Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-08-2010, 11:07 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Iowa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,368
QuoteOriginally posted by Miserere Quote
Or those who have been asking for a DA 28mm f/2 for the past few years

...
Take your pick, lol. And I understand the criticism. I am currently also a little underwhelmed. However, I guess I'm not as disappointed as some because:

1. I'm already satisfied with what I have in at this focal length.

2. And because I know two different Pentax users in my family alone who would consider spending more than $200 on a lens an exorbitant, unjustifiable amount of money while they would also like a autofocus lens wider than 50 mm. If you say "f/2.4 that's barely faster than a good f/2.8 zoom" you're already not looking at things from the right perspective. People who buy this new 35 mm will likely never own a f/2.8 zoom.

3. If it's the same design as the FA35 it will have great sharpness even wide open. And if that's true the f/1.8 difference from the Sony and Nikon counterparts, while it will look worse, won't really be that bad. Do many people use those lenses wide open with fantastic results?

Where Pentax may have made their mistake is by thinking that making the lens small and cheap was necessarily more important than making it as good as it could be. Small is something people notice after they buy the lens, but when they're buying online what they look at is the specs.

09-08-2010, 11:20 PM   #17
Veteran Member
yeatzee's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Temecula
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,675
QuoteOriginally posted by blue Quote
the fa was $299 shipped when pentax canceled in their infinite un-wisdom. Some guys in tokyo need kicked in the arse until their noses bleed.
+1

QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
i predict this lens will be a colored flop...

When the press release says "a lightweight inexpensive 'normal' prime", "one of the lightest slr lenses available at a mere 124g" and "hybrid aspherical optical element"

it just screams plastic, including the lens elements.
Sadly, i think pentax just killed sales of the da 35mm f/2.8 macro limited with this new lens.
+1

QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
f2.4 when nikon is offering f1.8 in the same price range/focal length?!? Am i the only one who thinks hoya is loosing it? I think the should kill off faltds, they are holding then back too much and this is one fine example...imo
big +1
09-08-2010, 11:25 PM   #18
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,678
Target audience, guys, target audience.
It's not made for us.
I'm impressed Pentax have gone out on a limb to produce an 'entry-level' prime, but I am DEFINITELY not buying it - nor would any of you, quite clearly.
So see it for what it is - a lens to appeal to newbie prime LBA...

Let's wait and see whether any new lenses come out around the time of the K-5.
09-08-2010, 11:36 PM   #19
Veteran Member
philippe's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Flanders Fields
Posts: 463
QuoteOriginally posted by kevinschoenmakers Quote
What's also troubling, there's apparently no place to attach a hood except for the filter thread. Some serious corner cutting here.
A few years ago, in the 'Silver Age', all lenses only had a filter threat to attach a hood, filter and other 'things' and everybody took it for 'normal'! Now, everybody bashes when there is no extra mount for a hood, nata bene on a low budget lens!
What is going on with you all, are you so spoiled?

09-08-2010, 11:36 PM   #20
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
QuoteOriginally posted by Urkeldaedalus Quote
3. If it's the same design as the FA35 it will have great sharpness even wide open. And if that's true the f/1.8 difference from the Sony and Nikon counterparts, while it will look worse, won't really be that bad. Do many people use those lenses wide open with fantastic results?
The difference between being able to shoot at f/1.8 and f/2.4 is quite noticeable. That's about 1 stop difference and if we go by the rule of thumb that for most lenses the optimal aperture is two stops down from the maximum aperture, that means the range of usable apertures for maximum sharpness is gonna be more limited. Add to the fact that that 1 stop difference affects viewfinder brightness and the ability for the camera to lock focus in low light plus light fall off in the corners, that really adds up. One may feel shooting at f/1.8 may yield weak image quality but having that capability opens up more creative options than a lens with a maximum aperture of f/2.4 (soft OOF backgrounds, better subject isolation, even reversing the lens for macro purposes).

It is just like the comparison between the FA 77mm f/1.8 versus the DA 70mm f/2.4... both are sharp lenses but most who own both clearly find the FA 77mm offers a lot more options in shooting aperture and in controlling the background blur...

Last edited by creampuff; 09-08-2010 at 11:48 PM.
09-08-2010, 11:38 PM   #21
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 12
It's what was expected

Yeah, I'm not sure what some people were expecting... All I've been seeing on the boards the last few days were comments about there being a DA-L level 35mm lens... and that's what it is. I personally was hoping for a DA Limited in the 26-28mm to replace the FA 43mm... but I kind of knew that wasn't going to happen.

I guess the 2.4 vs 1.8 might matter to some... but honestly it's all yet to be seen based on the IQ of the lens and, to some extent, the IQ of the K-r (which this lens is mostly aimed to be paired with) at high ISO. If the K-r continues with the K-x model of being great in the upper ISO range, a one f-stop difference might not really matter all that much to most people.
09-08-2010, 11:42 PM   #22
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
Target audience, guys, target audience.
It's not made for us.
I'm impressed Pentax have gone out on a limb to produce an 'entry-level' prime, but I am DEFINITELY not buying it - nor would any of you, quite clearly.
So see it for what it is - a lens to appeal to newbie prime LBA...

Let's wait and see whether any new lenses come out around the time of the K-5.
Ash, the budget 35mm prime offerings from Sony (f/1.8), Nikon (f/1.8) and Canon (f/2) are all targeted towards newbies... why does Pentax offer a paltry f/2.4 version?
A serious case of not keeping up with the competition. Image quality aside, it's already a non-starter on specifications alone...
09-08-2010, 11:49 PM   #23
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,678
Newbies shooting at f/1.8-2? I can just see all the keepers they'd get from that...
I don't totally disagree with you, it's more an appreciation of what Pentax has released in the newbie prime arena - it's not a total flop for a start IMO.

09-08-2010, 11:53 PM   #24
Veteran Member
wlachan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,626
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
F2.4 when Nikon is offering f1.8 in the same price range/focal length?!? Am I the only one who thinks Hoya is loosing it? I think the should kill off FAltds, they are holding then back too much and this is one fine example...IMO
And w/o Limited, Pentax is nothing. They cannot complete with their bodies, they cannot compete with their consumer zooms, their DA* lenses are junk these days. If not for the metal bodies, DA Limited would be slow, boring & unattractive. I think Pentax got the wrong idea that since Pentax loved the slow DA Limited, minus the metal part should be a success too. WRONG! Metal bodies are the reason people paid a small premium for, even though most are too afraid to admit and insist those optics are bah bah bah!!! The problem is, if they made the DA35/2.4 1.8, the FA31 will suffer, badly. They will lose either way.
09-08-2010, 11:56 PM   #25
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
QuoteOriginally posted by washcoll2004 Quote
Yeah, I'm not sure what some people were expecting... All I've been seeing on the boards the last few days were comments about there being a DA-L level 35mm lens... and that's what it is. I personally was hoping for a DA Limited in the 26-28mm to replace the FA 43mm... but I kind of knew that wasn't going to happen.

.....
don't give up yet... I think that this lens was announced now because as you say it's meant to be paired with K-x/K-r models, high end lens would be announced with high(er) end bodies... hopefully later in the month
09-08-2010, 11:58 PM   #26
Veteran Member
philippe's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Flanders Fields
Posts: 463
QuoteOriginally posted by washcoll2004 Quote
Yeah, I'm not sure what some people were expecting... All I've been seeing on the boards the last few days were comments about there being a DA-L level 35mm lens... and that's what it is. I personally was hoping for a DA Limited in the 26-28mm to replace the FA 43mm... but I kind of knew that wasn't going to happen.

I guess the 2.4 vs 1.8 might matter to some... but honestly it's all yet to be seen based on the IQ of the lens and, to some extent, the IQ of the K-r (which this lens is mostly aimed to be paired with) at high ISO. If the K-r continues with the K-x model of being great in the upper ISO range, a one f-stop difference might not really matter all that much to most people.
AHA, an intelligent remark at last!
I think that that new combo, K-r + DA-L 35, will be the best thing for beginning photography-shool students. Something like the former K1000 + 50mm F1:2 + Tri-X which was THE perfect learning kit at the time, or the Rolleiflex/Xenotar + Lunasix + AGFAPAN 400 what was my learning kit some 35 years ago...

BTW, who of the bashers has already seen, holded an tested these new things?
09-09-2010, 12:02 AM   #27
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
QuoteOriginally posted by wlachan Quote
And w/o Limited, Pentax is nothing. They cannot complete with their bodies, they cannot compete with their consumer zooms, their DA* lenses are junk these days. If not for the metal bodies, DA Limited would be slow, boring & unattractive. I think Pentax got the wrong idea that since Pentax loved the slow DA Limited, minus the metal part should be a success too. WRONG! Metal bodies are the reason people paid a small premium for, even though most are too afraid to admit and insist those optics are bah bah bah!!! The problem is, if they made the DA35/2.4 1.8, the FA31 will suffer, badly. They will lose either way.
agree here, that's why I say they should kill off FA ltds! That would open new road for DA*30/1.4, DA35/2 (no L).
As long as 31ltd remains in production, Pentax will struggle in "normal" prime segment. With their top dog being "only" f1.8 it's hard to do anything... IMO, they knew this and that's why they made the new lens f2.4 instead of f2. They knew that FA35 was/is highly regarded among users, and if the new lens would be the same optics in new shell, it would destroy sales of 31ltd. Now with 2/3s in f stop difference the 31 is more appealing as an upgrade to this...
09-09-2010, 12:03 AM   #28
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,678
QuoteOriginally posted by wlachan Quote
And w/o Limited, Pentax is nothing. The problem is, if they made the DA35/2.4 1.8, the FA31 will suffer, badly. They will lose either way.
Sure, but the Limiteds are everything.
And the DA 35/2.4 and FA 31 ltd are for two completely different customers - even if the DA 35 was f/1.8 and sold for $200...
09-09-2010, 12:06 AM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Iowa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,368
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
The difference between being able to shoot at f/1.8 and f/2.4 is quite noticeable. That's about 1 stop difference and if we go by the rule of thumb that for most lenses the optimal aperture is two stops down from the maximum aperture, that means the range of usable apertures for maximum sharpness is gonna be more limited. Add to the fact that that 1 stop difference affects viewfinder brightness and the ability for the camera to lock focus in low light plus light fall off in the corners, that really adds up. One may feel shooting at f/1.8 may yield weak image quality but having that capability opens up more creative options than a lens with a maximum aperture of f/2.4 (soft OOF backgrounds, better subject isolation, even reversing the lens for macro purposes).

It is just like the comparison between the FA 77mm f/1.8 versus the DA 70mm f/2.4... both are sharp lenses but most who own both clearly find the FA 77mm offers a lot more options in shooting aperture and in controlling the background blur...
Yeah, it's always good to have the option to have a wider aperture. When I had the FA50 f/1.4 I would use the f/1.4 in emergencies and sometimes for the "dreaminess" of it. I would guess that 75 percent of the shots I liked from that lens, though, are from f/2.4 to f/4.

The FA77 to DA70 is actually a useful comparison, because a lot of DA70 owners don't seem to mind the f/2.4 starting aperture only because it is so good at f/2.4. The FA77 does perform well enough at f/1.8 that it's much more usable for this purpose if that's what you're in the market for. Personally I think the two lenses are pretty evenly matched and are a matter of personal preference.

Now if the DA35 f/2.4 is poor at f/2.4, they better sell it for $75, because even newbies will get shooed away from it

The DA35 at f/2.4 is a flaw from a performance perspective, but you correctly point out that it's more of a flaw from a marketing perspective. If a person is choosing between entry level cameras, the lack of the f/1.8 option they're looking for might be one of the things that makes the difference.
09-09-2010, 12:12 AM   #30
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 27
I fully understand why Pentax opted for 2.4 aperture.
The current offer from Pentax around this focal range is already very broad at different price points:

smc PENTAX-FA31mmF1.8AL Limited
smc PENTAX-FA35mmF2A
smc PENTAX-DA35mmF2.8 MacroLimited
smc PENTAX-DA40mmF2.8 Limited
smc PENTAX-FA43mmF1.9 Limited

If they make it faster, they would cannibalize sales of all these lenses much more.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
da, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lenses with Quickshift jaieger Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 5 07-20-2010 05:05 AM
For Sale - Sold: DA 55-300mm/4-5.8 (w/ metal mount, hood and quickshift) (Worldwide) dgaies Sold Items 2 03-25-2010 06:54 PM
Samsung 12-24mm Quickshift Focus omega leader Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 10-07-2009 11:57 AM
Woah... Something weird with quickshift lens GLXLR Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 09-04-2009 04:42 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:05 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top