Originally posted by Uluru A prime lens that has a 62mm filter and weighs 0.66 lb is NOT a compact lens. If it was a zoom, then maybe.
Plus, Pentax would never design such a substandard lens body and mechanics for its K-mount. Just compare it to DA20-40 level of refinement.
Pentax won't go that route. There is reason behind SR inside camera, a reason behind compactness for an APS-C DSLR lens. A real photographer would understand Pentax intention immediately, but single-minded faux-photographers can not.
Fast glass for low expectations and low delivery where it really matters : go and buy tons of f/1.2 Voightlanders, Canons and Fujis, and shush, shush, just go and enjoy all the pretence with it.
Wow! Only a few years ago Pentax was still supplying the market with one of the very best 50/1.2 around. I still know Canon pro's that prefer to use the Pentax 50/1.2 on their Canon's, because the Canon equivelent sucks bigtime. But I guess back then they were a faux-photographer brand then?
In my own honest faux-photographer opinion though, photography-gear is about light and optics, and less so about high ISO oil paintings. Larger apertures are a plus, equally so are higher ISO capabilities. And the combination of the two is very sweet. The 50/1.2 stopped down just a little with a higher but still usable ISO enables me to take very sharp photo's without flash in very low light. Very hard to sacrifice that for the sake of having a smaller lens. What good is removing 1 or maybe 2 centimeters from a lens if it means having to mount a giant powerfull flash?
The small and slow Pentax lenses are an intruiging enigma. Apparently Pentax finds miniaturisation in their lenses so ultimately important that they are even prepared to sacrifice several stops. (Sacrificing valueble low light performance, versatility and even sharpness.) But then comes the paradox: they don't find the same miniaturisation important enough to sacrifice a mirrorbox and mechanism in their cameras. A much smaller sacrifice that doesn't even influence the quality of the images in the slightest bit, only the view through the viewfinder.
I think somewhere in the period between the development of the compact ltd lenses and the CMOS sensor they switched directions again. Compactness no longer being the highest priority: Which resulted in not developing a good mirrorless solution and the developement of the big heavy retro styled DA 20-40.