Announcements: K-r and inexpensive DA35/2.4

Discussion in 'Pentax' started by andrewg_ny, Sep 8, 2010.

  1. DA35/2.4 AL, MSRP $219, 124g. I'm sure more than a few will complain that it's not f/1.8 like the Nikkor, etc, or f/2 like the discontinued FA but if like most of the DA Limiteds with more modest max aperture (yes, I know it's not Limited, sealed, etc.) wide open it's probably not bad for its purpose--very compact, faster than any zoom, and cheap enough to be sold with entry level cameras.
    K-r body looks promising even though it's predictably making the K-7's position weaker.
    • 6fps
    • illuminated viewfinder AF points
    • 920K LCD
    • excellent-sounding compromise of allowing Li-Ion battery OR AA via adapter
    • dedicated AF assist lamp
    • "Pet" scene mode!
    I don't think USA pricing is listed yet but UK is GBP 599 with 18-55 so I expect USA MSRP will probably be ~$700 kit? That's a guesstimate, but I expect at time of introduction it will probably be somewhere between 100-200 more than K-x?
     
  2. More on DA35/2.4 AL: Appears to have no distance markings on focusing ring, don't know yet about quick-shift focusing, haven't seen it mentioned yet. In the past, no mention has meant no quick-shift focus, so this may be another downer.
    There are two hoods listed on the pentaximaging.com product page, don't think either are bundled:
    1. Plastic Square-edged Spring Type (PH-SA49)
    2. Rubber Round Shaped Threaded Type (RH-RC49)
     
  3. According to another source, initial MSRP will be more like $800 USD.
    Pentax's marketing video has plenty of squirm & cringe-inducing moments. A mom-n-pop company vibe, I guess it could be worse.
     
  4. I am not excited and I don't see the point for the 35mm f/2.4. What the heck is wrong with Pentax. Why isn't the old FA 35mm f/2.0 be back? Why do Pentax give us reasons to whine? I am sold on the recent lens on DA 15mm f/4.0 limited which comes out with everything I don't expect that Pentax does it good to pull out a good limited lens that I highly recommend to others.
    Not that I will buy or care to try the new 35mm out on cheaper price. For one, I don't see any loyal users who have DA 35mm f/2.8 limited will have any reason to get exited with Pentax DA 35mm f/2.4 AL. What is Pentax doing on the lens line? It is not full frame, nor does it have an old school aperture ring. I am scratching my head with this lens just as much as the 100mm WR version comes out. At least the macro has a good reason for weather seal for macro usage. What is so special on this new 35mm lens. Why not 28mm f/2.0 or God forbids a 24mm or 28mm f/1.8 with Pentax name on it. Why is Pentax so illogical and sporadic in lens roadmap? Are the good folks in Pentax lens development all gone for retirement and have the noob product management run the show and come out with odd products. I am stumbled and I am sure someone can correct me in the whining.
     
  5. I will admit that I'd be a little more forgiving of f/2.4 if the lens was a little more pancake-y. Since it's not quite THAT tiny, it seems like offering f/2.4 for prices like others offer f/1.8 or f/2 is just giving people a reason to go elsewhere. I suspect however that Pentax will be bundling this lens in kits where it will probably add less than $100 to the cost of the camera and will be offered in matching colors (maybe not for me but cool that it exists). It's not like any enthusiasts were excited about DA-L 18-55's low-rent features either.
    Lets hope this isn't the last lens announcement for the season, and that the K-5 is announced soon with perhaps another lens of a little more interest for enthusiasts.
    Folks will no-doubt whine about what the K-r is not, but it sounds like it matches or improves on the K-x in most regards, and should remain competitive. The product is fortunately less embarrassing than their youtube video. The trick dual-battery type is an excellent idea, and they managed to cram it in this little body, so kudos there. There's also a new major AF module version, SAFOX IX, any improvements here will be welcome, but I'll note that K-7's SAFOX VIII+ was a noticeable improvement over what came before, so this may yet improve on that too. Would have been nice if they'd figured a way to include AF in video but that's probably no mean feat. Maybe K-5 will?
     
  6. ???? Thats it? I'm goin to bed (;
     
  7. "???? Thats it? I'm goin to bed (;"
    Perhaps you missed the part about the Pet scene mode.
    Pentax also announced another pair of compacts, one of which is 'skinnable' with user-swappable faceplates. Not for everybody, but kind of cool. If they can't be found in stores and if they shoot like poo then it really doesn't matter though.
     
  8. I guess they finally got tired of my constant complaining about no affordable 35mm-ish prime lens in the Pentax lineup and figured this would shut me up for a while. ;-)
     
  9. I'll be the guy that's excited about a lens I can afford. Although I wish the new DA35 was f/2... a half stop isn't going to kill me. Seriously. Bokeh at f/2.8 is generally pleasing; just ask the DA40. I can afford it.... Wait.... did I say that out loud? (don't let the wife read this....)
    I dig the idea behind the K-r. It's a small step in the right direction. And frankly (since apparently my name is Frank...) compared to my DS.... everything is uphill from here, but I try to enjoy what I do have instead of wanting what I don't have. But then again, I'm a vulture.
    The K-r video is straight out of Golden. That's what Golden is like from top to bottom. They're generally informal and try to script jokes a little too much. So if you've always wondered: That's really what Golden, CO is like. If you've ever known anyone from Boulder, CO (a mere 20 minutes North) you'll be glad Pentax is in Golden. Boulder is .... unfortunate. :-D
     
  10. My thoughts here, if anyone cares.
    Good job on the K-r, tremendous fail on the DA L 35mm f/2.4. I'm sure they'll sell loads in pink as companions to the K-r in kits, and that's good for the bottom line, but they've insulted long-time Pentax users who still need a frickin affordable fastish normal prime.
    It's. Not. That. Difficult, Pentax.
     
  11. Aren't there supposed to be some big announcements at photokina later this month? Could there be more to come or is this it? What do you think?
    Mel
     
  12. That's the much-anticipated announcement?! I'm sorry, but there's gotta be more than that or there's going to be a long line at the strychnine stand over at PF. There have been pretty consistent and credible rumors about a note-worthy from Pentax release this month and, while this might qualify in a perverse sort of way, I can't believe this is it.
     
  13. We do need this option in 35mm(money no object) , the old FA J 19-35 never catch more than 33mm
     
  14. Dave et al., there will be more stuff announced at Photokina proper. The K-5, for starters. Then there might be an 18-135mm consumer lens.
    Like I said in my blog post, this is still not enough, not in the current climate of innovation and expansion set by the other brands. There better be a TC and a couple other NEEDED lenses announced, and I would even say they need to announce the immediate release of a MILC and show a FF prototype under glass.
     
  15. The DA35 f/2.4 is an affordable prime. Hats off for Pentax for thinking of the novice or newer, amateur.
    The K-r essentially improves over the K-x, regardiess of how it is positioned. Another well-done move, take what already wins awards, listen to users and improve the capabilities. Also looks like the first Pentax AA unit that has voltage regulation to handle the increased Li-Ion input. Well done!
    A826849D-9CF0-6C1F-CD7C-8D85ADCB8FD9 1.03.01
     
  16. Although I'm not sure I need one I agree the 35 is interesting just because it's affordable. A step in the right direction IMO but as I already have a DA40 I doubt I'll be getting one. Unless it might get bundled with the K-r body for next to nothing...
    The K-r looks nice. Nothing earth shattering and it looks like no weather sealing, but hopefully a capable camera. AF points are back which is nice and the high ISO sounds interesting. The proof will be in the handling and most importantly the IQ.
     
  17. The DA35/2.4 is also notable for being light -- 124 grams. That's not much heavier than a body cap. The lens hood will add significantly to the weight!
    Hybrid aspherical element, eh? Must be a plastic aspherical element molded to one side of a glass element. Also a plastic lens mount, obvious in the picture. Very much a cost-engineered lens. Not for "enthusiasts".
    Perhaps they view the K-r and DA35/2.4 pair as the digital replacement for the K1000 and 50/2.0 pair so loved by introductory photography classes.
     
  18. I believe there will still be the announcement for the new flagship at Photokina....the K5. I hope so.
     
  19. stemked

    stemked Moderator

    I think y'all are missing the point. Think about buying MULTIPLE 35 f2.8s! Should I go out with the Champagne lens or the Green one? No, no, definitely a purple lens day.
    http://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/showfull.php?product=359&bigimage=DA35Colors.jpg
     
  20. My wife would like the green one. In fact, that green almost matches our kitchen.
     
  21. To all of those who are loving the DA L 35mm f/2.4: Please go here and see the comparison to the Sony and Nikon equivalents. Unless they sell it for $125-150, I think it's an insult of a lens.
    And I'm still waiting, 3 years on, for a DA 28mm f/2.
     
  22. Even for small lens value of distort very important! Compare those items like pro-for fast f number ,will be some thing wrong for me(going to get one for BW) ,however price on unmarked lens ring should be publicly recognize for less than Sony or Nikkor!
     
  23. Will they ever bundle a digital body with a prime again like in the old film days? After schlepping the Super Takumar 35mm F2 for a few days a lighter slower prime starts to make sense and aren't most photos made at F5.6-11 anyway? As long as l get a bright viewfinder and acceptable corner sharpness fully open I could get interested despite my dislike for the make of most plastic lenses.
     
  24. While I'm still going to steer clear of calling it an "insult" I will also note that the Sony and Nikkor include nearly-silent in-lens AF motors, while the Pentax is not SDM. Yet another reason this lens should be $160 instead of $220. I'm still kind of expecting cheaper prices with kits and/or rebates.
    Pentax just needs to get it in their heads that this lens is an important piece of attracting people to the system and is a good candidate for loss-leader pricing if there ever was one.
     
  25. K-r looks like a decent evolutionary upgrade. No surprises but on paper looks just fine.
    This 35mm lens. Hmm. Can't fault Pentax for getting into the consumer prime market, good on them. But at Miserere pointed out, it's well beaten by the competition (on paper). Losing in price and speed, it's only advantage is size. That's not new for Pentax, but for a budget prime you'd think a few cm of size isn't a big deal. I also have absolutely no interest in colours, but if it helps Pentax sell gear, I can't really fault that.
    The idea is fine, but I think there are more pressing requirements in the lens line up (I'm biased towards higher end gear), like a pro level fast normal, and a fast moderate wide. Granted, the optically great FA* 31mm is currently there too, but I have a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 on the way for a fraction of the price.
     
  26. The K-r might improve upon the K-x's great performance at high ISO. Check out these 100% crops at all ISOs. I'm assuming they're out-of-camera JPEGs, which makes them even more remarkable.
    "FORZADO" means "forced".
     
  27. It's not like the DA L 35 is a pancake lens; it's not that small.
    To answer a question above, yes, it will be bundled with the new K-r as a kit option in matching colours. See here.
     
  28. It used to be that I was continually torn between Pentax and Nikon. Now I find myself torn between Nikon and Sony. Never thought I'd find myself in that position. :-\
    The new K-r looks great, and seems like it will be a worthy replacement for the excellent K-x. But the situation with Pentax lenses remains weird, for lack of a better term.
    Given Pentax's affinity for unusual focal lengths, and considering the gaping hole in their lineup between 21mm and 31mm, one wonders why they haven't come out with anything in the 25mm-26mm range. 26/2.6 DA WR, anyone?
     
  29. My personal favourite lens would be something like a 24mm f/1.8 DA, * or WR. Perfect for the sealed bodies.
    I realise camera companies can't always make your favourite lens, but I would imagine a moderate wide or standard, sealed fast lens at a moderate price would prove popular.
     
  30. Am I missing something here? The FA 35/2.0 is still available new... Where did this talk of it being discontinued come from? Or is it only discontinued in the US?
    I think the K-r looks awesome. Its got a much more serious look to it now its modeled after the K-7. I never liked the smooth plasticky K-x look. The K-r looks like it means business :)
    But I am disappointed that it isn't that much of an improvement over the K-x on paper. A small improvement but I wanted 1080p video... maybe thats too much to ask from something so cheap.
     
  31. Is it me or is this becoming yet another Pentax-complaining-board thread?
    I mean, sure the new lens does not appeal to too many people, perhaps even no-one, but don't you think that the K-r will be a hit? And how about the rumours (yeah ... rumours only) the supposedly upcoming K5?
    Anyway, time will tell once real test come out, from real users who, undoubtedly, will buy the K-r and the K5, when it's here.
    For me, what really matters is a better AF system and noise handling capabilities.
    Cheers for now.
    JP
     
  32. Pentax-FA 35/2.0 is very discontinued indeed, and the used prices are well above the new prices of 18 months ago. This was once a $299 lens, you can't get one for that little anymore. There are new old stock ones out there, but at about $500.
    The 50/1.4 is the last non-Limited Pentax-FA lens still in production.
     
  33. Is it me or is this becoming yet another Pentax-complaining-board thread?​
    It's you and it isn't you. We're complaining (some of us, anyway) about the new 35mm lens. Hardly anyone is complaining about the K-r; I might even consider buying one if the K-5 does come out at $1,600 like we've been hearing.
    We don't hate Pentax, and that's the problem. We love Pentax so much that when we see them do stupid things it makes us angry. Pentax introduced their first DSLR in 2003, with an APS-C sensor. Their very first lens released after that point should have been a DA Ltd 28mm f/1.9, the APS-C equivalent of the FA Ltd 43mm f/1.9. They've released over a dozen lenses in the 7 years since, and throughout all that time Pentaxians everywhere were requesting, with ever-increasing patience, a normal fastish prime for APS-C, and to make it affordable if possible. And what did we get after 7 years of waiting? A plastic lens that's 7mm too long and almost a stop too slow.
    Of course we're going to complain, Jacques.
     
  34. The FA 35/2 is still available and still being produced by Pentax as far as I know. Its listed n their site and I have at least 2 sources where I can get it new. Maybe its just Japan, but it is still alive. As for other FA lenses, there are a couple of other zooms too still being produced. The price may have gone up a bit but it is still available.
    Back to the topic, I just noticed that the 35/2.4 comes in like 12 colours! That's sweet and its cheap as well. I think it would make a great compact combo with the K-r or the K-x.
     
  35. "C Wyatt , Sep 09, 2010; 06:09 p.m.
    My personal favourite lens would be something like a 24mm f/1.8 DA, * or WR. Perfect for the sealed bodies.
    I realise camera companies can't always make your favourite lens, but I would imagine a moderate wide or standard, sealed fast lens at a moderate price would prove popular."

    Pentax: Please make an exellent DA 24mm f/1.8 (or 2) WR (Limited) with Quick Shift and Close Focus to 0.2m. Built in hood with same style as the hood in DA 35/2.8 Limited. Then I'll promise to buy an extra Pentax camera for it.
     
  36. I think a large part fo the problem being discussed here is that we are all either lifelong photographers or have a high interest in pentax equipement. Pentax by comparison, now sees itself as a maker/seller of consumer goods and has no interest in what 'photographers' want,..and, for all we know, they are correct in this strategy.
    When the first pentax DSLR appeared about 10 years back there were already signs that pentax were looking towards a different market and yo may all remember the furore of the 'Ist*' name and cheap plastic colour etc.
    The truth does seem to be that pentax sees itself as an adult subsidery to 'Toys-R-Us' so 'WE' as photographers are not going to ever see the items that we really want such as a large aperture moderate wide like a 24mm f1.4 Sadly it seems that pentax never takes into account the views and wishes of serious photographers and, from what I can see, has no dialogue with them. This is probably the reason why there may never be a full-frame camera because it wold simply be a serious image system and as such, out of market area for pentax.
    People here may be right to hail 'K-r', but the reality is that there are only 'drip-feed' improvements over previous models,...just enough to catch the eye of consumers. And, we can be sure that whatever replaces K-r will in turn have small, mainly visual, 'improvments' over K-r.
     
  37. The 35/2.4 sounds like a great buy, I imagine it'll be a very good performer too with it being such a simple design. I guess when people are buying a camera they might wonder why it's not a 1.8 like Nikon/Canon/Sony? But then I suppose if they had two 35/1.8 lenses, one extremely expensive, one extremely cheap, I guess it could potentially effect sales on the more expensive item. What are your thoughts? Was it 2.4 simply for the sake of differentiating? I can't see it making that much different on price/size.
     
  38. I see no problems with the new DA35/2.4 (I'd like to try one), but I really want a DA 24mm f/1.8 (or 2) WR (Limited) with Quick Shift and Close Focus to 0.2m. A lens like that will not effect sales of other Pentax lenses (perhaps it would effect sales of the DA21/3.2 Limited).
     
  39. Audun, have you tried the Sigma 24/1.8? Not trying to say it's a Pentax, it's nothing like a Limited lens, but I tested one and really liked it - close focus, nice build, bokeh, detail/"sharpness", quite large (for a short prime), but nowhere near unmanagable.
     
  40. The K-r sounds like a nice entry level camera. Not much to say about it. It definite erodes some of the K-7s strong points for people not wanting amazing ISO 100-400 and perhaps wanting the Sony 12MP CMOS.
    As far as the 35mm f/2.4, it's a kit lens, and thats great. Pentax has been staying afloat being competitive in the entry level market where it can afford to put some of it's best tech without stealing from the flagship. Having 2 levels of camera is a huge bonus. I don't have a problem with a "fastish" normal prime being bundled. Truthfully, if I was to get a K-r as a backup camera I would probably buy the 35mm 2.4 as a bundled lens with that camera. Whereas even the WR kit lens didn't convince me to buy it with the K-7.
    However, I have 3 issues which perhaps will be announced with the new flagship.
    1) why a 35mm lens? Do we not have a million options in Pentax right between 31 and 43mm?
    2) If a 35mm lens, why not the 35mm f/2. It's not like it was a big lens. Put the internals into an FA Limited WR body and let it fly off the shelves. If you priced it at $450, people would buy it! Why? It's faster than the DA 35mm Macro, it's tack sharp wide open, and it cost a lot less than the 31mm Limited. Yeah, I know Mis and some people don't like the 52mm FOV on a 1.5X sensor, but it worked just fine for me. My only issue with the 35mm f/2 FA was the build of the lens casings which just weren't quite as robust as I like. Plus the feel of the manual focus rings were also a bit disappointing.
    3) Why has no DA 30mm lens ever been announced? It was briefly on the road map as a DA Limited but gone at the next roadmap. 35mm is great and all, but 30mm gives you a more normal FOV on a APS-C camera. While 52mm worked for me, 28 or 30mm would be ideal. To this date we still have no 30mm fast prime from a company that openly admitted it had virtually no plans to ever make a full frame camera in the near future. If you are that committed to APS-C you need to produce 1 freakin fast normal prime that the average enthusiast can enjoy.
     
  41. "Sigma 24/1.8?"
    Weight: 485g
    Diameter x Length: 83 x 80 mm/3.3 x 3.1 in
    Way too bulky and heavy for my taste.
     
  42. Just a suggestion - you seem to want a lot of width and speed in a tiny package is all, so I thought I'd suggest something realistic (ie something that exists) :)
     
  43. I could live with a DA 24mm/2.4 WR with 0.2m and a hood like DA 35/2.8 Limited.
     
  44. Justin wrote: If you are that committed to APS-C you need to produce 1 freakin fast normal prime that the average enthusiast can enjoy.​
    My point exactly!
    And the 30mm lens that was on the lens roadmap until the Hoya buyout was labelled DA*, not Ltd, so it would've been weather-sealed and, we assume, fast. I suppose Pentax just wanted people to spend their money at Sigma's store buying their successful 30mm f/1.4, so they never released it.
     
  45. stemked

    stemked Moderator

    Personally if the lens gets a lot of buyers and keeps a bunch of engineers employed who put their extra curricular activities into a 400mm + autofocus lens I'll be a happy camper. I'd really like an autofocus lens in that range, not that I'm terribly disappointed in a manual 400mm f5.6 from Sigma and a 40 year old 500mm f4.5 Takumar.
     
  46. Bob Stevenson , Sep 10, 2010; 04:18 a.m.
    The truth does seem to be that pentax sees itself as an adult subsidery to 'Toys-R-Us' ... Sadly it seems that pentax never takes into account the views and wishes of serious photographers ...
    I hear what you're saying, but I don't think that's entirely true. Example: Pentax 645D. Definitely not a Toys-R-Us camera. I think that's evidence that Pentax has at least some interest in pros and hardcore enthusiasts. (The DA* and Limited lenses would also be evidence of that.)
    Justin Serpico [​IMG][​IMG][​IMG], Sep 10, 2010; 07:28 a.m.
    1) why a 35mm lens? Do we not have a million options in Pentax right between 31 and 43mm?
    The 31/1.8 costs $1K. Not an option for the target audience. The 35/2.8 is a bit closer at "only" $550, but again, that's too rich for most of the people who would buy a K-r or K-x (e.g., those who can't afford a K-7 or whatever the K-7 replacement will be). The 40 is almost in the right price range, but on APS-C it's too long to be a "normal." Same goes for the 43, and at $600 it, again, is priced too high for the target audience.
    On the other hand, the gaping lack of options between 21 and 31 makes me wonder why Pentax didn't come out with something in that range. However, I'm glad they didn't release yet another Limited or DA*, because that wouldn't have made any sense either. (see below)
    Richard Harris [​IMG], Sep 10, 2010; 05:13 a.m.
    I guess when people are buying a camera they might wonder why it's not a 1.8 like Nikon/Canon/Sony? But then I suppose if they had two 35/1.8 lenses, one extremely expensive, one extremely cheap, I guess it could potentially effect sales on the more expensive item.
    Perhaps, but if the other guys can do it, why can't Pentax? I just find it very confusing that Pentax comes out with these excellent, full-featured, affordable bodies, but doesn't have any lenses to match (kit lenses excepted). How many people are going to buy a $600 body and then put a $1000 31/1.8 on it? (OK, a few members of this forum would, but that's beside the point.)
    Look at it from the point of view of photography students and serious amateurs -- people who understand the unique advantages that a fast normal prime offers (or perhaps their photography teacher told them to get that instead of a zoom). They walk into a camera store looking to buy into a system, and they see that they can get a 35/1.8 from Nikon or Sony for under $200. Today, they'd see nothing in even remotely the same price range available from Pentax. Or, in the future, they'd see that they can get a Pentax 35/2.4 -- but it's slower and still costs more than the competition. Most people don't want to pay more to get less. (For that matter, why doesn't the new K-r have a tilt/swivel LCD? Most of the other low-priced DSLRs have that nowadays. It's not a feature I desperately need... but once again, when people are comparison shopping, they're going to be like "Ooooh the screens on the Nikons and Sonys tilt and swivel! Cool!")
    Honestly I'm not knocking Pentax for coming out with this lens. It's a step in the right direction. It's just frustrating for those of us who remember a time in the not-so-distant past when Pentax had something for everyone, and there was no question that Pentax offered both value and quality. Now it seems like Pentax is sort of fumbling in the dark trying to cater to the low end and the high end, and not really doing that great a job of pleasing either one. We all know they're capable of doing it, and that's why it bums us out when they do things that make us go "Huh?".
     
  47. I do think that this lens will keep some people from jumping ship. I know that it has convinced me to wait on picking a new camera. I was recently getting very frustrated with focusing my manual focus lenses on my pentax DSLR and went looking for an autofocus lens in the normal range. I wanted something fast since my camera is a bit older and doesn't have the nice high-iso capabilities of the newer bodies. Really, the only thing from pentax that would meet my needs was the 31 limited. The Sigma 30mm seemed like an option, but I heard a lot of bad things about its ability to achieve focus. Anyway, after recovering from the shock of the 31's price, I determined that it would actually be more economical to buy a Nikon D90 and a 35/1.8. What I am saying here is that Pentax had created such a limited line of lenses, that it was actually cheaper to buy a new camera from a different manufacturer to get access to the kind of glass I wanted. I know that the Nikon lens can't compare to the 31 limited, but at this point, I don't care that much.
    If they do offer this new lens as a kit with the k-r for a reasonable price, I will probably stick with Pentax. I absolutely love my 50/1.4, when I can get it to focus properly, and would not want to part with it.
    One other thing that I noticed regarding the odd aperture of the new lens. Its focal length is exactly half that of the 70mm limited, which also has a maximum aperture of 2.4. The two probably aren't related, but I just thought I'd point that out.
     
  48. Agree totally about the tilt/swivel LCD, R.T. I had that on my old Oly back in caveman times and you'd be surprised how useful it can be.

    As to the matter at hand, I was and remain in favor of Pentax's efforts to position itself with attractive options at the entry-level: they've done that well with the K-x. The trick now is to create an attractive upgrade path and if the K-5 is going to have a street price of +/- $1,400 the path is going to be steeper than it's been in the recent past and take longer to climb. What's needed, I think, are lenses in the $400 range which will be credibly appropriate in the context of a k-r > k-5 upgrade and I don't think this new 35mm qualifies.
     
  49. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/606792-USA/Nikon_2183_AF_S_Nikkor_35mm_f_1_8G.html
    Comes with a hood, and even better, a 5-year warranty. This is exactly what myself and many other Pentaxians have been asking for.
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/731697-REG/Sony_SAL35F18_DT_35mm_f_1_8_SAM.html
    No 5-year warranty on that one, but other than that it compares very favorably:
     
  50. No intentions of jumping ship here. In fact, I just bought a new body. I doubted between the K7D and the K20D and finally settled for the K20D. Especially because the controls of the K20D are much better placed and faster as the ones on the K7D. When I look at the pictures of the K-r, I see a missed chance. I'd have liked to see the internal specs of the K-r combined with the body of the K20D, especially the lay out and functioning of the controls. Much faster to change settings on the K20D as on the K7D.
    The 2.4/35 looks interesting, the price will be decisive if I'll buy it. A 2.0-2.8-ish 28mm would be my first choice though, my old Fa 2.8/28 is slowly showing the marks of my style of using it. (Tossing it in a bicycle barbag during all sorts of weather.)
     
  51. The fact that Pentax is the only company with the balls to release a new camera with a fixed lens as the kit says volumes to me. That it is a bargain price version of an esteemed lens -- trading half a stop of light for improved digital optimisation, lower weight and smaller size -- only adds to the value. Comparing this to Nikkor lenses that are NOT STABILISED is misleading. So too is expecting Pentax to run a loss leader like Nikon has obviously done.
    Me, I would love a fast 24mm or 28mm lens. Do I need another 35mm? No, not at all. But I think this is a great way for Pentax to snag new customers and indoctrinate them into the one focal length way that photographers need to embrace to become any good at all.
    This lens is faster than all the DA Limiteds, for goodness sake. If you are a photographer and can't deal with f/2.4 in a 35mm FOV then you are no photographer at all. Folks pine for the Leica X1 and it has a f/2.8 lens. Why don't we wait and see how good the optics are before condemning this one?
     
  52. Waiting to see how good the optics are is certainly a good idea. With that in mind, how can you call it an esteemed lens if it's an all-new design and hasn't been released yet? Do you know something we don't?
     
  53. Where are all this photos taken at F1.2-F2.8 hidden in the POW or general Pentax forum?
     
  54. This is apparently a return to the kit policy for entry level offering during the film era- as in ME Super with "M" 50mm f/2 prime lens. It really is a good kit for introduction of serious photography.

    The K-r is already listed on Pentax USA- pentaximaging website. The K-x is still there, the K-7 is now gone.

    I do hope the K-r becomes available packaged as body only without a penalty as to price. It is obviously an upgraded version of the K-x. They could have named it K-xr. It does appear to be just a bit heavier in build, by 1/2 ounce, 1/10 " more width, and 2/10 inch more in height (darn it!)- about the same height as my K200D. I believe the added height was necessary for the lighted focus points in the VF and the greater 3" LCD size. So it is an entirely new body.

    With the slightly heavier but still very compact new body, and perhaps a better-damped shutter/mirror mechanism, the detail smearing from vibration between 1/30 and 1/100 sec may be solved.

    The video is claimed to be somewhat improved at 25 fps, though still at a good 720p. The new Nikon entry DSLR, however, offers 1080p video, and with a 14.2 MP sensor, wich may be needed to deliver the 1080p. Nikon claims good high ISO performance, but theirs has been compromised by aggressive NR right along, and the 14MP sensor implies more of the same. Hopefully, the K-r will continue the fine high ISO detail-preserving performance of the K-x. Pentax is being wise to keep this potential by staying with the 12MP sensor. It must be a body size issue that accounts for a lack of HDMI output. It makes little sense to have HD video when it cannot be output as HD. The only option is to download the video to a computer via USB, then burn a DVD for HD viewing.

    I look forward to test reports, and find the K-r to be of great interest as my ultra-compact, low-light, and action shooter!! But for other needs, my built-like-a- tank, weather sealed, K200D will remain my most used compact DSLR! The k-r may turn out to be worth the wait instead of getting the k-x.
     
  55. Mis wrote:
    It's you and it isn't you. We're complaining (some of us, anyway) about the new 35mm lens. Hardly anyone is complaining about the K-r; I might even consider buying one if the K-5 does come out at $1,600 like we've been hearing.
    We don't hate Pentax, and that's the problem. We love Pentax so much that when we see them do stupid things it makes us angry. Pentax introduced their first DSLR in 2003, with an APS-C sensor. Their very first lens released after that point should have been a DA Ltd 28mm f/1.9, the APS-C equivalent of the FA Ltd 43mm f/1.9. They've released over a dozen lenses in the 7 years since, and throughout all that time Pentaxians everywhere were requesting, with ever-increasing patience, a normal fastish prime for APS-C, and to make it affordable if possible. And what did we get after 7 years of waiting? A plastic lens that's 7mm too long and almost a stop too slow.
    Of course we're going to complain, Jacques.​
    Well said.
     
  56. Speaking for myself. As a person whom many of you remember as a die hard zoom guy; over the course of the past year and a half, I have completely fallen in love with not only the pentax primes / ltds, but even the off brand ones. These small amazing lenses are the reason I will not completely dump Pentax. Nikon can't touch the Pentax primes as far as size goes. So for me, I would love a 24 or 28 F/2.0 prime that is optimized to be used wide open. A 25mm would also be really good. Well, I am off to take pictures with my cell phone, I mean K20D :cool:
     
  57. Javier, I agree with this:
    "So for me, I would love a 24 or 28 F/2.0 prime that is optimized to be used wide open. A 25mm would also be really good. "
    A DA 24 or 25mm could be f=2.4
     
  58. Ive been thinking about it, and if they came out with a 24mm 1.8-2 close focusing, weather sealed prime, I would get it the day it came out, and it would be the only lens I would carry under 70mm. I think this is the case for several of the people on here. Maybe we will get lucky and something close to that will be announced on the 20th.
     
  59. who you search for..?Give me Canon "white" and I color for you in thousands in L COLOR-give Pentax a break A FEW IN PINK AND GREEN -dont you get used to?
     
  60. First, there are very few, if any, fast primes that are at their sharpest wide open. Some are downright soft wide open. I have a Sigma 24mm f/1.8 EX DG that is pretty decent wide open. And it is good for close focus- near macro! Build quality is excellent, and it is full-frame with an aperture ring for use on a film body. Its build, close focus, and IQ make its price a very good value. But a fast, and WA lens ain't gonna be a pancake!
     
  61. If you look at Ricehigh's blog, the new 35/2.4 looks exactly the same as the FA 35/2.
    Leading me to think it's just a stopped-down 35/2 in a cheapified body. Stopping down the 35/2 would actually clean up a lot of its aberrations...
    At $220 it's definitely on my "want to buy" list. Cheap enough.
    OTOH maybe I should just get a Sony NEX 3 with the 16mm f/2.8 pancake. Perfect small camera.
     
  62. It would be a waste of time and opportunities to throw away a good lens design simply because it's the old one. So it sounds to me as a sound policy to reuse the old lens design. I wouldn't mind more lenses to be introduced in this way.
     
  63. These small amazing lenses are the reason I will not completely dump Pentax. Nikon can't touch the Pentax primes as far as size goes. So for me, I would love a 24 or 28 F/2.0 prime that is optimized to be used wide open. A 25mm would also be really good.​
    Precisely, I've been saying this for years.
    FOr instance, my Sigma 10-20mm didn't get bigger, I loved it because it was relatively tiny for a 10-20mm wide angle. However, Pentax released a 15mm DA Limited that is positively tiny even compared to the Sigma 10-20. The result, my kit got even smaller while for the most part covering the same range (I found I was using the Sigma around 14mm where it was to my eye sharpest and least distorted, and also about ideal for most of my photography). So the 15mm + 21mm is a better combo in most cases, and also smaller.
    People need not complain that Pentax isn't Nikon or Canon, but rather embrace the strong points.
    If you continue to live in a fantasy world where Pentax will compete by producing the same lineup as Canon and Nikon for less money you will continue to be saddened.
    On the other hand if you accept that Pentax has a great lineup in it's own right, and you determine that strengths of that lineup suit your photography than you will be happy as a Canikonite is perceived to be.
    For me being able to fit a very competent landscape kit into a Storm Case 2075 is a a truly amazing feat. To be able to fit a wonderful travel kit into a Lowepro 65AW is also pretty amazing.To be able to fit a 645N and lenses + a K-7 and lenses into a single medium sized photo backpack is amazing. If these sorts of things don't appeal to you than it is time to jump ship and move on.
    On the other hand it is perfectly normal and expected that people will have minor complaints and constructive critiques about the direction or misdirection of a company. For myself and many others we love our gear, but we don't understand why Pentax refuses to make certain "no brainer" decisions.
     
  64. Ivo Miesen , Sep 13, 2010; 05:43 a.m.
    It would be a waste of time and opportunities to throw away a good lens design simply because it's the old one. So it sounds to me as a sound policy to reuse the old lens design. I wouldn't mind more lenses to be introduced in this way.
    Exactly. Which is precisely what many of us have been saying for years. Maybe they finally listened.
    If it's the same optical formula as the old 35/2 and they simply made the max aperture a little smaller, I may consider buying one, because the 35/2 was one heck of a sharp lens. Even wide open.
    Now how about they take the optical formula of the excellent old 50/1.7, repackage it, and release it as an inexpensive DA 50/2! :D
     
  65. Precisely, I've been saying this for years.
    FOr instance, my Sigma 10-20mm didn't get bigger, I loved it because it was relatively tiny for a 10-20mm wide angle. However, Pentax released a 15mm DA Limited that is positively tiny even compared to the Sigma 10-20. The result, my kit got even smaller while for the most part covering the same range (I found I was using the Sigma around 14mm where it was to my eye sharpest and least distorted, and also about ideal for most of my photography). So the 15mm + 21mm is a better combo in most cases, and also smaller.​
    Me too. I have found that I was suing the Sigma @14, 15 or 20mm, so I have started to use either the DA15, or 21 now instead of the Sigma. How I wish there was a small DA24 and DA28. I would be all set...I am far from alone in wanting these....To show you how starved us 24m lovers are, consider I paid $600.00 for a used FA*24F/2.0 from KEH? How ever, I rarely use it because it is a monster. Many folks buy them at that price though. So I along with many others enter into these bidding wars for 24's and end up paying more than what this new da 35f/2.4 cost.
     
  66. Well on the upsaide, flippin heck, that K-r at 3200 ISO doesn't look half bad to me. Is it the same sensor as the K-x?
    But having just shelled out for a K-7 last year, I'm a bit peeved because this K-5 sounds like everything I was hoping the K-7 to be. And I have to say, reading Justin and Hin's tales of warranty woe, I hope I never need to get involved with repair.
     
  67. "People need not complain that Pentax isn't Nikon or Canon, but rather embrace the strong points. If you continue to live in a fantasy world where Pentax will compete by producing the same lineup as Canon and Nikon for less money you will continue to be saddened." -- Justin
    God if that isn't the quote of the year! If I want Canon or Nikon, I'd buy Canon or Nikon. I've always said if I was a Pro sports shooter, I'd have a Canon or Nikon body to gain access to their common lens rental. But I'm not, and I get into any sporting event with my barely 5" long DA* 200 f/2.8, and that's still long'n fast, especially for the size.
    As far as some being upset about the K-5 if it turns true, how does that change versus Canon or Nikon? They come up with better bodies and features on every rev (sans the often crippled, Nikon entry-level bodies). I just bought a K-x as a backup a few months ago and now the K-r is announced. I bought the K20D only 6 months before the K-7 was announced and its price plummeled to almost half of what I paid for it. Chill people.
    A826849D-9CF0-6C1F-CD7C-8D85ADCB8FD9 1.03.01
     

Share This Page