Originally posted by ManuH Great, now onto the personal attacks.
Call that an attack? Get a grip. You threw the first stone by saying...
Originally posted by ManuH The 35mm f/2.4 is only good for starved Pentaxians when all their options are the ultra expensive 31mm Ltd, the gone FA 35mm f/2 or the slow DA 35mm ltd and DA 40mm Ltd.
"You made your bed and you must lie in it" is I think the appropriate saying.
Originally posted by ManuH How can you seriously advise a Pentax camera with a 35/2.4 when the competition offers a cheap 35/1.8.
Many reasons, which I am sure are obvious to you now I have stated them:
- The Pentax lens comes stabilised via the body.
- The Pentax lens comes bundled real cheap with the body, so the total cost of ownership is in fact lower.
- The IQ of the DA35/2.4 might well be superior to the competition. Who can know at this time?
- It fits on the same camera as the FA Limited series.
- It comes in nifty colours.
Best of all, by bundling a fixed focal length lens with a body, Pentax is making a clear statement about photographic priorities. Forget slow zooms. Get a prime lens and train your eye. Get one or two stops of extra light for free. How can all of these things be anything but
a brilliant statement of the Pentax Way? Originally posted by ManuH Do you really think Pentax is not able to build a good f/2 lens in this range?
When did I make any such claim? Please stop putting word in my mouth to make your own frail arguments. Obviously Pentax
can do so, since they
have done so. It's called the FA31 and there is no better lens in its focal range.
Originally posted by ManuH It's a pure marketing decision and Hoya should be criticized for this, not excused in any way.
All product releases are the result of marketing decisions so what the heck is your point?