Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-22-2011, 02:14 PM   #16
Veteran Member
magkelly's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,905
I've looked at other lens brands for comparison. I don't see much difference really. If anything I think some of the Pentax gear is cheaper. But one thing you have to remember is that a lot of older Pentax glass is now popping up in cameras that aren't Pentax. They're using adapters to make them work on Canon et all. That does effect availability and price of glass for Pentax people. I've noticed a distinct rise in the price of some brands of glass in the past few years.

I can't even afford 90% of the lenses I look at, even used. I have to go to older bargain lenses at KEH just to be able to go there at all. New lenses, of any kind, are simply priced out of my reach. I don't really consider myself a LBA. I joke about it sometimes but I'm not. I have bought lenses I don't need in a kit I wanted to get a couple of good ones and to get a camera but that was usually the only way I was getting that camera or those good lenses and saving any $$$ doing it. I did have a definite goal, to get a decent kit together for my Pentax cameras and my Yashica cameras and I did that. I don't own any $300 lenses though.

The most expensive lens I own is probably worth about $150-200 and that one actually I got for free with my first Spottie. Most of my lenses? Well under $50 took them, and most of them were under half that when you price the whole kit out. Yeah, I eye that infamous Pentax 55-300MM AF lens and lust in my heart a bit, but for the most part I'm not expecting to own one new. In a few years one used maybe, but that's it. That's the last lens I really want to have for my kit. I don't really need anymore than I've got now and I've got too many lenses as it is. I'm not out there really looking for anything else.

I go to look at the regular lenses just to look mostly. They might as well be made of gold for all the good it does me to think about really buying them. A $150 -$300 plus lens is pretty darned rich by my standards. They all look like they charge pretty much the same thing though to me. They're all "too expensive" for my wallet, smile.

12-22-2011, 02:20 PM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 2,869
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
While I loved 50mm on 35mm film, it's an odd duck in the world of APS-C - a bit too long for indoors and a bit too short for outdoors. Recognizing the difference of APS-C, Pentax came out with a cheap DA35 F2.4. I don't have one but everything I've heard about it suggests that it's a good, cheap, all purpose lens.

Here are the reviews:
Pentax-DA 35mm F2.4 AL Reviews - DA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
This is exactly why they don't have a cheap 50mm lens. Unlike the other camera makers, Pentax has (so far) 100% committed their camera lens line-up to APS-C sensors. That is why instead of having a 70-200mm F2.8 fast zoom, they have a 50-135mm F2.8 fast zoom - the 50-135mm is the approximate equivalent of the 70-200mm on full frame cameras. So, rather than make an inexpensive fast 50mm lens, they wanted to mimmick a fast 50mm lens by creating a relatively fast 35mm lens, which approximately equates to the angle of view of a 50mm lens in 35mm terms.
12-22-2011, 06:14 PM   #18
Veteran Member
DaveHolmes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 1,501
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The DA 35 f2.5 really fits the cheap normal bill, although, it isn't fast enough to fit the role the fast 50 once did.
Isn't it? Even when you consider the increases made in ISO performance over the last 5 years?
12-22-2011, 06:53 PM   #19
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
I'd agree - in most ways, a 35/2.4 on a modern APS-C DSLR is *far* more versatile than a 50/1.7 was on film, given that you can reasonably use ISO 1600 and above with results that can compare favorably to ISO 400 on film. But, you definitely won't be able to get the same shallow DOF effects. Luckily, for that purpose, you can still use a manual 50//2 or 50/1.7 that can be had very cheaply.

Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
50mm, camera, pentax help, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why is the FA*28-70 so expensive? Clinton Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 56 08-25-2011 11:31 PM
Just wonder why Pentax is more expensive n US LFLee Pentax K-5 19 04-18-2011 10:25 PM
Pentax K-5 in US is more expensive than in... LFLee Pentax K-5 10 10-31-2010 08:01 AM
So you thought Pentax Star lenses were expensive? SOldBear General Talk 8 08-20-2009 10:19 PM
Is this the world's most expensive lens? (not Pentax) Ash Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 02-18-2008 10:58 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:13 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top