[dankoBanana]

a (D)FA 20-35/4 Limited with about the size of the 31/1.8 could be quite usefull.

marketed with a small(ish) FF camera as a kit, it would make a lot of sense. thats why we are never going to see it from Pentax

[Pål Jensen]

I can't see the point of a ~20-40mm Limited zoom if it's not FF-compatible, the gap between DA21 and DA35 could be filled better with a 27/2.8.
Howether, looking at the size of the old FAJ 18-35/3-5-4.5 and FA 20-35/4, a (D)FA 20-35/4 Limited with about the size of the 31/1.8 could be quite usefull.

Some people want zoom lenses. About 98% of the lens buying public...

[Uluru]

marketed with a small(ish) FF camera as a kit, it would make a lot of sense. thats why we are never going to see it from Pentax

20-35 mm for FF .. Hmm... Maybe a better idea woud be 28-50mm/f4 or f3.2.
It covers the 28, 35 and 50 mm, all the most popular f-lengths. For many, that could be the one and only camera and lens.

[Tonto]

A 20-35mm FF lens would make for an excellent street walking lens if relatively compact, eg FA31 sized. Handy for landscape too.

[thibs]

Pentax used to make a nice compact 24-50 zoom.

That would be nice...

[Digitalis]

ultra-wide was not even very popular in film; for that you went to MF or LF.

That is rather Debatable, Hasselblad had the SWC - and many Medium format lens makers stopped at around 40-30mm mark depending on the format. With 4X5 format the widest lens* is the Schneider Kreuznach Super Angulon 47mm f/5.6 XL - which is a pretty rare beast these days. It is much easier to buy a FX format 17mm T/S lenses with less bulk and effectively the same functionality. Many of canon's lenses are from the film era the Canon EF14mm f/2.8L** being the widest for full 35mm format, and if you go back even further there was the Carl Zeiss 15mm f/8 Hologon*** for Leica M mount - focal lengths 20mm and wider weren't common but they did exist and they were generally more popular with smaller formats because of the reduced size of the lenses.

though on 8X10 format I have used a Goertz Hypergon ****which was very interesting, but it is a very specialised lens. With a 75mm focal length on 8X10 format it is extremely wide - consider the fact that 300mm is considered a normal lens for 8X10.

*that still allows for some camera movements.
**introduced in 1991.
*** produced in 1972-1976 - apparently only 1000 of these lenses were made, they sell for upwards of $10,000 US these days.
**** these were produced circa 1910~1920 - it is hard to pin the date of production down, but these lenses are quite rare and sell for around $3,400US

[wed7]

I gave up on the 20-40, got myself a tamron 17-50. No need to dream. :-)

[Medium FormatPro]

Pentax used to make a nice

With all of the history of resources I never cold figure out why Pentax does not have more lenses on todays market; especially ones with far better optical and aperature quality

[glanglois]

With all of the history of resources I never cold figure out why Pentax does not have more lenses on todays market; especially ones with far better optical and aperature quality

As you say, the history of available resources (capital budget) explains it all.

[Anvh]

Aperture quality?
Are they made out of plastic now?

[Pål Jensen]

With all of the history of resources I never cold figure out why Pentax does not have more lenses on todays market; especially ones with far better optical and aperature quality

Because it cost money to make lenses of unlimited quality and the fact that any lens steal potential sales from another. They need volume and believe it or not, most DSLR buyers are happy with a couple of zoom lenses.
If you mean faster lenses with aperture quality, the fact is that fast lenses has never been less "needed" than now due to high ISO performance that was pure science fiction in the film days. And they don't sell well either.

[Smeggypants]

If you mean faster lenses with aperture quality, the fact is that fast lenses has never been less "needed" than now due to high ISO performance that was pure science fiction in the film days.

Many people buy fast lenses for shallow DOF shooting.

[Uluru]

With all of the history of resources I never cold figure out why Pentax does not have more lenses on todays market; especially ones with far better optical and aperature quality

I'm not sure what is wrong with today's FA Ltd, DA Ltd and DA* lenses regarding their optical quality?
Can you enlighten us?
What do you exactly expect from such lenses, and at what price? What is your measuring "stick"? Or you are just trying to be mindlessly unrealistic and killing your time while waiting for an FF from Pentax, which in your disappointment renders everything Pentax makes disappointing too?

I know from my experience that lenses such as DA40 and DA70 can compare favourably with Leica's lenses. And they are even AF enabled lenses.

FYI, due to nature of its working and specific design requirements to meet, there is a certain threshold above which any AF lens cannot reach the stellar quality of an exquisite MF lens.

[Medium FormatPro]

from my experience that lenses such as DA40 and DA70 can compare favourably with Leica's lenses. And they are even AF enabled lenses

Uummm, no.

I'll make a comparison posting soon, but nothing that Pentax has can compare with Leica glass

[rvannatta]

Pentax used to make a nice compact 24-50 zoom.

That would be nice...

in the days of the Super Program, I used the 24-50 as a walking around lens. was very happy with it.

Indeed when I finally decided to dispose of my film stuff, and manual focus lenses, I kept a Super Program body with a 24-50 as a monument to the 'film era'. Indeed the only other manual focus lens I kept is a Pentax-A 400mm f/2.8 because there is nothing like it
in Auto-Focus.