Originally posted by Ishpuini Well, considering the most expensive lens in the entire line-up is not a DA* but a DA, i.e. the DA560/5.6, I wouldn't exclude a worthy DA* grade DA*16-50/2.8 replacement with DA designation...
Wim
Oh, rats, I'd forgotten about the DA 560 - which introduces also "AW" to the alphabet soup....will the madness ever end?
I like order and system - Pentax lens lineup really isn't quite.
FA Limited: "excellent quality, metal build, fast primes, cover 135"
DA Limited: "excellent quality, metal build, compact primes, at the expense of speed, cover APS-C"
So far, that's rather clear (although I'd love to see a few more FA Limited come out, being addicted to "fast primes")....but besides that...
DA*: would be nice if that meant sealed, SDM, excellent optical quality, pro mechanical quality, f/2.8 and cover 135 (i.e., "the professional & photojournalist series")....the SDM problems, the 60-250/4 and 300/4 and such kinda-sorta breaks that logic, as does the existence of the 560 as a non-DA* break that - that's a lens that is aimed at "professionals" only.
DA: would be nice if that was the consumer-range of DA*, i.e., no SDM, less sealed, perhaps less sturdy construction, perhaps less fast (etc)....but the 10-17 FE kinda break that, the DA17-50 and DA18-270 are SDM, and the DA560 *really* breaks that and the 14/2.8 sorta-kinda breaks that (too expensive, fast, to be usually considered a "consumer lens", I'd wager).
Then, there's D-FA, which ipso facto means "macro lenses" in the lineup (but that wasn't the original intent of that designation, IIRC), the 100/2.8 of which is somewhere between DA (lack of SDM), DA* (WR, excellent optical quality) and FA Limited (metal construction)....
Pentax really couldn't have made their lens lineup any /less/ readable and clear - I find that somewhat unfortunate, especially for "new" entrants to the system.