[RonHendriks1966]

weight is 2.95kg and fron filter size is 105mm

Well there is also the magic. Wanting long lenses and fast makes them grow rapidly. A DA*135mm/f2.0 would have a 67mm frontlens and a DA*135mm/f1.8 would need a 77mm frontlens.

So the new 560mm/f5.6 needs a 100mm frontglas, but when Pentax descides to use the 77mm frontglassize it would make a 560mm/f7.3 lens. Still a great lens and only 2/3th EV slower that can be compensaded with either iso or shuttertime but much cheaper and less heavy.

So going from 300mm/f2.8 to a max of 270mm/f2.8 does make a huge difference.

[RioRico]

Deviating a bit from the current discussion, I'll suggest that Pentax produce modern analogs of the old budget FF lens kits. Back in the day, a budget shooter might have 3 or 4 or 5 lenses: 28 or 35, 50-55, 90 or 135, with the Fifty and Ninety being f/2 or faster and the others being f/2.8. I'll suggest these APS-C counterparts, in focal length and aperture (for similar DOF):

135/FF -- APS-C
------ -- -----
28/2.8 -- 18/1.8
35/2.8 -- 24/1.8
50/2.0 -- 35/1.4
90/2.0 -- 60/1.8 [macro?]
135/2.8 - 90/1.8

We can round-up those f/1.8s to f/2. And a clear message emerges: Pentax needs to make budget DA or DA-XS versions of these: 18/2, 24/2, 35/1.4, 60/2, 90/2. Price them at under US$200 each, at quality levels equivalent to the A50/2: good but not super-duper. All optical aberrations needn't be corrected, when needed corrections can be applied in PP or in-camera.

I like 'normal' focal lengths, so another cheap winner might be a DA-XS 28/2, analog of 45/2.8. And remember than the upcoming DA-XS 50/1.8 will be analogous to 75/2.8.

I don't say that the above are on my "wish list" (except maybe 18+24mm pancakes) but I think they might incite some excitement & sales. Sales are good. Greed is good.

[RonHendriks1966]

And a clear message emerges: Pentax needs to make budget DA or DA-XS versions of these: 18/2, 24/2, 35/1.4, 60/2, 90/2. Price them at under US$200 each, at quality levels equivalent to the A50/2: good but not super-duper. All optical aberrations needn't be corrected, when needed corrections can be applied in PP or in-camera.

I like 'normal' focal lengths, so another cheap winner might be a DA-XS 28/2, analog of 45/2.8. And remember than the upcoming DA-XS 50/1.8 will be analogous to 75/2.8.

I don't say that the above are on my "wish list" (except maybe 18+24mm pancakes) but I think they might incite some excitement & sales. Sales are good. Greed is good.

Well in my mind there is absolutely no thinking of what focal length my current lenses would be on FF or the other way around to think of what counterpart of old day lenses should be made. It's like Ronald Reagan said: A dollar is a dollar! The lens in my hands is the one I use and is of no interest of what it would be on a camera that I don't have.

So I still would want a FF (or APS-H) camera. And I would like to have a nice fast DA 28mm/f2 xs lens. I do agree with you that there is a good market for a small series of cheap lenses, but also for good lenses.

[bilybianca]

Just put back the FA135 and FA*200 macro in production as DFA 135mm f2.8 and DFA*200mm f4 macro 1:1 and I'd be happy. Well, I wouldn't mind a DFA*85 f1.4 either based on the FA*85.

Weather proving a wide angle, maybe even the DA14mm would also be clever.

+1
Or instead of the FA 135mm put the A* 135 F1.8 back to life as a DA* lens for concert photography (I'd use it for portraits too).
And also a shift/tilt lens around 18mm to replace the fun-to-use but not-wide-enough (aps-c) K 28mm shift lens.

Kjell

[eddie1960]

Deviating a bit from the current discussion, I'll suggest that Pentax produce modern analogs of the old budget FF lens kits. Back in the day, a budget shooter might have 3 or 4 or 5 lenses: 28 or 35, 50-55, 90 or 135, with the Fifty and Ninety being f/2 or faster and the others being f/2.8. I'll suggest these APS-C counterparts, in focal length and aperture (for similar DOF):

135/FF -- APS-C
------ -- -----
28/2.8 -- 18/1.8
35/2.8 -- 24/1.8
50/2.0 -- 35/1.4
90/2.0 -- 60/1.8 [macro?]
135/2.8 - 90/1.8

We can round-up those f/1.8s to f/2. And a clear message emerges: Pentax needs to make budget DA or DA-XS versions of these: 18/2, 24/2, 35/1.4, 60/2, 90/2. Price them at under US$200 each, at quality levels equivalent to the A50/2: good but not super-duper. All optical aberrations needn't be corrected, when needed corrections can be applied in PP or in-camera.

I like 'normal' focal lengths, so another cheap winner might be a DA-XS 28/2, analog of 45/2.8. And remember than the upcoming DA-XS 50/1.8 will be analogous to 75/2.8.

I don't say that the above are on my "wish list" (except maybe 18+24mm pancakes) but I think they might incite some excitement & sales. Sales are good. Greed is good.

I could be quite happy with that assortment for the most part. Not sure about the $200 across the board. some of those lenses in the old days were not that cheap just cheaper than the others in class

more realistic would be
18/2 @ $400
24/2@ $300
28/2 @$200
35/1.4@ 300
60/2 macro@ $250
90/2@$300

Or sell as a package with a K-01 for 2199 2299 with the KR replacement

[Impartial]

I'd chime in for the 60/2 macro, the 35/1.4 (but I think a /1.7 might be more realistic), and 28/2 if necessary but preferably 24/2 . . . all in the XS line (Though the 60/2 at least ought to also be usable on DSLRs). Something like that would really support any plan Pentax has to support mirrorless . . .

[RonHendriks1966]

I'd chime in for the 60/2 macro, the 35/1.4 (but I think a /1.7 might be more realistic), and 28/2 if necessary but preferably 24/2 . . . all in the XS line (Though the 60/2 at least ought to also be usable on DSLRs). Something like that would really support any plan Pentax has to support mirrorless . . .

Well this is noncence. The advantage in the xs line is to use the space where otherwise the mirror would be. So this is for short focallenghts. I don't know where the optimum is, but designing a 28mm/f2 xs would make some sence.

More important maybe for K-01 (series) is the design of a nice new zoomlens. One that makes the most of the system. Retracts when not in use and uses the space inside the camera to be short. A 3-5x zoomlens would be great to attracked new users to the system that maybe even only own the one lens combo. So something like DA 20-80mm/f2.8-4.5 xs would make a great lens.

[Pål Jensen]

We can round-up those f/1.8s to f/2. And a clear message emerges: Pentax needs to make budget DA or DA-XS versions of these: 18/2, 24/2, 35/1.4, 60/2, 90/2. Price them at under US$200 each, at quality levels equivalent to the A50/2: good but not super-duper. All optical aberrations needn't be corrected, when needed corrections can be applied in PP or in-camera.

You guys are totally unrealistic in you pricing assesments. A 18/2, which will be huge and complex, with a quality of the A 50/2 would be quite an achievement and selling it, and the other suggestions, at a mere $200 would get Pentax bankrupt in a record time...

[RioRico]

You guys are totally unrealistic in you pricing assesments. A 18/2, which will be huge and complex, with a quality of the A 50/2 would be quite an achievement and selling it, and the other suggestions, at a mere $200 would get Pentax bankrupt in a record time...

An FA18/2 would indeed be monstrous in size and cost. A DA18/2 wouldn't be quite so bad, but still pricey. But a DA-XS 18/2, fitting into the mirrorbox space, would be quite another matter. I've seen small short-register f/2s and faster in the 12-18-24mm range sell quite cheap.

As for reality -- I try not to let it bother me too much. I only notice it when it bites my ass.

[Jean Poitiers]

Deviating a bit from the current discussion, I'll suggest that Pentax produce modern analogs of the old budget FF lens kits. Back in the day, a budget shooter might have 3 or 4 or 5 lenses: 28 or 35, 50-55, 90 or 135, with the Fifty and Ninety being f/2 or faster and the others being f/2.8. I'll suggest these APS-C counterparts, in focal length and aperture (for similar DOF):

135/FF -- APS-C
------ -- -----
28/2.8 -- 18/1.8
35/2.8 -- 24/1.8
50/2.0 -- 35/1.4
90/2.0 -- 60/1.8 [macro?]
135/2.8 - 90/1.8

We can round-up those f/1.8s to f/2. And a clear message emerges: Pentax needs to make budget DA or DA-XS versions of these: 18/2, 24/2, 35/1.4, 60/2, 90/2. Price them at under US$200 each, at quality levels equivalent to the A50/2: good but not super-duper. All optical aberrations needn't be corrected, when needed corrections can be applied in PP or in-camera.

I like 'normal' focal lengths, so another cheap winner might be a DA-XS 28/2, analog of 45/2.8. And remember than the upcoming DA-XS 50/1.8 will be analogous to 75/2.8.

I don't say that the above are on my "wish list" (except maybe 18+24mm pancakes) but I think they might incite some excitement & sales. Sales are good. Greed is good.

Bonjour,

Sounds good to me ... if Pentax/Ricoh want to gain market share, then "good" budget DA's or DA-XS's would certainly be a positive step in that direction.

Let's face it, most of the DSLR users (probably other than the hardcore's here of PF and other similar forums) don't even know how to use their DSRL correctly ... and they are not IMHO going to plop down almost or over a grand for 1.5 or maybe 2 "upper-end" lenses (read Limited, pricey DA, DA*, etc.) ... It just ain't going to happen 9 times out of 10. So why go against the tide ... there's a real niche here to be exploited, and I would predict that we'll see even more after the upcoming new DA 50 f1.8 ...

Example: I was in the States over the last holidays and a friend had bought his wife over a year or so ago a Nikon D90 with a standard zoom plus a relatively fast longer zoom (don't ask, I didn't pay that much attention). Albeit, that they have a high income level, she doesn't have the time to invest in order to master this DSLR ... they saw my K-5, how I was using it and asked me more than a thing or two. I was flattered and suggested getting some basics like a lens pen, UV filters to protect, a simple flash, etc.

The truth is that only fanatics (like us maybe) are going to dedicate large percentages disposable income to camera equipment ... and even then it's sometimes hard to justify.

If you want new customers (plus maybe as well pleasing your current client base) then maybe get them "addicted" to good "budget" glass as suggested by RioRico, and once hooked, they'll go for the obvious upgrades ... better glass, bodies, accessories, etc.

Maybe I'm off base, but I used to work in retail sales plus I sold cars to finance college ... sell 95% of your customers what they want/need for a reasonable quality/price ratio ... not what the top 5% (or less) are demanding.

Allez ... enough said. Salut , John le Frog

[monochrome]

I could be quite happy with that assortment for the most part. Not sure about the $200 across the board. some of those lenses in the old days were not that cheap just cheaper than the others in class

more realistic would be
18/2 @ $400
24/2@ $300
28/2 @$200
35/1.4@ 300
60/2 macro@ $250
90/2@$300

Or sell as a package with a K-01 for 2199 2299 with the KR replacement

Hah Hah - the ultimate "I don't have to think" consumer purchase! Camera Bag In A Box

[eddie1960]

on a side note i sent a contact request to Sigma to see if the 3 lenses BH listed are actually going to come or if they have cancelled them (12-24,150macro,120-300)

I got an answer back, not the one I hoped for though

Hello Mr. Smith,
Unfortunately the lenses you mention are not available in the Pentax mount. I don't have a date of delivery nor a manufacturing confirmation date so I cannot tell you when and if they will be available.
Yours Truly
Paul Pizzano
Sigma Corp. of America

[Alizarine]

The truth is that only fanatics (like us maybe) are going to dedicate large percentages disposable income to camera equipment ... and even then it's sometimes hard to justify.

If you want new customers (plus maybe as well pleasing your current client base) then maybe get them "addicted" to good "budget" glass as suggested by RioRico, and once hooked, they'll go for the obvious upgrades ... better glass, bodies, accessories, etc.

I was one of those. Technically new to SLR's, just a year over or so. Pentax kit lens performance got me hooked (been borrowing friends' Nikon D60 and Canon 450D before I bought the K-x) so I bought my next cheapo: a manual 50 1.4. Got even more hooked and luckily caught a FA 100-300 silver. You could say I am now addicted to cheap yet good glass, but now really itching for an FA31 and a DA*50-135.
...and a K-5 too.

[luftfluss]

I got an answer back, not the one I hoped for though

Bummer.

Thank you for getting us the info, though.

[thibs]

You could say I am now addicted to cheap yet good glass, but now really itching for an FA31 and a DA*50-135.
...and a K-5 too.

If you get manage the 50-135, you ... will... get... well, hooked would be an understatement.

This is a real gem