new announcements?

macTak · 09-08-2010, 12:51 PM

I still have trouble believing the 35mm f2.4 rumor, as that's quite slow sounding compared to the competition on the market (f2.1 would be more believable). Plus there really wouldn't be much going for it besides price over the DA35 Ltd (and it's not like the DA35 is outrageously expensive). I can understand Pentax not wanting to undercut the FA Ltd 31, but does that mean we're never to see another fast prime in the 28-35mm range? (It it was I, I'd pursue a 26mm f1.8 as the best fit into the lineup.) As to the given specks, well the size would be the same as the FA35, and the MFD is the same, and it's about 50g lighter (about the same weight as the DA70), which I suppose is possible with the metal removed and likely smaller elements. I will say this, if it really is f2.4, I would expect the lens to be one that does very well numerically in terms of sharpness.

**ManuH** · 09-08-2010, 12:59 PM

Originally posted by macTak

I can understand Pentax not wanting to undercut the FA Ltd 31, but does that mean we're never to see another fast prime in the 28-35mm range?

The FA 35mm f/2 has always been available against the 31mm ltd. It's 95% as good at less than half the price. That didn't prevent people wanting the additional 5% IQ...

Originally posted by zman:

Hope it has the top LCD though

Forget about it, the top LCD has no place anymore on entry level bodies. The back LCD is now more than good enough to replace it, I don't miss it on my K-x. I prefer to have it but it's far from a deal breaker. On the K100D/K10D/K20D cameras it was necessary because the back LCD wasn't displaying exposure in live like the newer cameras do.

mikemike · 09-08-2010, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by ManuH

The FA 35mm f/2 has always been available against the 31mm ltd. It's 95% as good at less than half the price. That didn't prevent people wanting the additional 5% IQ...

You also have to consider how usable it will be wide open and whether or not it will support quickshit focusing

RBellavance · 09-08-2010, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by mikemike

You also have to consider how usable it will be wide open and whether or not it will support quickshit focusing

DA-L means no quick-shift, IMHO. And whether it's f/2.1 or f/2.4, it *better* be tack sharp from wide-open.

glanglois · 09-08-2010, 02:04 PM

I was hoping for a more capable camera and willing to look at USD $100-$150 more.

If the above is true, it means that my predictions of continued K-X availability are very, very wrong. Not enough difference in specs or price to find a home for the K-X.

We'll have to see about visible AF points, improved noise management, video improvements, and the special "fine dining" mode that makes a Big Mac look like it's worth at least one half a Michelin star.

Is this the D3100 competitor?

VaughnA · 09-08-2010, 02:26 PM

I'll be the odd man out and say that I'm interested in a 35 F2.4. I'm ready to jump back into AF primes (sold my 50 because it was too wide) and I don't have a big pocket. I could get the 35 for less than a used 28. Of course we'll need to see about IQ but 2.4 would be fine with me and as light as it is, plastic wouldn't be a show stopper and I rarely use quick shift.

mattdm · 09-08-2010, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by VaughnA

I'll be the odd man out and say that I'm interested in a 35 F2.4.

From my point of view: f/2.4 and weathersealed, sold.

Rory · 09-08-2010, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by mattdm

From my point of view: f/2.4 and weathersealed, sold.

It won't be WR.

ewalk · 09-08-2010, 07:19 PM

Originally posted by Rory

It won't be WR.

Shame.

That being said, if it's around the rumored $199 price-point and significantly smaller and lighter than my Sigma 30mm, I'm buying it as soon as it's available.

mattdm · 09-08-2010, 08:22 PM

Originally posted by Rory

It won't be WR.

I'm not holding my breath.

I don't think it'll *hurt* to have another lens in the lineup: more is good! But I've already got the DA 40mm Limited; going slightly wider isn't something I really need. But if I had a weather-sealed normal, well, the 40mm might come off my camera more often, given the weather around here.

Rory · 09-08-2010, 08:33 PM

Originally posted by mattdm

I'm not holding my breath.

I don't think it'll *hurt* to have another lens in the lineup: more is good! But I've already got the DA 40mm Limited; going slightly wider isn't something I really need. But if I had a weather-sealed normal, well, the 40mm might come off my camera more often, given the weather around here.

Oh, I understand the desire and reasoning behind it. And it would be great. However, I think everyone is correct in the thought that Pentax will need to create more competatively priced primes to continue to draw people over with the Kx and Kr.

nosnoop · 09-08-2010, 08:41 PM

Originally posted by mattdm

I don't think it'll *hurt* to have another lens in the lineup: more is good! But I've already got the DA 40mm Limited; going slightly wider isn't something I really need. But if I had a weather-sealed normal, well, the 40mm might come off my camera more often, given the weather around here.

Given that it has a plastic lens mount - I really don't have much high expectation of this budget prime.

09-08-2010, 12:51 PM	#31
macTak Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 759	I still have trouble believing the 35mm f2.4 rumor, as that's quite slow sounding compared to the competition on the market (f2.1 would be more believable). Plus there really wouldn't be much going for it besides price over the DA35 Ltd (and it's not like the DA35 is outrageously expensive). I can understand Pentax not wanting to undercut the FA Ltd 31, but does that mean we're never to see another fast prime in the 28-35mm range? (It it was I, I'd pursue a 26mm f1.8 as the best fit into the lineup.) As to the given specks, well the size would be the same as the FA35, and the MFD is the same, and it's about 50g lighter (about the same weight as the DA70), which I suppose is possible with the metal removed and likely smaller elements. I will say this, if it really is f2.4, I would expect the lens to be one that does very well numerically in terms of sharpness.

09-08-2010, 12:59 PM	#32
ManuH Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Montreal Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,249	Originally posted by macTak I can understand Pentax not wanting to undercut the FA Ltd 31, but does that mean we're never to see another fast prime in the 28-35mm range? The FA 35mm f/2 has always been available against the 31mm ltd. It's 95% as good at less than half the price. That didn't prevent people wanting the additional 5% IQ... Originally posted by zman: Hope it has the top LCD though Forget about it, the top LCD has no place anymore on entry level bodies. The back LCD is now more than good enough to replace it, I don't miss it on my K-x. I prefer to have it but it's far from a deal breaker. On the K100D/K10D/K20D cameras it was necessary because the back LCD wasn't displaying exposure in live like the newer cameras do.

09-08-2010, 01:13 PM	#33
mikemike Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: New Orleans Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,053	Originally posted by ManuH The FA 35mm f/2 has always been available against the 31mm ltd. It's 95% as good at less than half the price. That didn't prevent people wanting the additional 5% IQ... You also have to consider how usable it will be wide open and whether or not it will support quickshit focusing

09-08-2010, 01:22 PM	#34
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	Originally posted by mikemike You also have to consider how usable it will be wide open and whether or not it will support quickshit focusing DA-L means no quick-shift, IMHO. And whether it's f/2.1 or f/2.4, it better be tack sharp from wide-open.

09-08-2010, 02:04 PM	#35
glanglois Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Madison, Wis., USA Posts: 1,506	I was hoping for a more capable camera and willing to look at USD $100-$150 more. If the above is true, it means that my predictions of continued K-X availability are very, very wrong. Not enough difference in specs or price to find a home for the K-X. We'll have to see about visible AF points, improved noise management, video improvements, and the special "fine dining" mode that makes a Big Mac look like it's worth at least one half a Michelin star. Is this the D3100 competitor?

09-08-2010, 02:26 PM	#36
VaughnA Banned Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Virginia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,363	I'll be the odd man out and say that I'm interested in a 35 F2.4. I'm ready to jump back into AF primes (sold my 50 because it was too wide) and I don't have a big pocket. I could get the 35 for less than a used 28. Of course we'll need to see about IQ but 2.4 would be fine with me and as light as it is, plastic wouldn't be a show stopper and I rarely use quick shift.

09-08-2010, 06:29 PM	#37
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by VaughnA I'll be the odd man out and say that I'm interested in a 35 F2.4. From my point of view: f/2.4 and weathersealed, sold.

09-08-2010, 07:04 PM	#38
Rory Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Chicago Photos: Gallery Posts: 672	Originally posted by mattdm From my point of view: f/2.4 and weathersealed, sold. It won't be WR.

09-08-2010, 07:19 PM	#39
ewalk Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 316	Originally posted by Rory It won't be WR. Shame. That being said, if it's around the rumored $199 price-point and significantly smaller and lighter than my Sigma 30mm, I'm buying it as soon as it's available.

09-08-2010, 08:22 PM	#40
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by Rory It won't be WR. I'm not holding my breath. I don't think it'll hurt to have another lens in the lineup: more is good! But I've already got the DA 40mm Limited; going slightly wider isn't something I really need. But if I had a weather-sealed normal, well, the 40mm might come off my camera more often, given the weather around here.

09-08-2010, 08:33 PM	#41
Rory Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Chicago Photos: Gallery Posts: 672	Originally posted by mattdm I'm not holding my breath. I don't think it'll hurt to have another lens in the lineup: more is good! But I've already got the DA 40mm Limited; going slightly wider isn't something I really need. But if I had a weather-sealed normal, well, the 40mm might come off my camera more often, given the weather around here. Oh, I understand the desire and reasoning behind it. And it would be great. However, I think everyone is correct in the thought that Pentax will need to create more competatively priced primes to continue to draw people over with the Kx and Kr.

09-08-2010, 08:41 PM	#42
nosnoop Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 1,299	Originally posted by mattdm I don't think it'll hurt to have another lens in the lineup: more is good! But I've already got the DA 40mm Limited; going slightly wider isn't something I really need. But if I had a weather-sealed normal, well, the 40mm might come off my camera more often, given the weather around here. Given that it has a plastic lens mount - I really don't have much high expectation of this budget prime.