Originally posted by axl I beg to differ:
gap 1) any zoom wider than 16 at f2.8
gap 2) good super tele (prime or zoom longer than 300)
gap 3) true UWA prime (widest at the moment is 14mm which is "only" 20-21 equivalent how about 15 or 18mm equivalent = so we are talking 10-12mm prime)
gap 4) any NEW prime between 21 and 31 (this is probably the biggest and very important gap IMO)
gap 5) good non macro short to mid tele (something around 90-105 mms)
gap 6) any fast prime between 14 and 31
my 2p
Originally posted by filorp Pentax doesn't seams to see a problem:.... primes!!!! The only problem with pancace DA40 is lack of at least f2. f4 or f3.2 who is going to buy it for £600...? Where are f2, f1.4, f1.2, especially on crop sensor we'r going to need it.... everything we need is fast prime...., sorry there is ONE f1.4 + 3x limiteds below f2!!!!!
Sincerely, I just don't get it, we have currently in the prime lineup :
- 14mm/2.8
- 15mm/4
- 21mm/3.2
- 31mm/1.8
- 35mm/2.8 (macro)
- 40mm/2.8
- 43mm/1.9
- 50mm/1.4
- 50mm/2.8 (macro)
- 55mm/1.4
- 70mm/2.4
- 77mm/1.8
- 100mm/2.8 (macro)
- 200mm/2.8
- 300mm/2.8
In the zoom lineup:
10-17 /3.5-4.5 Fisheye
12-24 /4
16-45 /4
16-50 /2.8
17-70 /4
50-135 /2.8
55-300 /4-5.8
60-250 /4
Sure we could have had something faster and wider, but I must that at the moment I'm yet to see a picture taken at 24mm / FF that doesn't feel artificial. Ultra-wides have to me a feeling of engineering tour de force, but don't bring much to photography (and I do own the 10-17 so I'm used with the FOV)
We have excellent alternate providers with Sigma, Tamron, Zeiss and Voigtlander. Sure, apart from Sigma we're missing some supertele here, but as I said in a previous reply, the cost of a true high performance supertele is so high that the cost of a matching body is marginal compared to it. If you're willing to invest 6000$/€ in a supertele, 2000$/€ for a body is not that much.
My final argument would be a comparison with Leica, Leica have a fantastic range of wide to normal lenses, compact and fast. But they have
nothing above 135mm. This never prevented Leica shooters to make lengendary shots, simply, the Leica system is made with specific constraints and photographers whose style match with those constraints have a great time with those cameras. Even if SLR layout allows for more flexibility, Pentax have made a clear choice in recent year : lightweight outdoor photography. The K-7 is the smallest and lightest rugged camera, the ltd primes are extremely compact with no equivalent in the competition, the zooms are even quite compact compared to the competition. Making a fast, ultrawide zoom would lead to a massive beast like the NIKON 14-24mm F2.8 AF-S G ED, Super tele are quite massive by nature.
I'm not saying that Pentax won't do it in the future, I'm just saying that at the moment they have quite a complete lineup on line with their philosophy. I would expect Pentax to put their effort for "extreme" lenses with their upcomming 645D. Ultrawides, Supertele etc make much more sense with a body made with the sole goal of image quality in mind (at price of size and weight, even it is quite compact for a DMF)