Where is the weathersealing, guys?

Leandros S wrote:

A Schamber wrote:

Also, I could picture myself shooting in the streets with a 15, 21, 35 or a 40 mm even in the rain if they were weathersealed. Most zooms are way too big for street shooting.

Well, the 20-40mm WR Limited will cover you perfectly for the 21, 35 and 40mm focal lengths.

I don't know what you consider "too big", but here's that lens with its Ltd brethren:

It's a bit smaller than the Tammy 17-50, about the same as a Zeiss Macro-Planar 2/50 (but thinner):

I believe you have some experience with the 50-135, so here's that lens compared to the 20-40 - I would say the latter is less than half the size:

It's also only slightly bigger than the 35mm plastic fantastic.

I do get why they did it. I remember the awesome tri elmar from Leica, F4, that was fantastic. But I'd need to really consider it. It's not going to happen that in the short term... 100 Macro and 55 awaits me, probably.

Leandros S wrote:

leggeron wrote:

Thats actually a weird way of thinking. I'd definitely not risk water ingress in a lens and much less in the body... and then waiting a few days to dry? Thats actually a ridiculous proposition.

Honestly, I don't think Pentax will forfeit the opportunity to compete with CaNikon at the bottom end of the lens market for the benefit of rare customers like you. If you want the kind of value you're alluding to, your first stop should be the DA* 55. Its weather sealing is even better than would likely be the case on a $200 plastic fantastic.

As for the OP's original point, you'll notice that Fujifilm's entry level lenses are not weather-sealed, either, except the 35/2 which costs about twice what you were hoping for.

For me it's not about the weather sealing only, but how the marketing guys could use something like that to atract new buyers.

And I do believe that Pentax weather sealing is a great point when you have to compare things with Canon and Nikon with their actual budget offerings.

Leandros S wrote:

leggeron wrote:

Thats actually a weird way of thinking. I'd definitely not risk water ingress in a lens and much less in the body... and then waiting a few days to dry? Thats actually a ridiculous proposition.

Honestly, I don't think Pentax will forfeit the opportunity to compete with CaNikon at the bottom end of the lens market for the benefit of rare customers like you. If you want the kind of value you're alluding to, your first stop should be the DA* 55. Its weather sealing is even better than would likely be the case on a $200 plastic fantastic.

As for the OP's original point, you'll notice that Fujifilm's entry level lenses are not weather-sealed, either, except the 35/2 which costs about twice what you were hoping for.

They've already stated in interview that they are not going after the bargain basement customers as much anymore.   hence why they released the K-S2, K-70 and K-1 (over another KS-1 entry level clone with disco lights).

That said, I'd buy a couple primes with WR seals if Pentax offered them sub 500USD.  And I'm one who normally shoots with zooms.  But I value the IQ increase and formfactor of a prime sometimes.. Right now, it is impossible to use these when there is a chance of storms, which is pretty much all the time but some of fall and winter here.