[pres589]

That is wishful thinking. For a fair benchmark you need to check the latest OEM lens of that spec. If I am not wrong, that would be the 4 year old Sony, which initially sold for 1500 EUR - four years ago, pre the last +20% price rises.
So an average starting price around 1800 EUR / $1900 is a fair assumption, especially considerung the Sony was not a *-type lens.

The Nikon 58/1.4 was at 1720 EUR initially, which would suggest a current starting price of 1,999 EUR or $2,100.

If Pentax want to go really cheap, then yes, maybe they start out at $1500 for the first two years for the DFA 50.
But then *-lenses never were offered on the cheap side of things, so the direction of $2000 is much more like it.

I can't speak to euro pricing. I could see the pricing be as high as $1500 USD, street, for the first two years like you've suggested. Time will tell.

I really really hope excitement about this lens here on pentaxforums somehow translates into general population excitement.

[D1N0]

Can you do it with the DFA*50 and the DA*55 ?

I could

[beholder3]

The point is that absolute sharpness does not make a great lens.

+1

"Quality" is fulfillment of requirements.

And MTF chart readings is just one out of a couple of dozen of requirements / qualities. Not to even mention that it's probably the least visible one in an image (based on what even the poorest of modern kit lenses produces).

[Snakeisthestuff]

When first reading the news about the DA* 50 1.4 I was also thinking about, why now?

But now I think it makes perfect sense. Remember when Ricoh stated that they want to introduce new lenses specifically designed for FF of the digital era?
For them the old FA* lenses, even Limiteds do not fall into that category, also the DA* 55 never did.

So from their perspective this lens was missing and is no doubt one of the standard lenses you need to offer for an professional user.

Last year I bought a DA*55 new for ~480€ in Japan, and I knew this lens is not perfect (i.e. freaky bokeh 1.4-1.8 on certain situations, SDM-focus speed a little slow, Longitudinal Chromatic Aberrations).
But therefore it is more affordable, much sharper than i expected (better than my DA35 Ltd., didnt know this was possible before xD), small dimensions and not so heavy for a FF lens.

The new D FA* 50mm will be most probably the king of IQ and AF-speed but therefore it is expensive (pro-level), heavy and large.

On the other hand we have the FA 50 which is even more affordable than the DA* 55 but offers no weather resistance and so on.

So actually for me all these lenses do make sense for different kind of use cases / people.
In my case, I am happy I bought the DA* 55 since I wanted a AWR lens for hiking in all weather conditions, also I do not have unlimited funds to spend on my camera gear as its "only" a hobby.
Buying that DA* 55 has kept me some money I can save up for the roadmapped wide angle lens (hopefully DFA*) for landscape photography.

So for me it was a very good thing seeing pentax offering these newly developed DFA* lenses, which shows me they are really serious concerning there FF lineup.
I think we all can agree on that, right .

[pres589]

The DA*55, in your experience, is sharper than the DA 35 Ltd. Macro? This is not something I would have expected to hear.

[awscreo]

Funny reading "DxO" and "reference" in the same sentence...

I don't put any faith in DxO's results and opinions, because of how they test lenses. And mostly because of the erroneous and blanket evaluations they make.

You appear to have missed my point. The point is not how to measure a lens's sharpness. The point is that absolute sharpness does not make a great lens.

OK, I wasn't trying to imply anything about your evaluation, I was honestly asking if you had a method you use to determine how a 77ltd outresolves 36mp sensors. But now I see it's all just your personal opinion.

I don't know how exactly dxo does their testing but it seems more scientific than "I think this lens is good".

[ffking]

I think the sharpness test scores are one of those necessary evils - you have to convince the world that you are capable of making sharp lenses as well as anybody in order to be taken seriously - whether Pentax can still sprinkle it with pixie dust is another matter - but I think that the D-FA 70-200 has a pinch of it as well as being very sharp.

[MJKoski]

As far as I can tell, as long as we don't mind the slow focussing SDM motor the 55 1.4 will still be the choice for many users who'd like a 1.4 lens for daylight portraiture etc.. What's not to like?

If you are pushing the limits of low light AF I'm sure the new design will be better, and there are a few of us who need that. Even I need it once a year.

Yes, 55/1.4 looks like fine candidate. I considered it for ~normal lens but got 43mm ltd at exceptionally good price. Only thing which does not work with 55mm and K-1 is the APS-C tuned lens hood. Other than that it looks razor sharp stopped down few stops. My 1500 euro estimate included Finland-extra bonus increment of ~300 euros.

But anyway, this is where K-1 and these modern lenses *might* get costly. If CaNikon bodies cost a bit more, you can get ART-lenses for them. This few 50mm has to be exceptionally good to overtake 50mm ART. Same applies to 85mm compared to 85mm ART which btw. reached/passed Otus 85mm in many benches. I call this Pentax Trap Effect.

[monochrome]

How many people would actually buy a slight update of FA 50 or FA 43 with the addition of in lens motor and quick shift? Seems like if that is what Pentax came out with, most people would do a hard pass on such a lens. Those lenses do exist and will continue to exist. If want one of those, it is better to buy from current stock.

IMO Pentax is playing the FF lens transition very well -

• Continue to produce and sell the FA Limiteds as they are - until people stop buying them
• Temporarily fill immediate gaps where necessary with excellent Rebadges or legacy designs still in production.
• Develop new, truly top-flight lenses that will be relevant and competitive for a decade or more
• Develop high-consumer lenses that have value by punching well above their weight, not merely by price

I'll leave it to you to decide which lenses fit in which category

[bdery]

OK, I wasn't trying to imply anything about your evaluation, I was honestly asking if you had a method you use to determine how a 77ltd outresolves 36mp sensors. But now I see it's all just your personal opinion

Actually it's not, but I had decided not to go there in my reply. I am one of the people performing lens reviews for pentaxforums, and an by trade an optical designer with a PhD in optics It would hijack the thread even more to go into details of how lenses are tested and how I build my opinion, but reading reviews will give you an idea. There's a subjective (meaning, non-measurable) part to it, sure, based on my experience with the lenses and looking at how they perform in various situations, the level of detail they deliver, how one compares to the other, but for the most part it's quantitative.

I don't know how exactly dxo does their testing but it seems more scientific than "I think this lens is good".

What they do is : verify that a particular copy of a particular lens, on a particular camera, is sharp.

What they SAY is : that lens design compares in such-and-such way with all those other lens designs from all those other manufacturers, and our conclusions are general and applicable in all cases. and they substitute "sharp" with .good" in their conclusions.

I think the sharpness test scores are one of those necessary evils - you have to convince the world that you are capable of making sharp lenses as well as anybody in order to be taken seriously - whether Pentax can still sprinkle it with pixie dust is another matter - but I think that the D-FA 70-200 has a pinch of it as well as being very sharp.

The 70-200 is an astounding lens. If not for the size, I would have considered replacing the 60-250 with it, and that's saying something. But I wouldn't say it has pixie dust.

IMO Pentax is playing the FF lens transition very well -
Continue to produce and sell the FA Limiteds as they are - until people stop buying them
Temporarily fill immediate gaps where necessary with excellent Rebadges or legacy designs still in production.
Develop new, truly top-flight lenses that will be relevant and competitive for a decade or more
Develop high-consumer lenses that have value by punching well above their weight, not merely by price
I'll leave it to you to decide which lenses fit in which category

I fully agree with that analysis.

[lithedreamer]

You can't expect a 1.4 lense to be as compact as the 28-105..come on

You took what I said out of context. I was replying to the sentiment that 'there are no compact D FA lenses' by naming two.

[ffking]

The 70-200 is an astounding lens. If not for the size, I would have considered replacing the 60-250 with it, and that's saying something. But I wouldn't say it has pixie dust.

Ok - put it this way - the pictures I get out of it are more pure Pentax than those I get out of the 24-70 - I prefer the rendition, not just the sharpness, and in an undefinable way - it just has that Pentax something that the 24-70 lacks (to me).

[lithedreamer]

Are you implying that (necessarily, or most often) there is a rational choice involved?

What's wrong with wanting one camera that offers both light lenses sometimes and (superb, but) heavier lenses at other times? The last shoot I was on, I brought my * 70-200 and my 43 Limited. I knew what field of view I wanted most of the time, and a lightweight prime gave me the option of a little variety.

When I go shoot street photography, I have my 31 and my 43. When my subject is models or distant landscapes, I take the 70-200. When I'm just walking around, I often take the 100 Macro, because it's so lightweight, and the macro ability makes me think more creatively about my shots.

[robjmitchell]

But anyway, this is where K-1 and these modern lenses *might* get costly. If CaNikon bodies cost a bit more, you can get ART-lenses for them. This few 50mm has to be exceptionally good to overtake 50mm ART. Same applies to 85mm compared to 85mm ART which btw. reached/passed Otus 85mm in many benches. I call this Pentax Trap Effect.

Art Series lenses dont have stabilisation.
Imagine an AF Otis with 5 stops of stabilisation, I think pros will be happy to pay $1500 for that.

[Glorfindelrb]

Options are good. I would rather walk into a restaurant with multiple things on the menu and choose, rather than only have one option to choose from.

And that's a mistake, for restaurants.

I'm on the market for such a lens if it delivers as expected but will probably get the 85 first.