[janneman]

Well a zoom lens is always going to be bigger, heavier and may not on balance have as good image quality as a prime lens BUT the reality is a large proportion of shooters today do opt for zooms for the convenience. There are a few constant f/2.8 zooms that do give a lens like the DA 40mm a run for the money image quality wise. My argument is if one already have a fast zoom, then buying a prime lens of the same maximum aperture is not going to be much of an improvement aside from the size, weight and slight gain in image quality. What's the point of buying a prime if it can't deliver the often touted advantage of a larger maximum aperture and the associated benefits that comes with it.

I guess the availablility of good f2.8 zooms may be a reason to concentrate on small , light cheap for one prime instead of f2.0 or something This f2.4 would not matter to most people for their first prime

The whole point of primes is to have a comparatively small lens with great IQ thats much faster than zooms! You may not need it, but I'd reckon the VAST majority would rather have a 35mm that is not so stinking slow :ugh:

And please, take a look at the Nikon and their 35mm :ugh: If only pentax would have made a similar lens now of course, there is no longer a possibility they will. Looks like the Sigma 30mm F/1.4 is in my future :ugh:
.

It may be different, a slow DA35/2.4 would be cheap and small so that may attract a certain crowd without (because of plastic mount, not being fast etc etc) canibalizing on the crowd lusting for for example a DA*30/1.4 or the FA31/1.8 LE.
So we may see a fast sealed top IQ lens appear after al, would have been unlikely if it were a DA L35/1.8

[Ash]

I've asserted this from the beginning: different markets for the DA 35 and FA 31 ltd.
I don't see the DA 35 shifting prices anywhere in the lineup, nor do I see it as a prime failure for the discovering newbie who wants their hands on a good cheap 'normal' prime.

[janneman]

I've asserted this from the beginning: different markets for the DA 35 and FA 31 ltd..

Yes but the DA35 would have competed in the same market if it were faster

[ManuH]

I've asserted this from the beginning: different markets for the DA 35 and FA 31 ltd.
I don't see the DA 35 shifting prices anywhere in the lineup, nor do I see it as a prime failure for the discovering newbie who wants their hands on a good cheap 'normal' prime.

Sony, Canon and Nikon all have faster lens for similar prices. But yes they are not available in multiple colors!!! If it was a 30mm f/2.4 I would be less disapointed, but as it is it's a failure compared to the competition.

[ManuH]

Yes but the DA35 would have competed in the same market if it were faster

Not really, it was the same thing between the FA 35/2 and FA 31 Ltd before. Many people (me included) settled on the 35mm because it offered most of the performance without the price tag. But the 31mm is still the better lens and many people will pay the price for the small increase in performance because they're guarantee to have a top lens, regardless of brands.

[lithos]

It wouldn't surprise me if the optical quality of the f2.4 35mm outstrips the Nikon and Canon offerings at the same aperture.

Also, the Pentax one looks a helluva lot better.

It's bleeding brilliant, though, that's it's a kit option (and multicoloured to boot.) Even the most po-mo of punters with their flickr accounts and Holgas are beginning to get interested in primes. Man, if the K-5 comes with the 35mm, I might just wet myself.

[rawr]

If the DA 35 2.4 is a great performer optically, especially wide-open, no one will have any reason to complain, especially for the price.

Next task for Pentax will be a round of related software updates:
- update the K-7 and K-x firmware to include the optical profile of the 35/2.4 in the in-built lens corrections;
- update the DCU4 software to include the 35/2.4 lens profile (as well as all the other image effects introduced in the K-r).

[ManuH]

- update the K-7 and K-x firmware to include the optical profile of the 35/2.4 in the in-built lens corrections;

Not needed, the profile is in the lens' chip.

[rparmar]

DA 35mm f/2.4 AL is the new kit prime lens...

Why the frown? This is a BRILLIANT idea!

Bundle a small, high IQ (I am presuming) prime with the kit and give people a new photographic experience. The f/2.4 aperture is faster than the DA Limiteds and one to two stops better than a cheap zoom. Pentax has given new DSLR users better lowlight performance through the simple expedient of giving them a faster lens. Furthermore, this plays to the brand's strengths -- a company for prime shooters who care about IQ. Now it is apparent why the FA35/2 was switched out of production; this is no doubt a re-jigged version of that item.

Unfortunately it is not a 28mm, which would have made a lot more sense in the lens line-up. No doubt this new kit prime will eat sales of the DA35 Limited.

Better yet, we see from that page that the FA43 will be kept in production, in silver no less! All the full-frame rumour geeks will love this!

[janneman]

Not really, it was the same thing between the FA 35/2 and FA 31 Ltd before. Many people (me included) settled on the 35mm because it offered most of the performance without the price tag. But the 31mm is still the better lens and many people will pay the price for the small increase in performance because they're guarantee to have a top lens, regardless of brands.

That is my point exactly. If it were a FA35/2.8 or even 2.4. I guess many would ave bought the FA31/1.8.

[Christopher M.W.T]

I really don't see what's so wrong with F2.4.

I rarely go below F2 on my FA50 1.4 and yeah Tanner aka Yeatzhee will totally disagree with me on this one!

But the FA50 1.4 is at a particular price point and so is the DAL35.

Let's just see how it performs in the real world whne it's available!

[raider]

I do not understand all the nay sayings about the new DAL 35/2.4.

The DA35/f2.8 Ltd is a f2.8 lens but yet it is called by some as "the greatest lens ever". Why would the DAL35 be put off because it is a F2.4 lens and not a F1.4 (or whatever)?

[ManuH]

I do not understand all the nay sayings about the new DAL 35/2.4.

The DA35/f2.8 Ltd is a f2.8 lens but yet it is called by some as "the greatest lens ever". Why would the DAL35 be put off because it is a F2.4 lens and not a F1.4 (or whatever)?

Competition. There's no other similar lens and it's a true 1:1 macro so the relative slow max aperture is not a big deal but it's not the first lens I would reach when doing hand held low-light photography.

Another case is 40mm f/2.8 vs FA 35mm f/2. I have both lenses. I prefer the 40mm except in low-light. The one full stop provided by the FA 35mm is very useful indeed and it's more than sharp enough. That said, if the Voightlander 40mm f/2 was AF I would have bought this one instead of the DA 40mm and saving money in the process for skipping the FA 35/2.

And to repeat myself the new 35/2.4 is only interesting compared to other Pentax lenses. It looses badly vs what the competition is offering.

[gazonk]

Competition. There's no other similar lens and it's a true 1:1 macro so the relative slow max aperture is not a big deal but it's not the first lens I would reach when doing hand held low-light photography.

I dunno, wider apertures than 2.8 must be used be care anyway (because of the thin DOF: I've tons of pictures of the kids shot in available light with ME Super or LX and the M-50/1.7, and most of them were shot with at least f/2.8 in order to get more than the tips of their noses in focus), the only gripe I have with the DA35Ltd and hand held low-light photography is that autofocus at a few meters distance is slightly unreliable with my K10D (presumably because of the ridiculously short throw at those distances - it's a macro after all).

[ManuH]

I dunno, wider apertures than 2.8 must be used be care anyway (because of the thin DOF:

Yes but at 35mm the DoF is actually deeper. DoF is relative to the physical aperture size thus a 35mm f/2 has about the same DoF as a 50mm f/2.8.