Originally posted by cali92rs I agree that most folks don't go wider than 28mm but that is because cheap kit zooms started there.
Yes, we definitely disagree
My comment was based on several decades of shooting mostly landscape on 35mm film. During those years I never owned a "cheap kit zoom" for FF. Instead I used 28mm and 50mm primes exclusively for those subjects. I agree that 24mm is a useful focal length (FOV equivalent to the DA 15/4 Limited on APS-C), but adding a new 24mm would not plug the huge hole in the prime lineup for a moderately-priced options (Pentax has the FF wide zoom range covered very nicely down to 15mm).
To illustrate, I did a filtered query for FF primes from Nikon, Canon, and Pentax for 28mm and 31mm focal lengths. After filtering duplicates and specialty perspective control lenses from the results, I can summarize in a few points:
- The $999 Pentax FA 31/1.8 Limited was the most expensive lens returned in the search
- Nikon offers the 28/1.8G at $696
- Canon offers the EF 28/1.8 USM at $509
- Nikon offers two 28mm lenses below $500: an AF 28/2.8D ($287) and a manual focus 28/2.8 ($499)
- At the sub-$500 price point Canon offers the AF 28/2.8 IS USM ($449)
A Pentax K-1 owner assembling a landscape kit has the following purchase options at present (listed by price, decreasing):
- Pentax D FA 15-30/2.8 $1449
- Pentax D FA 24-70/2.8 $1296
- Pentax FA 31/1.8 Limited $999
- Pentax D FA 28-105/3.5-5.6 $499
- Tamron 28-75/2.8 $499
- Samyang 24/1.4 $469
Adding a $500 D FA 24/2.8 would be an interesting option and the kit zoom could plug the gap at 28mm.
Steve