[Brightcolours]

"People are mentioning - as usual - Sigma and Tamron. Their lenses... my impression is that they're optimized for test charts and reviews. Which is of course fine if that's what you want." <<< come on... nobody ever does that. For some reason some people like to criticize good sharp lenses, I mostly see this as a case of subconsciously attempting to defend their purchases (or at least some brands on categories they associate themselves with) if there's a measurably better product out there, especially at lower prices.

Fast, precise and silent AF is mostly a given now across most every brand, right?

Precise is probably kinda new for Pentax users? 

[Kunzite]

It looks to me this section exists solely so non-Pentaxians would have the opportunity to bash/othering the brand.

Fast, precise and silent AF is mostly a given now across most every brand, right?

Precise is probably kinda new for Pentax users? 

q.e.d.

[Kunzite]

"People are mentioning - as usual - Sigma and Tamron. Their lenses... my impression is that they're optimized for test charts and reviews. Which is of course fine if that's what you want." <<< come on... nobody ever does that. For some reason some people like to criticize good sharp lenses, I mostly see this as a case of subconsciously attempting to defend their purchases (or at least some brands on categories they associate themselves with) if there's a measurably better product out there, especially at lower prices.

You're not getting what I said. You're making that clear in the last part, with "measurably better" - when I mentioned lenses optimized for test charts and reviews. You're basically reducing a lens to its basic specs, price and MTF test charts. That makes for a good Internet fanboy fight, maybe, but when we're talking photography, there's much more than that to a lens.
Do you really think you're getting everything and more, for a lower price?

The fact is, I do own modern Pentax lenses, including a D FA* prime - the D FA 50mm f/1.4. The main reason for its heavy focus group is to offer uniform performance at all working distances, and that lens delivers.
If you're trying to say I'm defending soft lenses, you'd make a fool out of yourself.

[Klaus]

I'm sure that the 21mm f/2.4 is an awesome performer but fact remains that the pricing is a bit surreal.

If true that's 50% more than Sony/Nikon are asking for their 20mm f/1.8 - thus even faster/wider lenses.

You may argue with the build quality - maybe - but this is still a steep difference.

I suppose that Pentax is banking on their reputation in JP. Just from hearsay, they seem to have a more Leica-like image there. It's probably their main market nowadays.
Of course, if it's working out for them, they should go for it.

[davidmanze]

I'm sure that the 21mm f/2.4 is an awesome performer but fact remains that the pricing is a bit surreal.

If true that's 50% more than Sony/Nikon are asking for their 20mm f/1.8 - thus even faster/wider lenses.

You may argue with the build quality - maybe - but this is still a steep difference.

I suppose that Pentax is banking on their reputation in JP. Just from hearsay, they seem to have a more Leica-like image there. It's probably their main market nowadays.
Of course, if it's working out for them, they should go for it.

Advertising poets don't come cheap ......

[Kunzite]

I'm sure that the 21mm f/2.4 is an awesome performer but fact remains that the pricing is a bit surreal.

If true that's 50% more than Sony/Nikon are asking for their 20mm f/1.8 - thus even faster/wider lenses.

You may argue with the build quality - maybe - but this is still a steep difference.

I suppose that Pentax is banking on their reputation in JP. Just from hearsay, they seem to have a more Leica-like image there. It's probably their main market nowadays.
Of course, if it's working out for them, they should go for it.

You're comparing with the wrong lens - the Zeiss Loxia 21mm f/2.8 has about the same MSRP.

I could argue about many things, although the optical qualities of this new lens are yet to be discovered (however, we do get some good hints). I could argue about the Sony and Nikon Z relying on software corrections, for example, and being mirrorless lenses thus much easier to make. And yes, the build of the D FA 21mm is on another level. I could argue about mechanically connected focus rings, too.
Did Sony and Nikon put a similar amount of effort into their lenses' rendering as Pentax did? It's too bad the others don't do "development stories" the same manner as Pentax, so we're not told what they had in mind when designing a lens.

And then - as you said - if it's working out for them, they should go for it.

[Brightcolours]

I'm sure that the 21mm f/2.4 is an awesome performer but fact remains that the pricing is a bit surreal.

If true that's 50% more than Sony/Nikon are asking for their 20mm f/1.8 - thus even faster/wider lenses.

You may argue with the build quality - maybe - but this is still a steep difference.

I suppose that Pentax is banking on their reputation in JP. Just from hearsay, they seem to have a more Leica-like image there. It's probably their main market nowadays.
Of course, if it's working out for them, they should go for it.

You're comparing with the wrong lens - the Zeiss Loxia 21mm f/2.8 has about the same MSRP.

I could argue about many things, although the optical qualities of this new lens are yet to be discovered (however, we do get some good hints). I could argue about the Sony and Nikon Z relying on software corrections, for example, and being mirrorless lenses thus much easier to make. And yes, the build of the D FA 21mm is on another level. I could argue about mechanically connected focus rings, too.
Did Sony and Nikon put a similar amount of effort into their lenses' rendering as Pentax did? It's too bad the others don't do "development stories" the same manner as Pentax, so we're not told what they had in mind when designing a lens.

And then - as you said - if it's working out for them, they should go for it.

Ho hum.

Yeah, you are comparing wrong as the much cheaper (almost 1/3rd of the price Sony 20mm f1.8) is wider, faster and much, much cheaper!

Did Sony make a lens that renders beautifully? (yes...) 
Did Sony make a lens that relies on software corrections? (no...)
Did Sony make a much simpler mirrorless lens? (no... Almost the same weight, more elements (14 vs 11), and I doubt this Toki... I mean Pentax (sorry for the typo) reaches the same quality).

For sure we should only compare it to the very overpriced and slower Zeiss lens.

Also, just about the same can be said about the Nikkor 20mm f1.8 that can be said of the Sony... Does not rely on distortion, renders beautifully, is much cheaper yet has 14 elements. 

The difference appears to be that they spent less money on the nonsense sales copy than Pentax does.

[Kunzite]

Wow, you're always so eager to "prove" Pentax is no good What's in for you?

The D FA 21mm does not merely "renders beautifully"; it seems to be in another league compared to "pedestrian" lenses like the Sony and the Nikon.
The Sony does rely on software corrections. I didn't say distortion correction; this is about vignetting, which doesn't get away even at f/5.6.
I said much easier to make, not simpler. The Sony being a 20mm f/1.8 is feasible because it's a mirrorless lens.

And anyway, I'm paying the money - not you; so why do you care?

[Brightcolours]

Wow, you're always so eager to "prove" Pentax is no good What's in for you?

The D FA 21mm does not merely "renders beautifully"; it seems to be in another league compared to "pedestrian" lenses like the Sony and the Nikon.
The Sony does rely on software corrections. I didn't say distortion correction; this is about vignetting, which doesn't get away even at f/5.6.
I said much easier to make, not simpler. The Sony being a 20mm f/1.8 is feasible because it's a mirrorless lens.

And anyway, I'm paying the money - not you; so why do you care?

You project onto others a lot, it seems...

Where do you get that "another league" from? Just from the Pentax PR blurb?

No, the Sony does not rely on software corrections, just like any/all wide angle lens, just like this Pentax will show, even at f5.6. Perhaps the Sony will show a bit more just because the optics are closer to the sensor, but that has nothing to do with the lens  and its quality (just with the sensor and the angle the light hits the mirco lenses).

Why is a lens with more elements "much easier to make"? Because it is a stop faster?
And where is the mirror in that Pentax lens, by the way?

Why is it about you paying money, according to you? 

Questions, questions, questions....

[thxbb12]

@Kunzite

Roger Cicala from lensrentals did test the Sony 20mm f1.8 on their optical bench, which tests lenses *without* a camera: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2021/02/sony-fe-20mm-f1-8-g-optical-tests/
This means there is no software correction at play in their findings.

Here is a quote from the conclusion:

"I keep saying Sony lives out there on the cutting edge of technology, always going for the home run shot. Sometimes that results in a swing-and-a-miss, but when it works, everyone leaves their seats. The FE 20mm f/1.8 is a home run. It’s really amazing. The resolution is awesome, the lack of astigmatism and lateral color is more awesome, and the flat field double-secret most awesome.
I can spew superlatives for a paragraph or two, but it’s really not necessary."

Based on Roger's analysis and findings, I wouldn't exactly call this lens "pedestrian"...