[Kunzite]

I am making fun of you, and not bashing. Poking fun is not bashing.

Your attack on this Sony (and Nikkor) only illustrates your total lack of objectivity. I acknowledge the awesomeness of the Sony 20mm f1.8, even if I do not want a Sony camera. 

This particular Sony renders really well for 20mm. Yet you bash it, and claim the Pentax is "special" even though not even a single sample image has been published.

The Sony lens will be retro focus too, at 20mm with all these elements. Talking about utter lack of knowledge... Projecting again?

"Making fun" in this manner is how a troll (or an idiot, but you're the former) would lower the discussion to the desired level (or the only level he can work on).

Attack Sony? You're here, on the Pentax section, bashing Pentax - and you're saying that I attack Sony?
Why, because I don't sing praises for Sony? That I don't say it's oh so much better than Pentax by default? That I dare to prefer Pentax to Sony?

I'm not impressed by the Sony's OOF rendering. It's indeed not bad for a 20mm, but it doesn't look that good - very few ultrawides do IMHO.
Then we have a lens made to perform better, particularly wide open and at close distances.

"Not a single sample image has been published" - you're saying this without bothering to check the product page... of any lens?
Of course they published sample images; they always do. Then there's knowing they intentionally altered the optical parameters - going as far as making a special, adjustable test barrel - just to evaluate the bokeh rendering.
I stand by my words: this lens seems to be in another league.

The Sony E mount has a register distance of 18mm. The Pentax K, of 45.46mm. That's more than double.
Don't enter into technical arguments; stay with "making fun" - that is your level of competence.