C lens - is it what we want? it's ridiculously....Everyone can afford FA35/2 for USD250, but marketing killed this lens. Pentaxian need fast WR prime of 28-30 and cheap 50 mm lens and non-expensive 85/2. Hmmm..If it's true, it's marketing idiocy of Hoya. maybe 16.5-135? Well, Sony also made a slow 85/2.8, haven't they But I do think it should at least be a 35/2. And new guys really want a cheap 50, even a DA50/2 will do.

09-06-2010, 12:32 AM	#17
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	There was rumor about DA-L 35/2.1... Where is the truth?

09-06-2010, 12:37 AM	#18
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by frank Well, Sony also made a slow 85/2.8, haven't they But I do think it should at least be a 35/2. And new guys really want a cheap 50, even a DA50/2 will do. Why Canon, Nikon and Sony offer 50/1.8? And 35/1.8? But Sony also offers 24/2...Not only 85/2.8. Pentax can't offer even 85/2.8.

09-06-2010, 12:50 AM	#19
Gimbal Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,106	Originally posted by ogl Slow APS-C lens - is it what we want? it's ridiculously....Everyone can afford FA35/2 for USD250, but marketing killed this lens. Sure, there is only one problem, the FA35/2 costs about 1052 USD in Sweden. Real cheap those Pentax lenses.

09-06-2010, 12:55 AM	#21
Christopher M.W.T Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,689	Originally posted by ogl There was rumor about DA-L 35/2.1... Where is the truth? That is closer

09-06-2010, 12:59 AM	#22
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Gimbal Sure, there is only one problem, the FA35/2 costs about 1052 USD in Sweden. Real cheap those Pentax lenses. They stopped FA35/2 and rised the prices...But FA35/2 was USD250.

09-06-2010, 01:07 AM	#23
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Christopher M.W.T That is closer There is logic - to announce low-end body with low-end lenses together... 16.5-135 WR is good idea for WR body. Cheap price too...But, not 2.4...Please. But, we'd like more pro-lenses and cameras on September, 20-21.

09-06-2010, 01:07 AM	#24
0144 Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Lithuania Posts: 38	so, as i understand Hoya decided to have some fun and told everybody that they are going to release 35mm F/(your personal number) prime. it basically says that nobody really knows if the number they got is real, or even if it's really a 35mm prime. i guess we'll have to wait and see. personally i wish that they released 28mm F2 FF covering prime they patented not so long ago in DA* flavor

09-06-2010, 01:11 AM	#25
Christopher M.W.T Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 1,689	Originally posted by ogl There is logic - to announce low-end body with low-end lenses together... 16.5-135 WR is good idea for WR body. Cheap price too...But, not 2.4...Please. But, we'd like more pro-lenses and cameras on September, 20-21. What I'd rather see is a WR & * quality flash unit. That to me would just complete and fix the weak link in the Pentax chain. THE FLASH! ThE DAMN FLASH!

09-06-2010, 02:36 AM	#26
RolloR Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 264	WHAT?! f 2.4?! Very slow?

09-06-2010, 04:49 AM	#27
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	DA-L 35/2.4 would be a stupid move. A stop slower than what the competition offers. That would be an obvious "let's not kill the sales of the DA35/2.8 macro" move, IMHO. The other rumour of a DA-L 30/2.1 is a better move, again IMHO. The focal length is different, and f/2.1 is only half a stop from f/1.8...

09-06-2010, 05:10 AM	#28
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by RBellavance The other rumour of a DA-L 30/2.1 is a better move, again IMHO. The focal length is different, and f/2.1 is only half a stop from f/1.8... We will see...DA-L30/2.1 - not bad.

09-06-2010, 05:17 AM	#29
zelovoc Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Kosice Posts: 80	it would be great if they will make a whole line of cheap L primes. i would definitely go for it.

09-06-2010, 05:21 AM	#30
Edvinas Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Kaunas Posts: 1,458	None of them would interest me. I still hope for DA* 16-50 f/2.8 II and DA* 50-135 f/2.8 II (both with proper SDM implementation) .