[zbrueningsen]

Chris if you are doing shots around 85mm I would suggest the Tamron 90 SP Macro 2.8. It is a fine portrait lens. The F/FA 1.7 vs. the F/FA 1.4 debate is all on preference. I have both and I prefer the 1.4 because its beauty in portrait shots. It isn't as sharp as the 1.7 - that is true wide open. They are about the same from 2.8 and up. If you are wanting Bokeh in your pictures - FA 50 1.4 or the Sigma 50 1.4 (I've heard that this is the finest bokeh of the 50s). If you want straight sharpness at a great price - F series 1.7.

Overall I believe my portrait shots are excellent with the Pentax 1.4 and the Tamron 90 SP Macro.

The upside to the new 1.8 is rounded blades - good bokeh. The downside is the plasticky look/feel.

[ChrisTrevino]

Ya, to be honest even 50mm (75mm equiv) is slightly too long for many of my needs. Unfortunately my "studio space" is very small which is limiting for focal lengths.

I am also looking into the 28 to 31mm range as well. a cheap decent quality 24-70 f/2.8 would also probably fit my needs nicely.

I'm not really exactly looking for super creamy bokeh or super sharpness, a good balance of both would be nice.

Most of the time I am shooting portraits I am between f/2.8-f/4 anyway and between f/4-f/8 if I'm trying to hit the 1/180th sync and use flash outdoors.

You have any samples of portraits you have done with the FA f/1.4 and 90 f/2.8 I can look at? (I was considering the 90 at one point for macro as well.)

[hangman43]

Ya, to be honest even 50mm (75mm equiv) is slightly too long for many of my needs. Unfortunately my "studio space" is very small which is limiting for focal lengths.

I am also looking into the 28 to 31mm range as well. a cheap decent quality 24-70 f/2.8 would also probably fit my needs nicely.

I'm not really exactly looking for super creamy bokeh or super sharpness, a good balance of both would be nice.

Most of the time I am shooting portraits I am between f/2.8-f/4 anyway and between f/4-f/8 if I'm trying to hit the 1/180th sync and use flash outdoors.

You have any samples of portraits you have done with the FA f/1.4 and 90 f/2.8 I can look at? (I was considering the 90 at one point for macro as well.)

I am no portrait professional but was playing around the other day (I usually take pics of bugs with macro) trying to figure out how to take pics of people was using my FA 50mm 1.4 here are 2 shots exif intact.

[awo425]

How many 50s and 35s do we need? FA 35f2, DA 35F2.8 Lim, FA 43 F1.9 Lim, DA 35F2.4 (the cheap one that nobody wants), FA 50F1.4, DA*55F1.4, DA 40 F2.8 Lim 2 versions now, not mentioning that there are plenty of used FA and F 50 F1.7 on the market for $200, since they were produced for a few decades. Not mentioning macros in the same focusing range. Who needs another 50, please raise your hand??? I don't, and I will not buy this one for sure.

Pentax, where are 85 F1.8 and 105 F2.8 mm portret lenses? Even used manual focus M42 lenses in this focusing range are fetching $300+ in marketplace. And you don't have any with AF or electronic aperture control. Just plain dumb if you ask me.

[eddie1960]

How many 50s and 35s do we need? FA 35f2, DA 35F2.8 Lim, FA 43 F1.9 Lim, DA 35F2.4 (the cheap one that nobody wants), FA 50F1.4, DA*55F1.4, DA 40 F2.8 Lim 2 versions now, not mentioning that there are plenty of used FA and F 50 F1.7 on the market for $200, since they were produced for a few decades. Not mentioning macros in the same focusing range. Who needs another 50, please raise your hand??? I don't, and I will not buy this one for sure.

Pentax, where are 85 F1.8 and 105 F2.8 mm portret lenses? Even used manual focus M42 lenses in this focusing range are fetching $300+ in marketplace. And you don't have any with AF or electronic aperture control. Just plain dumb if you ask me.

While I agree the 85 and 105 (and 135 for that matter) are lengths that need to be addressed, the Da50 fills a hole. the FA is $400 so a different market. As for the no-one wants the DA 35 f2.4 you can't be serious. I would bet Pentax has sold a boat load of these. though they are plastic, they are well made compared to some of the competition. they also fill an entry level price the other 35's don't. As for performance have a look at some of the images posted with it. It really is an excellent little lens and has got consistently good reviews. the 3 35's actually all fill different needs, the now 4 50/55s same thing. Really this just updated and replaces the F 50 1.7 that hoya killed. and it is a FF lens apparently so will fill the need for an inexpensive normal for any upcoming FF, and having been a recent production item was probably easy to get to market. the older lenses use optical elements that can no longer be sold in the european market so they require redesigns based on the elements available. My guess is Hoya didn't leave any of that sitting ready to go on the shelf. It will come but good design doesn't happen overnight

Edit - BTW pentax never made an AF 105 lens, they have always been 100mm and macro in the AF era - so the DFA100 is there. the missing 135 is a bigger issue

[thibs]

The FA50/1.7 wasn't killed by Hoya. It was killed years ago... KMP says around 2004. IMO, even before.

[eddie1960]

The FA50/1.7 wasn't killed by Hoya. It was killed years ago... KMP says around 2004. IMO, even before.

Possible, it was available at retail long after 2004 though, up until Hoya, It's likely the DA50 1.8 may well have been designed and sat on the shelf even before hoya then as a replacement

[awo425]

While I agree the 85 and 105 (and 135 for that matter) are lengths that need to be addressed, the Da50 fills a hole. the FA is $400 so a different market. As for the no-one wants the DA 35 f2.4 you can't be serious. I would bet Pentax has sold a boat load of these. though they are plastic, they are well made compared to some of the competition. they also fill an entry level price the other 35's don't. As for performance have a look at some of the images posted with it. It really is an excellent little lens and has got consistently good reviews. the 3 35's actually all fill different needs, the now 4 50/55s same thing. Really this just updated and replaces the F 50 1.7 that hoya killed. and it is a FF lens apparently so will fill the need for an inexpensive normal for any upcoming FF, and having been a recent production item was probably easy to get to market. the older lenses use optical elements that can no longer be sold in the european market so they require redesigns based on the elements available. My guess is Hoya didn't leave any of that sitting ready to go on the shelf. It will come but good design doesn't happen overnight

Edit - BTW pentax never made an AF 105 lens, they have always been 100mm and macro in the AF era - so the DFA100 is there. the missing 135 is a bigger issue

That's my whole point. Missing are classic 85/105/135 primes. They are nowhere to be found, and yet Pentax keep spending resources to multiply 50-35 range, range that is already wider then any competitor has to date. And how it is helping Pentax?

I have 35F2 that cost me the same money a few years ago, that Pentax started charging for DA35F2.4.
It is razor sharp from wide open, half stop faster, have nice bokeh and came with lenshood standard. Not even mentioning metal lens mount and aperture ring. I must go complete Mad Cow Desease before I choose DA35F2.4 over FA35.
In fact I would choose used FA35 over DA35/2.4 in New York Minute, even if it would cost me +$100 over DA35F2.4

[eddie1960]

That's my whole point. Missing are classic 85/105/135 primes. They are nowhere to be found, and yet Pentax keep spending resources to multiply 50-35 range, range that is already wider then any competitor has to date. And how it is helping Pentax?

I have 35F2 that cost me the same money a few years ago, that Pentax started charging for DA35F2.4.
It is razor sharp from wide open, half stop faster, have nice bokeh and came with lenshood standard. Not even mentioning metal lens mount and aperture ring. I must go complete Mad Cow Desease before I choose DA35F2.4 over FA35.
In fact I would choose used FA35 over DA35/2.4 in New York Minute, even if it would cost me +$100 over DA35F2.4

I'm not sure it is wider than any other competitor to date. The Price you paid for the 35f2 wasn't a sustainable price though. Nikon makes a large number of lenses in this range as well with 11 lenses between 35-60 showing as current on their website. their is a reason for the huge range in this size. it is the size that allows the most affordable price points to get people into the prime arena, and then there are the specialty uses (like macro) and then high quality for enthusiasts/pros.

current lens lineup in this range at Pentax is 9 lenses including 2 macros - not out of line since they all meet different needs
DA35 2.4
DA 35 2.8 macro
DA40 2.8 xs
DA40 2.8 LTD
FA43LTD
DA50 1.8
FA50 1.4
DFA50 macro
DA*55


What they need is the DA 24 2.8 and DA8 24 1.8/2, the DA28 2.8 and 1.8, DA* 85 1.4, the DA85 2.0 the DA*135 2.0 and the DA135 2.8 - preferably at this point all FF compatible. I think if they are going to do it I would start with the slower lower priced 24/28/85/135 and introduce the higher price ones later as the lower price will sell in much larger numbers and fund the higher price line. - so 4 lenses in addition to 3 FF zooms that's a big chunk of work

.

[wjjstu]

What they need is the DA 24 2.8 and DA8 24 1.8/2, the DA28 2.8 and 1.8, DA* 85 1.4, the DA85 2.0 the DA*135 2.0 and the DA135 2.8 - preferably at this point all FF compatible. I think if they are going to do it I would start with the slower lower priced 24/28/85/135 and introduce the higher price ones later as the lower price will sell in much larger numbers and fund the higher price line. - so 4 lenses in addition to 3 FF zooms that's a big chunk of work.

Or just re-release the 85/1.4, 135/1.8, and 200 macro.

[pdo]

Or just re-release the 85/1.4, 135/1.8, and 200 macro.

Those 3 going to be mighty expensive...

Paul Do

[dadipentak]

Yawn. Wake me up when they release something interesting.

[eddie1960]

Or just re-release the 85/1.4, 135/1.8, and 200 macro.

Aside form the price they would be, you may no longer be able sell the glass used in those in europe (not sure of the lead content) so the glass may not be available. this requires a redesign to take into account the different optical properties of the new glass. Not a major undertaking with CAD but if you are going to redesign then focusing on the volume lower price items first makes more sense

[zbrueningsen]

Awo - My take is that Pentax is building up lines just as though it is a new company. Everyone knew an overhaul was in the process and this could be the way it is. You mention all the old stuff that they have in the F and FA series but only the FA 50 1.4 is being produced. Their production line is not going to be produced on what they made in the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s. It can't. I think you make a great point that there are too many lenses in that range though. Think of where they initially built things in the process - the wide angle and the 50s were the first to be mass produced. Their success dictated future production. Understand that Pentax is in a bit of a pickle in this - because of their K mount and the availability of all the old glass that is manual focus (and AF for that matter) they have to produce that quality again at a good price point. Who is going to spend 700 (maybe 500-600) bucks on a 135 2.8 AF built now when it isn't as good of quality as the A, F, FA series? People will stick with the manual glass. Don't believe me? I would be willing to bet that the Rokinon is quite popular in photography because of its price point and quality. I've read some people even claim that it is as good of quality as the 77 LTD.

As far as the classic 105 prime/portrait prime - look at the 100 Macro. If it is portrait work nobody is racing around and macro zoom speeds are acceptable. I just don't think in this early restructuring phase Pentax is going to go after ANYTHING that the 3rd party market is going to have because of price point.

To respond that nobody wants the 35 2.4 - I'm sure people said this with the 50 1.7 vs the 50 1.4. The 35 2.4 I just picked up, and in my opinion it is as sharp as the 50 1.7. For being a $170 wad of plastic it takes good pictures. That tells me that Pentax released in it in good faith knowing that it would cover the market that the old 50s have on the APC sensor format. Just looked at the 35 2.0 - $475 on B&H new. That is a terrible price point and if it isn't made in Japan it has no market share anymore. The reality is that there is no more made in Japan glass that is inexpensive. Pentax's lines are all under 1000 dollars (except the 645d) which identifies their current market. $700 lenses is going to cater to very few of their current base with the availability of old glass. Which all of this is why I believe they aren't spitting out the lenses you want. I still agree they need to cover a new area, but there are reasons they don't - primes cost a lot of money. Pentax makes terrific primes and always have, and if they can't make if for the competitive price point with their historical quality they won't do it right now.

[Aristophanes]

For DA only and APS-C, Pentax needs to downprice their current primes.

All of them.

DA 15, 21, 35 Macro, and 70. They should also get a 90-120 APS-C DA Macro out as well.

All too expensive in the next few years for sub-$1,000 APS-C camera bodies.

The 35/2.4 and 50/1.8 are the template for the APS-C lens array future. Between 35mm and 50mm it is possible to make lenses that work on both APS-C and FF without much compromise (save the DA 35 Macro). Everything wide and tele will either vignette or be large if trying to accommodate both markets. About the only model unscathed is the 40mm's.

They need a pretty clear distinction between DA and D-FA primes if FF comes or the APS-C specific lenses will not sell at their current price points. The DA Ltds are the best, most compact primes for APS-C and they can keep Pentax relevant and with great ammo against non-OVF m43 and NEX- E-mount stuff.

How they engineer it and remake the DA line is a question for the company and Pentax loyalists.