ok.............

PENTAX!! Why don't you put HD on ALL lenses for renewal?

I want more lenses!!!!!!!

[Uluru]

Not exactly massive IMO
Stuff like this makes it more appealing

http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/gfx/objekti..._40mm_frei.jpg

f2 v f2.8 is significant to some, this is just one example

Ultron 40/2 is 200g vs DA40's 90g
52mm thread vs 49mm thread.
60 x 25mm vs 63 x 15 mm.

The difference is significant. Ultron weighs almost as DA40 and DA21 together.

And which is beside the point: there's Ultron, there's DA40, so you can choose an f2 lens or an f2.8 lens.
What is supposed to be the problem? This is least a problem Pentax should be addressing: Voigtlander made their lens long after the SMC 40/2.8 was around, and they have decided not to compete directly with it, or be directly compared to it.

PS. There's also Nikon P 45/2.8, which looks very much like SMC 40/2.8. Manual focus lens, made for old Nikon bodies. Pity Nikon has forgotten about it.

[RobA_Oz]

Not exactly massive IMO
Stuff like this makes it more appealing

http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/gfx/objekti..._40mm_frei.jpg

f2 v f2.8 is significant to some, this is just one example

Not a good example, I'm afraid. I looked hard at the Voigtlander 40 (while they were available new in K-mount) but decided that an FA43/1.8 Ltd was a more attractive prospect, having AF and a touch more speed and a better build, in spite of being a little more expensive. I did buy the Voigtlander 58, though, in spite of the MF, but I'd have to think a little harder since the DA*55 became available, even though I love the 58's colouring and bokeh.

[JinDesu]

Not exactly massive IMO
Stuff like this makes it more appealing

http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/gfx/objekti..._40mm_frei.jpg

f2 v f2.8 is significant to some, this is just one example

Minus the autofocus...

Also, you could have just chosen the FA43 F1.9 to compare instead (since the FA43 is smaller than the Voigt) - but even then the DA is smaller. Is it worth that extra 1cm thinner and 60g lighter? Eh - probably not. But if the goal of the Limiteds is to be compact as compact can be - then there you go.

Also, the 40mm/43mm focal length is known for pancakes. The 35mm/50mm/70-80mm is not known for small lenses - but Pentax makes do.

[bossa]

Why would they do that, they are excellent in purple fringing already!


(hopefully also new SDM II)

I like my PF nice and purple thanks! ;-)

[Gray]

Sep 2013
HD DA 15/4 Ltd $700 | smc DA 15/4 Ltd $650
HD DA 21/3.2 Ltd $700 | smc DA 21/3.2 Ltd $650
HD DA 35/2.8 Macro Ltd $750 | smc DA 35/2.8 Macro Ltd $700
HD DA 40/2.8 Ltd $550 | smc DA 40/2.8 Ltd $500
HD DA 70/2.4 Ltd $750 | smc DA 70/2.4 Ltd $700

Mar 2012
smc DA 15/4 Ltd $510
smc DA 21/3.2 Ltd $510
smc DA 35/2.8 Macro Ltd $540
smc DA 40/2.8 Ltd $340
smc DA 70/2.4 Ltd $545

[hidden_au]

FWIW, it looks like Pentax is here to stay, at least in aps-c arena. There is no way Ricoh would launch these new lenses and not have a long term plan for the Pentax line. Unfortunately it looks like a full frame is not coming....unless they announce new HD coatings for the FA Ltd's. Now that would be very interesting.

Agree that with these announcements signal a new apsc is definitely on the way. However its still too soon to discount a full frame. They may hold back the announcements to when the body is announced.

[cali92rs]

Seems like a decent update. What is everybody griping about? I suspect WR
on these lenses is not feasible due to the compactness and quick shift.

As has been stated the DFA 100mm macro has quickshift and is compact.

I thought pentax was supposed to be the company of WR? So we get WR flashes but no new WR lenses?
These are cool lenses but no holes were filled.

[Uluru]

Sep 2013
HD DA 15/4 Ltd $700 | smc DA 15/4 Ltd $650
HD DA 21/3.2 Ltd $700 | smc DA 21/3.2 Ltd $650
HD DA 35/2.8 Macro Ltd $750 | smc DA 35/2.8 Macro Ltd $700
HD DA 40/2.8 Ltd $550 | smc DA 40/2.8 Ltd $500
HD DA 70/2.4 Ltd $750 | smc DA 70/2.4 Ltd $700

Mar 2012
smc DA 15/4 Ltd $510
smc DA 21/3.2 Ltd $510
smc DA 35/2.8 Macro Ltd $540
smc DA 40/2.8 Ltd $340
smc DA 70/2.4 Ltd $545

Actually, if I were Ricoh, I'd double those new, current prices, and double smack all the pretenders. What is ridiculous in all this story is that no one would complain about same or worse prices if the company was Canon — they'd accept it as normal, and quite suitable to Canon's rank. And when purchased, people would treasure them more like they do with Canon L glass.
But in case of Pentax, everything must be undervalued to be "up to scratch".

Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi, was never truer than in case of Pentax and other brands.

[Cannikin]

I actually see the rounded aperture blades as a negative thing in the case of the 15. I'm pretty sure the straight blades are responsible for the starburst effect that the 15 is so famous for. And it's not like you're going to get much bokeh with that lens anyway, so rounded blades are kind of superfluous.

[tzrenz0]

If they only added 2 more blades to the 15 that would be nice. Let's see if it still do those cool starburst tricks. If not then I'll buy the old 15 right now.

[TOUGEFC]

I think this is pretty sad, no new lenses just a new look for all the old limited's. And FWIW the old green looked heaps better.

And the added 2 blades to the 15 is a con.

[JohnBee]

They could even triple or quadruple that and go for a Leica model. Just make fun of everyone who complains about pricing until they simply die-off from embarrassment =

Actually, if I were Ricoh, I'd double those new, current prices, and double smack all the pretenders. What is ridiculous in all this story is that no one would complain about same or worse prices if the company was Canon — they'd accept it as normal, and quite suitable to Canon's rank. And when purchased, people would treasure them more like they do with Canon L glass.
But in case of Pentax, everything must be undervalued to be "up to scratch".

Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi, was never truer than in case of Pentax and other brands.

[Daoidekini]

would be exciting if the price would be limited not unlimited. Waiting for zoom lenses with better performance like competition have

[filoxophy]

Actually, if I were Ricoh, I'd double those new, current prices, and double smack all the pretenders. What is ridiculous in all this story is that no one would complain about same or worse prices if the company was Canon — they'd accept it as normal, and quite suitable to Canon's rank. And when purchased, people would treasure them more like they do with Canon L glass.
But in case of Pentax, everything must be undervalued to be "up to scratch".

Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi, was never truer than in case of Pentax and other brands.

To me personally, the positioning of the Limiteds made more sense to me 18 months ago; "splurge" lenses for amateurs who appreciate superior optical performance and build quality at a "take everywhere" size.

They sat comfortably between the DA series primes/zooms and the DA* series, which features fast apertures, weather sealing, and silent focusing. In short, the Limiteds were premium and the DA*s were professional.

Now the Limiteds are entering full-luxury mode, but they don't have lower cost alternatives besides the (tightly clustered by focal length, and overpriced compared to Pentax's competitors' offerings) DA primes.

The DA 70, for example, at $750 may as well not exist as far as my budget is concerned.

Anyway, these are the thoughts of one recently-converted Pentaxian who feels the Limiteds slipping out of reach. More could be said, but it's tiresome typing on this tablet and it's almost 2am. :-)