[RobA_Oz]

Yea, I was hoping for price like 18-55 KIT lenses, under 100 EUR. I'm sure they would sell much more with that price. Why don't they want to listen to me?

But honestly, not lens for me. I have 50mm lens and i've used it like 3 times for maybe 20 photos in last 3 years. Maybe i'll change my sigma 10-20 for new 11-18, and i'm hoping for some ultra long zoom, reaching over 450, maybe like old sigma 300-800 (but with modern image quality and AF)?

It's interesting how photographers' perspectives have changed over the years. For a long time, many who started in 35mm film photography only had a 50mm lens, because most SLR bodies came standard with one, and disposable income was less. It was the same with rangefinder bodies from the likes of Leica and Zeiss, of course. Nonetheless, it was a great learning experience, having to cope with the one focal length. As time went by, prices dropped and wages rose, so other focal lengths became affordable.

Short zooms became the standard before the start of the digital era, with greater general affluence, but quality gave way to convenience despite the steady improvement in zoom lenses, then. Now, we don't tend to think twice about using today's very good zoom lenses, except when we need the things that most don't provide, like control of shallow depth of field or ultimate resolution.

I think the concentration on unifocal lenses like the forthcoming D FA*50/1.4 is actually a good thing, partly because it provides a standard that other lenses in that range can be measured against, but also because it gives attention to the potential benefits of work with a unifocal lens, even for those who never buy one of these. I've got more than one lens in that range, so I'll probably remain in the latter category, because I don't need the lesson – I've had it in the past, but this has reminded me that I should revisit the 50s, now that I'm shooting mostly with my K-1.

[reh321]

I think the concentration on unifocal lenses like the forthcoming D FA*50/1.4 is actually a good thing, partly because it provides a standard that other lenses in that range can be measured against, but also because it gives attention to the potential benefits of work with a unifocal lens, even for those who never buy one of these. I've got more than one lens in that range, so I'll probably remain in the latter category, because I don't need the lesson – I've had it in the past, but this has reminded me that I should revisit the 50s, now that I'm shooting mostly with my K-1.

I was reminded Monday of the shortcoming of a 'unifocal' lens. I was taking a photo of a relatively new train station, but I was frustrated that there was so much parking lot in the picture, regardless of where I stood. When I was stuck with the 45mm lens on my rangefinder camera or the 50mm lens kitted with my Super Program, I would have snapped the picture and been satisfied, but this time I switched to my Sigma 10-20mm lens, stepped forward, and zoomed out, thereby eliminating much foreground of the photo I didn't take from the photo I did take. I have learned so much about composition since I got zoom lenses, and framing was no longer chained to perspective! I'm glad for those who have been waiting for a 50mm lens, but I wouldn't purchase one if I were the richest person on earth.

[beachgardener]

50mm is a staple for me as is 35mm

[RobA_Oz]

I was reminded Monday of the shortcoming of a 'unifocal' lens. I was taking a photo of a relatively new train station, but I was frustrated that there was so much parking lot in the picture, regardless of where I stood. When I was stuck with the 45mm lens on my rangefinder camera or the 50mm lens kitted with my Super Program, I would have snapped the picture and been satisfied, but this time I switched to my Sigma 10-20mm lens, stepped forward, and zoomed out, thereby eliminating much foreground of the photo I didn't take from the photo I did take. I have learned so much about composition since I got zoom lenses, and framing was no longer chained to perspective! I'm glad for those who have been waiting for a 50mm lens, but I wouldn't purchase one if I were the richest person on earth.

I don't know why you put the word "unifocal" within single quotation marks – it's an accepted word for what many people call a "prime" when they're speaking about lenses, but "prime" in that sense means "the first" or "best", which could equally well be a zoom lens. I was referring to non-zoom lenses.

That aside, I wasn't implying that a single unifocal lens doesn't have limitations. My second SLR lens was a 28mm, for exactly the same reasons as you've indicated, but the Brenizer Method wasn't an option when you were shooting film and printing in a darkroom! Also, the few zooms that were available then were really used for convenience, not quality.

I use zoom lenses, too, and some of them are very good, but I also like unifocals for the other things they bring to the picture. Sometimes, what they bring is attention to things you'd miss, otherwise. When I'm travelling, I often put one lens like my FA31 on the camera, because it causes me to see differently. Other times, I'll use a zoom, particularly when I want to record a lot of different things that I'm seeing. Horses for courses.

[ffking]

Ok - so primes are less versatile in one sense, and I don't have much need for 50mm per se, but I know that when I see the results from this lens I'll want one, and if I had that sort of money to play with I'd get one because it will produce results that none of my current lenses - and very few if any currently existing lenses - can produce. I don't mean just sharpness, I mean a look to the final image that is close to if not actually unique. Making your work stand out is more and more difficult with so much photography happening, and lenses like this can do this.

[LensBeginner]

We also didn't have 1.8 zooms once, like the Sigma 18-35 and 50-100...

[Mikesul]

I've been working a lot lately with the DA*55 1.4 and I find it more than adequate for most needs. Kind of like the 60s and 70s with a rangefinder.

[DeadJohn]

This exercise in cross-cultural numerology raises another question in my mind: why are focal lengths always in mm? Don't get me wrong, I'm very pleased about that. However, given that there are as many as three countries (Burma, Liberia & the USA) that haven't adopted the metric system, I wonder if there are or were any lenses with focal lengths expressed in inches? Since many lenses display focus distance in both m and ft still, it is a valid question.

Many mid-size amateur telescope specs in USA give aperture in inches, focal length in mm.

[JPT]

Check the ricoh imaging japan and us sites. 150000yen japan and $1100 usa.

It's like Mistral75 says - The price Nokishita is reporting is the price after the retailer has applied a discount, and those discounts will apply from Day 1. The official price on the Ricoh site will likely be about 170,000-180,000 yen, but that's a price no retailer will be expected to sell at*. I'm not sure why Japanese electronics companies follow this bizarre convention, but it's not just Ricoh.

My point is that the 300mm never really sold at 150,000. It was probably selling for 125,000-130,000 at launch. That would be the price to relate the Nokishita price to if you want to make a comparison. But anyway, it looks like all will be revealed on Friday, so we will soon know for sure.

* Different retailers have different ways of offering the discount. Some are quite transparent and just apply a straight discount (like Fujiya, which is why I linked to it). Others have a point card system, where they give back 10% to the next purchase. Even Ricoh offers discounts to its Family Club members and extends the warranty to 3 years for people who buy direct. A further complication is that some retailers show the price before the 8% sales tax and others including tax. So it's easy to get confused by the camera prices in Japan.

[RGlasel]

it's easy to get confused by the camera prices in Japan.

Which is the intent, I'm sure. This reduces the tendency to shop based only on price and gives the seller a chance to offer unique incentives to convince potential buyers to decide to purchase. Showing the final cost without having to do the calculations is an incentive to some buyers. Different incentives allow sellers to differentiate themselves from other sellers of the same products. Japan isn't the only country where sellers have figured this out.

[robbiec]

Tick tock...

[clackers]

i'm hoping on a price like the 28-105mm at about 500-700 eur

The existing FA50 f1.4 and DA* 55 f1.4 are already well within your budget, Ebk.

This thing will be the biggest and most expensive fifty Pentax has ever made.

[torashi]

The existing FA50 f1.4 and DA* 55 f1.4 are already well within your budget, Ebk.

This thing will be the biggest and most expensive fifty Pentax has ever made.

Is there any bigger or heavier 50/1.4 around?

Gesendet von meinem Mi A1 mit Tapatalk

[robbiec]

Biggest and baddest surely? It has a job to do, stomp on every 50mm out there and call it a draw / personal preference opposite the OTUS 55.

To paraphrase a famous lens article "it’s still Zeiss and Pentax, baby, same as the old days."

[BigMackCam]

Biggest and baddest surely? It has a job to do, stomp on every 50mm out there and call it a draw / personal preference opposite the OTUS 55.

I think this new lens would take any other 50mm lens' mother out for a nice seafood dinner and never call her again. That's what I think.