50mm f/1.4 discontinued?

Sorry I ain't use to think in Pounds.
Just see that the Nikon 50 f/1.8 goes for £109 so does that price sound as a good offer for a DA 50 f/1.7 WR :

I know that quite a lot Canon and Nikon users buy such lenses for beside a telezoom and a kitlens so it's strange that Pentax does not have anything to offer at that range.

As for the other lenses are these prices better?
24/2.8 WR or 28/2.8 WR £209
35/2 WR £179
50/1.7 WR £109
85/2 WR £229
135/2.8 WR £279
200/4 WR £299

Just making them up of course.
The point is don't you think there would be a market for cheap primes?

I would love to see the current camera models coupled with a 18-55, 50 or 35 coupled as kit lens.
And personally I think they should make them WR to give it the edge over the competition.

I think a 35mm would be an ideal cheap prime on APS-C sensors, as it'll give more or less the same field of view as 50mm on film. I don't even see it harming the marketing if they made a 35mm lens with similar image quality to the old M 28mm f3.5 for around the £100 mark as it'd hook people into both Pentax and prime lenses.

The DA* 55mm is SDM only and I believe it has an APS-C image circle, so yes, a 50mm f1.4 with a 35mm image circle still has a place I think.

But do we need a Pentax 50mm f1.4 which (current SRS oldish stock excepted) is £100 more expensive than the optically superior Sigma 50mm f1.4 which also covers a 35mm image circle?

You can't except the price you can buy something for. The Sigma would cost you £359 and the Pentax £319, both from SRS.

I would rather have the Pentax for its consistent colour balance with the rest of the range and its compact design. Its performace is fine but I haven't used the Sigma, so I shall leave it to others to compare if they wish.

Of course because that's a sigma.
Do you know how many 100mm macro's you can buy

I'm also curious where you found out that the Sigma 50mm is better