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?

It may have been discontinued a while ago (hence we don't remember the announcement) and is only now going out of stock. Either that or places like SRS have decided that at over £400 (retail price for new stock) they won't sell and thus aren't bothering to stock it.

I've got four lenses that cover 50mm lens (an entirely different matter from four primes ): the 18-55, 50-200, 50 Macro, and Helios 77M (which I haven't used for portraits yet, have to try that sometime ).

I'm increasingly coming to the view that I might actually be better sticking with the 50 Macro for now - improving my technique and knowledge rather than buying another lens. After all the Macro Trio are supposedly the sharpest lenses Pentax currently make!

Well I suppose Pentax had to come up with something MORE ridiculous than £439.99 for the FA 50 1.4

Warehouse Express have it listed for £799.99 - I greatly hope for Sigma's sake that this price is just WE making up a price the way Amazon sometimes do on preorders, and not the actual selling price.

Cheers, but I don't think I have the eyesight for MF!

I do like 50/55 as a portrait focal length (from using the longer end of my kit lens) - I just think that yet another 50mm lens (fifth lens, third prime) would be a bit redundant.

If I wasn't a) Up at nearly 2am and b) Writing a legal theory essay, I might get that joke

On a more serious note, the 28-75 and 12-24 combination is probably the one I would go for if there were any (new) 12-24s still available at sane prices.

Aargh I was hoping to avoid the issue of the 28-75 I've actually been looking at that lens a lot, but was edging away from it for two reasons:

*The DA70 is stunning, and presumably (as a prime costing more than the zoom!) has better sharpness/bokeh than the 28-75 at the same apertures

*I might at some point want an upgrade standard lens (ie most likely the Tamron 17-50) which would clash quite badly with the 28-75 in range terms

EDIT: Two and a half reasons: I also have the 50 Macro 2.8, which paired with the 70 2.4 should adequately cover the longer end of the Tamron's range (though I don't consider the 50 Macro a portrait lens per se)

The 50-135 is fabulous, but unfortunately even with recent reductions it's still the best part of £800