[nanok]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Thats OK, I was responding to a particular post without thinking about the rest of the thread so its easy to read my comments out of context.


VW group has a large parts bin and a lot of common drivetrains and floorpans and even switchgear shared across the different companies, moreso at the low end. True, chassis settings, body shells and trim are quite different and most Audi models are built to accommodate 4WD systems so the cars drive quite differently, but they have a lot more in common than say, Ford and Honda.
If I buy a Skoda, most of the mechanical components are tried and tested VW items, even if they are sometimes from the previous generation VW and their specification is adjusted slightly but the reliability and quality control is still good.

correct. quality control won't be as good though, and you are right about using previous generation stuff, that's mostly what i meant. overall, i think you get a good package for what you pay.
edit: having said that, as a fun fact, you would be amazed how much ford and mazda have in common . there's an explanation why the focus turned out to be such a brilliant car (no offence to ford meant)

I didnt know that! I see you are Czech - is it actually cheaper to buy VW? In the UK that gap has closed a lot between them and apart from the Fabia/Polo they dont really make comparable models. The Octavia looks like a big saloon but it uses the Golf platform so it looks like a Passat class car for a Golf class price, but its really a Golf with a stretched 5 door body (and decent handling).

no, not really czech, just stranded here . i was more shocked than you were, believe me. my first car was supposed to be an old skoda. i ended up buying a mazda 323, form roughly the same year (1994), because it was much cheaper and, i am sorry, much more car for that money, too. i am not entirely certain about new prices (i honestly don't care much), but last time i checked it seemed they were expensive. there is the urban legend that, being indigenous, they will be extremely cheap to maintain (it is wrong), that usually "explains" the high price they command on the second hand market.

never actually drove the octavia, but i hear it doesn't handle that bad. than again, a stock one would probably not be for me (while i was driving the 323, there was little on the road, old or new, which could keep up around the corners, i put that down to the superb handling of that car, as i am a new and, inevitably, shit driver )

i do have respect for skoda, most recently for what they did with the new fabia -- the s2000 rally spec. i have seen that little rocket when it had it's debut last year, and though i knew it was coming, i knew it was going to be fast, i heard it from a mile away, i still nearly dropped my k20d. i got two or three blurred shots of it. ffwd a few months, it has proven itself at monte carlo, in the hands of both czech and foreign pilots. skoda also has their own rally team now, for which i respect them even more (many other, much bigger auto makers, have seen fit to "cut costs" on that lately, some of them with great racing tradition, renault most notably).

btw, here's a few shots of the last one in the season, there's some s2000's too, it might get a smile from you, as their nose looks just like the roomster (only a bit more agressive, because of the inflated arches and such).

slusovice (rally-show)

[cbaytan]

Pentaxians always try to look into reality with ignorance to it. We try to say to others:" Pentax allow you to use old primes like 50mm, 100mm, 200mm" but now its meaningless. Price for these lenses are high and at least in Turkey you can buy 50mm 1.8 AF CaNikon lens for the same price you pay for Pentax M 50mm 1.7 .

Not exactly, I purchased legendary M50 1.7 for 40USD today,
Pentax K SMC 50mm F1.7 Lens - Film / Digital - NICE - eBay (item 150397302931 end time Dec-13-09 06:35:00 PST)
What is the Canikon prices?

To me Pentax means one thing, lenses that giving the IQ that only Leica lenses can compete, I will give you just a single M lenses page to prove my claim:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/27739-m-club-32.html

Now anyone tell me what lens series can give me such saturation, contrast and resolution with dirt cheap prices? Besides those lenses are all shake deducted for free, aren't they

An FF camera would be great, K-7 has no IQ superiority over K20D all true but I can bear with that, an FF camera will come eventually, and I don't buy no D/DA lenses except my beloved DA16-45mm. Pentax will never die, but maybe someone else will buy it from Hoya.

Canon lenses are expensive, ( I am primarily a Canon FD convert and used some EOS too including 24-105 L) even though their pastel color are greatest in the world, you have to buy IS for every lens separately. But Canon lenses give you a flat look, not like 3D look with great saturation and true colors. No Canikon lens can give you those 3D look (Please see above PF page)

People is leaving Pentax, PentaxTurkey is loosing members, well I don't give a damn, they can go anywhere they want to, Pentax lenses are here to stay, at least with us.

I’ve tested and took some photos with k-7 but its not for me. I can’t see Image Quality I have on my K10D.
May be this topic is meaningless or silly for you but I’m afraid that very soon our PentaxTurkey Community will fall apart and with time there will be no Pentax.

Now I am surprised by this claim, can you give/point us your K10D and K-7 samples, I am waiting for K-7 drops to below a grand to purchase, or should I buy a K20D instead and wait for the K-8 I don't know.

PS. Sİnce you are a moderator just wanted to let you know I am a member of PentaxTurkey too but I am having a very hard time reading those characters, like small grey letters over dark grey background, that strains my eyes.

Regards from Trabzon

[*isteve]

correct. quality control won't be as good though,

Skoda have a far better reliability record in the UK than VW. Perhaps they just bolt the bits together more carefully. I owned a Golf mk4 GTI Turbo 9 years ago and it was the worst car I ever owned. Water leaks, paint peeling, blown turbo and soggy handling. I also had an Alfa 156 which was a lot better!!

and you are right about using previous generation stuff, that's mostly what i meant. overall, i think you get a good package for what you pay.

Well, I was more interested in getting something unique to my needs - but I am surprised how well it drives - even if the engine is a bit more clattery than the latest common rail diesels, its quiet enough at 130kph.

edit: having said that, as a fun fact, you would be amazed how much ford and mazda have in common . there's an explanation why the focus turned out to be such a brilliant car (no offence to ford meant)

The fact that Ford used to own 33.4% of Mazda would have something to do with it perhaps? I gather they sold some of these shares recently, but they still do a lot of platform sharing. In Europe its a lot more obvious (2 ,3 and 5 are just the Fiesta, Focus and Mondeo with different trim).

no, not really czech, just stranded here . i was more shocked than you were, believe me. my first car was supposed to be an old skoda. i ended up buying a mazda 323, form roughly the same year (1994), because it was much cheaper and, i am sorry, much more car for that money, too. i am not entirely certain about new prices (i honestly don't care much), but last time i checked it seemed they were expensive. there is the urban legend that, being indigenous, they will be extremely cheap to maintain (it is wrong), that usually "explains" the high price they command on the second hand market.

Well old Rover cars are very common here, very cheap and very cheap to maintain....but noone ever liked them very much

never actually drove the octavia, but i hear it doesn't handle that bad. than again, a stock one would probably not be for me (while i was driving the 323, there was little on the road, old or new, which could keep up around the corners, i put that down to the superb handling of that car, as i am a new and, inevitably, shit driver )

Amazingly a firm in the UK makes a rollbar kit for the Roomster and can rechip the pd motor to 150ps. It is quite an amazing drive!! The Octavia VRs kit is a bit more serious though!!!

i do have respect for skoda, most recently for what they did with the new fabia -- the s2000 rally spec. i have seen that little rocket when it had it's debut last year, and though i knew it was coming, i knew it was going to be fast, i heard it from a mile away, i still nearly dropped my k20d. i got two or three blurred shots of it. ffwd a few months, it has proven itself at monte carlo, in the hands of both czech and foreign pilots. skoda also has their own rally team now, for which i respect them even more (many other, much bigger auto makers, have seen fit to "cut costs" on that lately, some of them with great racing tradition, renault most notably).

btw, here's a few shots of the last one in the season, there's some s2000's too, it might get a smile from you, as their nose looks just like the roomster (only a bit more agressive, because of the inflated arches and such).

slusovice (rally-show)

Thanks for that - Personally I would like to see a one-make race series for Roomsters only It would be hysterical watching them race, but surprisingly competitive on pace I think.

[nanok]

you might be surprised of how that would come out. maybe you knwo the suzuki ignis, which is a similar concept with the roomster i think. while i think the ignis is plain ugly (it's based on the swift, i personally love the swift's look, but the ignis is just ...wrong), it can actually kick ass if prepared properly and driven well. the difference between the fabia and the roomster is not such a long way -- with similar effort, i think you could get similar results from both. it might be a bit more work if you are starting with the commonrail diesel though.. :P

[Jonson PL]

If you will ask me, well, before K10D satisfied all my needs but not its not enough for me. I need body that will provide me fast and accurate af, good ISO and 35mm sensor.

It really doesn’t make much sense for Pentax to bring out a new D-FA 100/2.8 macro, unless it is a new formula optimized for digital use. I see it as an indication that FF Pentax cam is in the pipelines.
Had they brought out a new 85/1.4 in D-FA standard, it would have been too obvious, and people would have screamed for FF now. Instead they can steadily built up a new base of FF lenses, and update some older ones. Maybe that is why we’ve seen FA 50/1.4 and FA 35/2 leaving production. (FA 50/1.4 coming back in batches every once and a while).
Medium Format has always been big in Japan, and first the 645D will be released here in the new year.

With the K-x there is good AF, excellent Iso, all in a sweet package. But we’re all waiting to see the new indications in high end DSLR.

I really hope that Pentax doesn’t go the plastic way that Canon does. The Canon 50/1.8 is a horrible lens, the new version even poorer than the previous. Sharpness is fine, but built quality and all other image parameters are a joke. It is what the Pentax community didn’t like when Pentax tried the FAJ lenses.
I recommended the Canon 50/1.8 to a friend of mine as he needed some speed over his otherwise fine IS kit lens. But he was very disappointed when he found out that he couldn’t use IS with it. He had to stay at 1/80 or above, to avoid camera shake, so now it has pretty much been collecting dust. It wasn’t much of a help. Lately he has found out that he has to go with flash as well, so he’s giving it another try.

Unfortunately I think our friend from Turkey has some valid points. I have a K10D and frankly there isn't enough difference or better in the K7 to make me change.

But that also goes for the Nikon D300 and Canon 7D...more mps and HD video, but i'm a still photographer and frankly neither the Canon or Nikon offer enough for me to consider change.

I know that some consider a FF to be the new medium format. I don't think so having medium format film ...Mamiya and three lenses. I have a friend who used a Canon FF and I've seen his pix blown up...they are not in medium format territory...I'm not sure they are that much better than my K10D can produce.

Sony...I don't buy...I have had problems in the past.

I think Pentax needs to review the cost of their lenses and also the fact that they are short a number of lenses compared to Canikon.

I want a extreme wide angle zoom and the 12 -24 isn't extrme enough and the price is way out of whack.

I also want an good, 400 F5.6 prime, but again...nothing on the horizon. Toss us a bone Pentax.

Good points

I use Tamron 70-200 which is superb lens.

But the main problem is AF, I have a lot of friends who complain about AF system. I shoot a lot on the streets with my tele lens. Last week Ive been asked to take photos of my friends. I had terrible time with K10D trying to lock AF and take photo. At the end I took about 100 photos and only 3-4 of them are good but others are out of focus. Do I need those meaningless photos?

I can't explain how it was hard for me to show those photos to my friend.

Both K20 and K7 have AF adjustment

Honestly, this is one thread that surprised me quite a bit. I use a Pentax DSLR (K-7) and cameras from other manufacturers, because they fill different needs. I know the (in production) lens choices are limited on Pentax compared to other brands but the fine Pentax lenses are superb.

- AF speed is an issue, I agree. I find even on the K-7, the AF-C mode does not keep track of moving subjects well, that is why my sports photography camera is a Canon.

- The advantages of FF are well understood, so I do wish I could add one to my set, although the price is high. I did an estimate for a D3 and the lenses I need, and it is upwards of 10K USD. If Pentax has a lower-resolution camera (maybe 6 megapixels) for ultra high-ISO, I would buy that instead and would not need to get lenses for yet another system.

- The Pentax K-7 is the cheapest camera of its kind, so I disagree we have to pay more. One thing that lead me to Pentax in the beginning was value and that remains true today. The K200D and K20D are the lowest priced weather-sealed cameras. The K-7 is the lowest price camera with a 100% viewfinder. I'm in Canada through, so maybe this is not true elsewhere. Some DA* lenses are the cheapest weather-sealed lenses among their competitors.

- The built-in stabilization of the K-7 and K20D may not be as good as Sony's but it helps beat the low-light performance of all cameras except the D3 (and possible D3s) because it can stabilize a F/1.4 lens while only the D3/D3s have enough of a high-ISO advantage to beat that.

- The K20D is the most efficient camera I have every used. I review cameras at neocamera.com, so not only do I own several, I tried almost all of them. A simple example is the self-timer which both does mirror-lockup and turns of stabilization which are needed for ultra-sharp low-light photography. Many more button-presses are needed in other systems. The separate bracket and drive mode controls allow incredible flexibility, including shooting an entire bracket with a single button press with mirror-lockup and delay between each shot. There are a slew of these subtile points.

The bottom line is I think that the Pentax offerings are in great shape. They do not cover every situation but what they do is done exceptionally well. For sports, other systems are better due to AF speed, I agree. For wildlife, Pentax lacks some super-telephoto lenses, yes, but Sigma does cover some of that partially.

Thanks for your insights

The prices of lenses are like the rest of prices of electronics and high tech stuff in general.

First you have to bear in mind first that the prices in Europe are including the VAT, while prices in US are not, this makes up for a difference of around 20% (depending on the country)

Then Euro rose considerably against the dollar, on the begining of the 2000s, Euro was around 0.8 Dollar, now it's struggling to stay under 1.5 Dollar. Companies cannot ajust prices on live exchange rates. And if you were willing to pay 600€ for a lens in 2007 why wouldn't you pay the same price in 2009 ? In fact Japanses makers were forced to rise the prices because of the rise of Yen even compared to Euro.

But at the end of the day, price of high tech good in Europe are may be higher because people are used to those prices. This may change will the globalisation, and in fact prices are rising less in Europe than in US.

Good points

The cost of lenses is much debated. I think the answer is simple. Pentax needs to come out with a couple of cheaper primes in the 200 dollar range -- say a 35 f2 and a 50 f1.7. They will be all plastic and have no durability, but they will give photographers a taste for primes. The more expensive primes should stay more expensive. No one buys Canon L glass for cheap and in the same way, if there is durability and craftsmanship in one of Pentax's lens it is not a problem for them to ask higher prices for it.

I hope the issue is more with the lack of cheaper options than that Pentax has more expensive options available.

I see your point, but I think that this is where third party, like Sigma, Tamron, etc. will have their offerings.
Regarding Pentax, B&H sells the FA 50/1.4 for 360 $, and likewise at Adorama.
The excellent Sigma 28/1.8 is 349 $. The Sigma 30/1.4, which has a lot of fans in the Pentax camp, is 439 $.
Recently Voigtländer have been bringing out some superb lenses, and for acceptable prices.
With the high Iso ability of latest Pentax DSLRs, there are also Tamron options, like Tamron SP 90mm f/2.8 Di 1:1 AF Macro for 399 $.

I'll repeat, Everybodys raising price: I Blame Nikon

Nikon jacked up their prices first, then Canon followed as did Pentax.

Anyone see the USA price on Nikon's newly announced 300mm f2.8 VRII and its dedicated 2x teleconverter ???

$5,900 plus $500

Canon will now further raise their 300mm 2.8 IS price... It currently sits at $4,350 w/ free delivery:

Canon | Telephoto EF 300mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer | 2531A002

A fun read, newly announced 300mm 2.8 VRII Nikon thread at fredmiranda...

if you're interested:


Nikon 300/2.8G VR II - FM Forums

Thanks for the links, interesting reads indeed.

Here is one of the comments I came upon :
"What they should realize is that instead of updating a $6,000 lens, they would make more money by just releasing $1,200-$1,700 fast primes. For one, they would sell a lot more as current Nikon users will be all over them. Secondly, i know a lot of Canon users who were eyeing a move to Nikon, but held off due to just 2 lenses... 24L/35L. A lot of people would consider switching if Nikon just gave them what they wanted... "accessible fast wide primes". "

[pakhead]

Isn't the marketing strategy pretty obvious? A line of cheaper, great value cameras like the K-x, aimed as giving Pentax bigger market share, with cheaper zoom lenses that most K-x buyers will stick with.

And a line of more up-market cameras - K7 - with high-grade, desirable lenses that they will charge as much for as they can get away with.

The pricing discrepancies in different countries are weird, and don't make much sense - and no, it has nothing to do with the yen, as the US dollar has fallen against the yen more than moset currencies.

But it is true that in the past Pentax appeared to have no strategy, and was certainly charging very low prices for superb lenses. It's very tough on those who can no longer afford the better Pentax glass, and it will certainly cost the company some loyal users. But it might just be a money-making strategy, for a company which has teetered on the brink of survival. If it works, you can't really blame Hoya.

[Samsungian]

There's alot of pent up demand for newer nikon design "AF-S" lenses.

Luckily for Nikon owners most any 1977 Ai lens will work with their better Dslrs, like D700, so thats a bonus for the nikon system owners. 32 years of compatibility is helpful.

At Thom Hogans main page he's been counting the months since making requests for certain nikon lens and assessories:


Waiting for Nikon List

The following items are ones that serious Nikon shooters have been patiently waiting for (a basic month count from when it went on my list is in parenthesis after each item).

Any APS Coolpix (21)
Small High Res FX body (13)
17-35mm f/2.8 redesign (15)
28mm f/2G AF-S (or faster) (18)
35mm f/2G AF-S (or faster) (18)
85mm f/1.4G AF-S (or faster) (18)
80-400mm f/4-5.6G AF-S VR (19)
300mm f/4G AF-S VR (21)
400mm f/5.6G AF-S VR (21)
28-200mm for FX (18)
Any DX wide angle prime (27)
35-135mm f/2.8G AF-S DX VR (21)
200mm Micro-Nikkor AF-S VR (27)
Any FX f/4 zoom (21)
Metadata standards compliance (16)
Post AI-S extension tubes (131+)

Thanks for the links, interesting reads indeed.

Here is one of the comments I came upon :
"What they should realize is that instead of updating a $6,000 lens, they would make more money by just releasing $1,200-$1,700 fast primes. For one, they would sell a lot more as current Nikon users will be all over them. Secondly, i know a lot of Canon users who were eyeing a move to Nikon, but held off due to just 2 lenses... 24L/35L. A lot of people would consider switching if Nikon just gave them what they wanted... "accessible fast wide primes". "

[jgredline]

Having read half the thread, I myself am not to surprised. I never thought I would see the day when I would have two systems, yet here I am. Pentax with the GLS fiasco, The SDM petition that I just signed that is going around, Pentax shutting down their official repair station and now repairs need to be sent to CRIS (which to me is like sending your new car to the garage on the corner, instead of the dealer)

As for Pentax, I will be keeping my K20D's because frankly, I love them. I love the little lenses and frankly the image quality is very good. No doubt the K20D has its short comings, but I have learned to over come them by using is fully manual.

I have a friend who has a K-X and what a wonderful cam it really is. But is is too late for me. I am done spending money with Pentax. I will enjoy what ever Pentax stuff I will keep, but they have lost me as a customer...Since purchasing my D700 a few months back, I have added a D300S for my APS-c needs. The most overwhelming part of adding a Nikon system is the abundance of Lenses.

As I have been visiting more and more Nikon Forums, I am amazed at how many members I know that I met in the Pentax world and how many have jumped ship. I imagine that it is the same in canon forums as well.

[LeDave]

Jgredline I agree with you. At times I wish I would have gotten the Canon 50D instead just because I was unsure of where Pentax's future lies, yet at the same time I really love my K-7. With the sales of the K-7 going as well as expected, as well as the K-x being sold way better than expected to be; hopefully Pentax will utilize this hard-earned money to actually improve their customer service, find a solid solution to the failing SDM motors as well as the 16-50's high decentering problem, and hopefully get a real repair factory also. With these problems, hopefully they aren't trying to rush in just to raise lens prices, as shown with the 100mm WR Macro and known pricing increase of the FA Limiteds in February; but instead actually improve the current problems because I wouldn't want to pay premium Canikon prices for Pentax when Canikon can provide proper CS and QC.

[KungPOW]

I am moving to Nikon. Slowly, not all at once, but certainly. The problem I have with Pentax is two fold.

1. Their quality control is abysmal. I have no interest in spending my cash on the top Pentax lenses only to wonder when and where the SDM crap out. Assuming I can get a 16-50 that does not have a decentering problem. This really is an issue. Pentax has pleaded the fifth, and there is no solution on the horizon. How is the resale value of these lenses? At least they could match Nikon's 5 year warrenty.

2. No full frame anywhere on the horizon. Zip Zilch. nadda. With Nikon I can buy FF lenses with the plan to later get the FF camera I want. Eventually the cost of FF will be where the K-7 is now. And when that happens, I want to have the lenses. With Pentax, I need to surf e-bay for the very rare FA28, FA35 FA24 etc. Bleh. With Nikon, and Canon, I can just go to the store and buy the lens I want with that 5 year warenty. Additionally, I if I do want to buy from e-bay, or craig's list, or KEH, there are far more lenses available. But I digress. With Pentax, the FF options are limited. FA limited as a matter of fact. and it turns out the three FA LTDS cost more then the Nikon 24-70 2.8. (I know there are more FF lenses from Pentax, like the FA 50 and there are the DA*'s that work on a FF body.)

So, I asked myself, what would I rather have? What would work better for me?

A K-7 with the 31, 43 and 77 for $4060.00 CAD (priced from Aden camera)

or

A D300S with the 24-70 2.8 for $3400.00 CAD

For me, Nikon has the gear that works for me. They have the FF f2.8 zooms that Pentax does not. I don't see the Pentax price advantage anymore.

[Boris]

When this thread started and was noticed by me, I had a suspicion that it will be another "let us see if the neighbor's grass is so much greener" thread. I am afraid that I was actually right.

@KungPOW - I've seen photos (printed 30x45 cm) from almost that very Nikon combo you mentioned - D300 + 24-70/2.8. They look impressive. I've also seen photos from K-7 and the FA limited lenses because I happen to own them. Again - whatever rocks your boat.

My wife suggested that I buy myself a Leica for my 40th birthday which is due in slighlty less than 2 years at this moment. I might do that because I like to shoot wider than 2.8 and I like my gear small and light. Although K-7 with FA 43 is already light enough.

Additionally, all my present needs including those of my 8 years old daughter who's shooting with formerly mine K10D, DA21, FA 50/1.4 and FA 100/3.5 macro are served by my gear.

So, as usual it is horses for courses. I shall be staying with Pentax for some while. May be prices will go further up and my transition to Leica will be less painful to my vallet. May be not. It is the process that counts and not the result. As long as the pictures come out to your liking - it does not really matter what was the gear.

Finally, I don't think that sky is falling and that Pentax is loosing it. I've rather limited experience with other brands' gear through my friends and the quality assurance problems are there as well. Of course, given the difference in number of customers, the chances that you'd bump into Nikonian with AF problems are generally less, but the neighbor's grass is more or less of the same green level.

Just my two pixels here.

[KungPOW]

@boris

Right now I don't have the cash for the D300 + 24-70 f2.8.

But I do have the cash for the D200 + 50 f1.8.

The greener grass I found has far more in focus shots, plus far better meetering.

Understand, the D200 is not without its blemishes. The K10D has much better high ISO, plus SR. So the K10D is the better camera for museums etc.

The point I was trying to make was that I would not have been temped to look elsewhere for camera gear if Pentax was able to make a good 28-70 2.8 FF lens. The 16-50 f2.8 is not FF, and it has QA issues.

So I am going Nikon because I believe I can get better quality, and build a lens collection that is FF ready.

At heart I still am a bit of a Pentax fan boy. I still love the pre-autofocus film bodies. I still think my K10D is the cat's pyjamas.

But I don't trust SDM and I want FF lenses.

[LeDave]

Until late 2010, we will see how it goes. If Pentax doesn't get their SDM straight and fix some stuff by then, then we can all assume that something is seriously wrong with Pentax. But with the success of the K-x and with the K-7 doing pretty good right now, I am just going to wait it out until late 2010. With all this profit they are making right now, I'm sure Pentax has to utilize this time and money to correct some of these problems, and hopefully more research and development into a SDM fixture.

KungPOW, I'm sure Pentax will release a FF in 2010, I am very certain of it. One of the biggest hint they gave that made it obvious was the 100mm WR Macro. If you really think about it this lens has no aperture ring and yet it's a DFA. DFA is stated to be a lens optimized for digital but can be used for film, you see what's the problem here? No aperture ring yet it doesn't fit the DFA description, meaning that Pentax is most probably going to change the DFA term to optimized for digital but works for full frame.

Now whatever Pentax is doing they are releasing a full frame. Hopefully when they do announce this full frame, hopefully they will announce a 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 to go along. these two set of zooms in this focal length and aperture are definitely needed for announcing a full frame and I'm sure Pentax wouldn't announce a full frame without announcing such lenses. I don't believe Pentax will release a FF until late 2010 or early 2011. For sure by early 2011, I know they won't release it early 2010 because they need more FF compatible lenses such as stated above, the 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8. I am sure if they ever do announce a full frame in early 2010 without any announcements of the 24-70 or 70-200, they will announce them later but release it at the same time the full frame does.

First thing I would hope they would do before they make any further bigger decisions, such as announcing more lenses or announcing any new DSLR whether it's a full frame or not, is to find a solution to SDM and improve QC on the DA* 16-50. I do agree these problems are unacceptable and if they just keep announcing new things without fixing these current problems, then more problems will just tumble on top of them, and if not then it will leave people unhappy and curious which isn't a good thing.

One thing I do agree with you though is with the Nikon 24-70 f/2.8 being cheaper than all 3 FA Limited primes. I mean come on they are Made in Vietnam now and they're going to increase prices? That's just ridiculous when you compare it to the Nikon's "L" equivilant of Canon's that is Made in Japan, and not even that but Canon's L glass are also Made in Japan. While Pentax has no glass at the moment that is Made in Japan and they're on the move to "price-match" Canikon, sheesh at least get better QC and a proper repair factory before raising the bar on the prices.

Overall what I have to say is, don't lose your hopes yet. Just wait until late 2010 and see how it goes before you make the decision on any thoughts switching. I'm saying this is because right now everything is going quite well for Pentax, and a full frame announcement is just right there but isn't quite there at this moment, so if you want a full frame I know it will come. I also know things will improve for sure and without a doubt. But the real question is how much will it improve, will they be able to improve fixing the problems above, or will their rate of improvement not be that good? Because their rate of improvement on the current problems reflects how they feel about their customers and if they're just going to blow these problems off, then obviously the future FF release ain't going to be worth it as there would be signs of future problems.

[Rondec]

I agree with you about fixing the SDM issues, but even if they fix it, for us to know, it would require a statement and Hoya has been incredibly coy about releasing any information about anything going on behind the scenes. Whether it is coming lenses, camera bodies, or lens flaws, they don't admit anything until they want to. For all we know, they have figured out the problem and the 16-50 lenses now being produced will last for twenty years.

As to the price issue, I think we have reached the end of the era of cheap primes. It used to be that most people who wanted to shoot with high image quality would shoot primes. Not any more. Most people shoot with zooms and therefore primes are becoming (a more expensive) niche market. The reason why the DA 55-300 is so cheap is because it is one of Pentax's most popular lenses. On the other hand, a lens like the DA 15 will sell maybe a tenth as many lense, yet still has the same cost to develop and higher cost of materials. Nikon and Canon have the advantage here, because they sell far more cameras over all, of course they will also sell far more primes.

[Boris]

@ KungPOW, perhaps D80/D90 + 50/1.4 would be a better idea. You can look for used FA* 28-70/2.8 lens which is a good lens though available only second hand and somewhat on the heavy side. I hear you and I had similar thought roughly a year ago when I also wanted to go full frame. However I should point out that a move from Pentax to either Nikon, Canon or Sony seems more like a horizontal move to me. From print quality point of view, Pentax Limited primes are playing very much equal to the top offerings from other companies, though of coure Nikon and Canon have more lenses in this category than just three (Pentax Limiteds).

I also don't trust SDM thus I don't have SDM lenses, only regular ones. And I bought FA 20/2.8 for purpose of:
1. Having a full frame super wide
2. Allowing my daughter use smaller and lighter DA 21 Ltd with her K10D as her wide lens.

I reckon that you and I may have similar views here the only difference being that I don't see myself shooting Nikon or Canon modern FF cameras. I held both D700 and 5DMkII and found both rather too big for my taste. For me the compactness and light weight of the gear are towards the top of priority list.