FA Limiteds discontinued?!

<p>Looks like it - it's being talked about on PF:<br>

<a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/115758-annihilation-pentax-lens-line-up-death-fa-ltds.html">http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/115758-annihilation-pentax-lens-line-up-death-fa-ltds.html</a><br>

It's not that they were producing new models anyway, but I would have imagined the existing ones were selling well. Maybe not.</p>

<p>I don't think they were selling well (new from shops I mean). If they would have. do you think that money hungry Hoya would have stopped the line?</p>

<p>If the 31mm limited goes, that means Pentax has <em>no </em>fast standard in production at any price, I think? In my opinion, the FA limiteds have a problem compared to the more modern lenses of slower and noisier AF (from what I have been told), but their IQ sounded very high.</p>

<p>I don't have an issue with them going if more modern ones are introduced, but all the latest lenses have been at the lower end of the scale.</p>

<p>Well, I guess Zeiss and Cosina/Voigtlander provided the early cover for this move. The Olympus non-announcement that 4/3rds lens development is completed is along the same continuum.</p>

<p>It makes a lot of business sense, even if it doesn't feel good. Now Pentax can turn its manufacturing capacity towards new lenses for the 645D and colorful skins for the K-r.</p>

<p>I'm getting the feeling that the DA line of lenses is almost complete. A couple more consumer-level zooms, hopefully a truly fast 30mm prime, and victory can be declared. I don't think we'll see anything serious over 300mm, which is counter-intuitive to the higher-speed capabilities of the K-5.</p>

<p>ME</p>

 

<p>The FA Limiteds are the only reason a discerning shooter would choose Pentax. They have special rendering unequalled in any brand.</p>

<p>So now there is no reason at all to choose Pentax. (Except "value" and other things pros and lens aficionados both do not care about.) Well done Hoya!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The FA Limiteds are the only reason a discerning shooter would choose Pentax. They have special rendering unequalled in any brand.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>What about Leica? If you have the money.<br /> Pentax still has an affordable, compact, sealed, quiet, tough set up.</p>

<p>As pointed out in the linked thread, this likely means no FF anytime soon.</p>

<p>It is interesting to read this. How many of us that run dual systems have not said that the one thing Pentax has that Canikon does not have are those amazing small primes. Those Ltds are the best out there. Well, atleast my lenses just went up in price :)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>It is interesting to read this. How many of us that run dual systems have not said that the one thing Pentax has that Canikon does not have are those amazing small primes. Those Ltds are the best out there. Well, atleast my lenses just went up in price :)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, I think it won't be hard for Pentax to come up with some DA* ones - I am not knowledgeable in optical design but I guess that the DA31/43/77 could be even smaller than the FAs.<br /> LE: probably they will ditch the 43/77 for good - because 40/70 are still in production</p>

<p>C Wyatt wrote:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>What about Leica? If you have the money.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Of course if you are rich, Leica have some nice stuff. But I do not think their lenses are "better" than the FA Limiteds. And the utility of their cameras cannot possibly match digital SLRs.</p>

<p>Marius Mirea wrote:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>LE: probably they will ditch the 43/77 for good - because 40/70 are still in production</p>

</blockquote>

Yep, that makes sense. Ditch the lenses that are superior to all others of any brand and keep the ones any company can make.

<p>I feel the same because I used to own the FA trio - on the othet hand, it is highly unlikely that first time dslr customers would buy into Pentax because of the FAs. As for the hard cores - enough FAs on the market right now.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Of course if you are rich, Leica have some nice stuff. But I do not think their lenses are "better" than the FA Limiteds.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><a href="http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2010/03/17/wide-open-pentax-31-limited-leica-35-summilux-asph/">http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2010/03/17/wide-open-pentax-31-limited-leica-35-summilux-asph/</a><br>

Not a scientific comparison, and against a Leica lens that is 4x the price, on a different body I think too. The 31mm limited is great, but these Leicas are actually probably about the best optics money can buy in this format.</p>

<p>Anyway this is pretty off-topic.</p>

<p>Now that I am partially leaving Pentax. I really don't know what to feel. I sold almost all of my DA limited and FA 50 in 21/40/50/70 and Sigma 105mm in PF marketplace. I only intend to keep a few primes and a single Pentax digital body with DA15/DA35/FA43/FA77 limited. I pick the FA limited as I like the aperture rings to be used with Pentax MX and color is always surreal in FA limited. I may be tempted to swap 2 Pentax bodies in K20/K-x to a used K7. There is a rush people leaving Pentax everyday. Some kind folks really sell it for < $700 a piece.</p>

<p>I am not downplaying DA limited pimes but FA limited are all more special to me. And they work in FF film bodies. Justin, Robin and Peter are absolutely right on the FA 43mm f/1.9 limited. I am happy as a clam in using the FA 43mm f/1.9 on my K20D and film body with Pentax MX and Ricoh xr-p</p>

<p>It is a shame if Pentax stop producing any of the 31/43/77 primes as they are the best in Pentax. The DA limited are close but never the same as the FA limited with an aperture ring for film bodies.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I will stay to promulgation of 3D lenses !</p>

<blockquote>

<p>There is a rush people leaving Pentax everyday. </p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>This is a real shame. Worst part is that it is true..</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If the 31mm limited goes, that means Pentax has <em>no </em>fast standard in production at any price, I think?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, this is the most obvious hole in the lineup. The new 35/2.4 will fill it somewhat, but there's still a big gap between 21 and 35. And there's nothing fast in between like you said. On the other hand, I don't feel like the 31mm sold as well as the 77mm - I've seen a lot more shots from the 77 than from the 31. And few people could afford it, so for most of them the hole was always there.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Yep, that makes sense. Ditch the lenses that are superior to all others of any brand and keep the ones any company can make.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Hey, you played a little part in it with your thread about Vivitar 28s as an alternative to the FA 31! :)</p>

<p>In the end, the FA 77 generated threads like "DA 70 of FA77?", the FA 43 is something I never even considered - not a very appealing FL on APS, and the FA 31 was appreciated, but either could not be afforded or it was sold to cover the purchase of other lenses like Hin did with his.</p>

<p>So, I don't really care much - it's going to matter more for people that never heard about Pentax that you could attract by telling them about the 31/43/77, but for the existing Pentax users, it doesn't really matter - either you got them already or you were not going to get them anyway - there's a small segment that might have got them in the future if their finances improved, but that's life - there's a used market for them. I'm still laughing remembering someone that was trying to collect all FA Limiteds in pristine shape and was also looking for MIJ versions instead of AIV - of course, he went on the used market rather than buying new - he found a hair in one FA 77 and had to resell it - with such users, no wonder Pentax stops production.</p>

<p>Since I never had a limited series lens in my hands and in use, I confess, I wonder by how much the image quality differs from my best Takumar or Pentax-K primes. I don't recognize "surreal colors" and "special rendering unequalled in any brand" samples often or at all in this forum despite the fact that we have quite a few lens collectors and LBA addicts here? </p>

<p>Honestly, as Olympus said, the lens lineup is complete.</p>

<p>Most sensible Olympus owners have noted that no one in their right mind expected Olympus to compete on a selection basis with Canon (actually one post I read sounded something like what I always say on here) so at some point the lenses probably would stop being created.</p>

<p>Right now the DA line is filled with really solid lenses, I think Pentax could do another refresh by making them all WR. But honestly, aside from the missing 30mm and 1.4X TC, what regularly used lenses is Pentax missing? (I guess you could argue a 24mm, but don't you think you are splitting hairs when the 21mm is so close??, maybe a 400mm f/5.6 for the birders). There just aren't any dogs in the DA lineup, you can shoot from 12mm to 300mm with some of the best glass money can buy. Obviously the SDM can be improved, I've seen complaints of the focus speed of the 16-50, but that doesn't require an optical redesign or a new lens. <br /><br />As far as the FA Limiteds, most people love the size of the DA 40mm over the FA 43mm, even though I find it a bit hokey. Optically the DA 40 isn't really worse, it's just more average from start to finish. Most people seem happy with the DA 40mm, and can't justify the price of the FA 43mm. The DA 70mm makes a lot more sense to me over the 77mm. It's faster focusing, it has less fringing, and it cost a lot less. Mostly everyone finds it to be a good lens, even those that ended up with the FA 77 tend to not speak poorly of it.</p>

<p>The FA 31mm is the one lens that is a big loss, but perhaps this is Pentax chance to release a smaller (and cheaper) DA 30mm. FA 31mm isn't a particularly small lens, and it's price makes it far from a must have for the majority of people shooting Pentax. However, it's price is pretty damn reasonable for a lens many consider to be one of the best AF primes ever produced. So perhaps with the discontinuation of the 3 FA limiteds, we will finally get a DA 30mm.</p>

<p>All that said, I think this pretty much closes the door on Pentax producing a full frame camera, and I'm actually sort of happy it came down to this. As long as any FA lenses were produced people would note they existed and FF was a possibility. Now it's dead, we can move on. I'm guessing it must be sort of like when they find the body of a missing person. A mix of relief and grief, but I assure you life will go on.</p>

<p>You can now move on to the sweet reality that APS-C is actually a sweet spot in digital capture. I for one am glad the baggage of Fools Frame is gone!</p>

<p>Assuming this is true and not just another baseless rumor: it'll be sort of ironic, considering that Mr. Bunnell stated on his blog how fond he is of those lenses, particularly the 31 Limited.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Yep, that makes sense. Ditch the lenses that are superior to all others of any brand and keep the ones any company can make.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Any company can make the 40mm and 70mm but no one has. Personally, I love the 43mm but I wrestled with buying the 40mm instead. The 43mm was almost an impulse buy since I found it at a great price.</p>

<p>I never considered the 77mm and most people looking at lenses in 2010 don't, but the 70mm has been on my list.</p>

<p>Of the 3 FAs, only the 31mm is a lens I really wanted off and on. Of course, I still would be perfectly happy with a FA35mm f/2 in a Limited or DA* housing. That was my favorite lens aside from the build. So had the FA 35mm f/2.0 had a better build, I'd not even consider the FA 31mm either.</p>

<p>BTW, it's not as though I don't love the limited series. I have the 15, 21, 43, and the 70mm got passed over for a superior deal on the CV 90mm SLI. I just think the FA series was best for people shooting both film and digital, while the DA series is superior for digital shooters.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The DA limited are close but never the same as the FA limited with an aperture ring for film bodies.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Hin, you validated what I said above in your post. The FA Limiteds appeal to those shooting 35mm film and digital. Those entering the DSLR game without a 35mm film camera don't really care about the FAs.</p>

<p>I really don't shoot 35mm film, as a matter of fact, I left 2007 with 18 rolls of Provia in my freezer it's almost the end of 2010 and I have 16 rolls left with a half shot roll in my Program Plus. And that is the only 35mm I have shot in 3 years. On the other hand I shoot 2-3 rolls of 120mm film on average a month, with spurts of 5-10 rolls a week. I figure if I'm investing my time in film, I'd like the most out of each frame.</p>

<p>As Justin start to make point from Olympus ,say put a new M.Zuiko ED 75-300 with weight under 1lb and cost under $1000 on E-P1 - and you have 600mm focal and f4.5 all this cost and weight less than any other application. My point if Pentax proud maker of good solid primes -it sure sooner we do going to have something new as valence of all ready present lens!</p>

<p>Justin I largely agree with you, although I will say I think price is a much bigger factor than size in the 40-43 debate. I would get a 70mm over the 77 any day, if I was in the market for that focal length. And I probably would have bought a 31 at some point, if it wasn't quite so big AND expensive. A weather sealed DA* lens that costs a little less and/or is smaller would be very appealing.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I've ended up with the 15, 21, 43, and 70. While few argue that the 31 isn't an exceptional lens, it always just seemed a bit bulky and too expensive...and I say this as someone who did buy four other limited models. I fear now to some extent that I probably should have bought one two years ago or so when the prices were only mile-high instead of stratospheric.</p>

<p>Justin Serpico wrote:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Any company can make the 40mm and 70mm but no one has.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Voigtländer has, but those are out of production too. Both the classic 60mm Macro Elmarit and the newfangled Lumix G Vario 20/1.7 work out to the same field of view at the DA40. I would say the latter is the direct equivalent in terms of compact size and usability. This is not irrelevant since Pentax markets small cameras and lenses. They must compete with micro-four-thirds and other offerings. Getting rid of their best lenses is hardly going to help them win this competition.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I just think the FA series was best for people shooting both film and digital, while the DA series is superior for digital shooters.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The film / aperture ring thing is a red herring. The FA Limiteds simply have better bokeh and rendering. Or, to be more objective, I can go back to saying "more distinctive" instead of "better". This was not by accident; it was by design. Pentax have not designed their other lenses this way, but rather to different standards. Not to mention every other Limited is slow, compared to those that are faster than f/2.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>All that said, I think this pretty much closes the door on Pentax producing a full frame camera, and I'm actually sort of happy it came down to this. As long as any FA lenses were produced people would note they existed and FF was a possibility. Now it's dead, we can move on.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Do you really think people will move on? "Oh look, the FA200 covers the full image circle! So does the FA300! So does the FA70! Full-frame is around the corner!" :D</p>