> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Because it is too expensive? If so, why do they continue to offer > > some really expensive "pro" glass? > > > > This has always mystified me. Last I looked, Pentax made a 600/4.0, > > a 300/2.8, and an 80-200/2.8. Last I looked, the equivalent Nikon and > > Canon lenses were CHEAPER. > > Even more mystifying considering their refusal to produce a reasonably > priced (~$300) non-soft focus 85mm lens.
They must not sell. Pentax has produced two such lenses (K85/1.8 and M85/2.0) but did not apparently see a reason to continue selling them. It is interesting that N and C both have such a lens currently in their lineup. It's also interesting to note that I have NEVER seen a fellow photojournalist shooting with either of them. My guess is that folks who have a real need for an 85 buy the 85/1.4s or know enough to find a used K or M 85, and the rest of the folks just stick to the 85 settings on their 28-80 or 80-200 zooms. How many companies even MAKE a 105 any more, or even a 135? There is some evidence that Pentax views 85 as a portrait lens, and soft focus as desireable in portraits. No other company has been so aggressive with the soft-focus 85s (which might include the M85/2.0 and S-T 85/1.9, according to some critics...) DJE
