Wow, that was a lot of emoticons... you must really be feeling the pixies at work.

Actually it's the other way around. The FA43 is sharper, especially at the most used f/2.8 and f/4 apertures. Please see the Photozone tests.

The FA43 has an aperture ring, full-frame coverage and does not rely on an SDM motor. It is also half the weight and about one-third the size of the DA*55. The build, including screw-on hood and felt-lined cap, is second to none. Plus it has magic pixie dust, as you mentioned.

Yes, we can only guess. It is encouraging that the initial demand has been beyond Pentax expectations.

Even in Japan that is highly unlikely. Once people actually get to see the cameras, put their hands on units in stores, see how excited their friends are, read the blog reviews, etc. there will be much increased demand. (Unless the product is rubbish... but I don't think so.)

The professional market is relatively small, but many other people have money to spend on products because a) they can, b) they have an abiding interest, c) it's a status symbol. Just look at Leica, who know how to cultivate this effect. IMO Pentax should take a leaf from their book. Because I don't really care why people buy the 645D... the fact that they do will drive future R&D and improvements.

Not to mention driving the price down.

The FA43 has no lack of sharpness wide open except at the borders, since it has a curved field. This is not a disadvantage, rather it enables you to use the lens to highlight the subject you have chosen and isolate it in the depth of field. At f/4 this is one of the sharpest lenses ever made. And it has a magic, certainly, that goes far beyond mere sharpness. I think it is the single best lens Pentax has ever made, in the sense that it is distinct and has a personality.

It is not my favourite lens, that would be the FA77. The reason lies in the focal length and my use of screw-on adapters to get macro.

I bought the DA35 since I found the lack of close focus on the FA43 limiting and did not want to sacrifice IQ. I got rid of the DA35 instead.

(I have posted extensively on this lens with example shots etc. on that other Pentax Forum.)

In my experience the f/2.8 variants are not as sharp as the f/2 variants. Even stopped down to the same aperture (say f/4) the f/2 lenses will perform noticeably better. Wide open all are quite soft and I never use them this way. In other words, I treat my Vivi 28/2 as an f/2.8 lens that will get better at f/4. Since I use it as a sort of street lens this is not a real restriction.

You can check out my gear tests set on Flickr, for example the last three shots of shells.

I am not sure what gave you that impression! I have used the DA35 and it is excellent, certainly better micro-contrast and resolution than the Viv 28mm but at a much greater cost. I cannot compare with the FA35 as I have never used it, but if someone wants to send one along I'll see what I can do.

That would be rather difficult since I have no idea which lens is being discussed. But anyone who wants to ID their 28mm Vivitar lens can do so using the Vivitar Bestiary.

So has marketing and compromise. How many current lenses are made with the all glass and metal build of yesteryear? How many are made with tighter tolerances and better workmanship? I'd say darned few. Maybe the Limiteds, Zeiss and Voigtlander.

That said, I am not claiming anything about the relative merits of the Viv 28 versus the DA35 since I have never tried the latter and have no idea which variant of the former is under discussion.

Now I see why you are called MrCynical!

And that is likely why the DA*30 was shelved. The sales from the DA*55 have been poor.

I can only compare to the same focal length since otherwise it's a bit apples and pears. Certain Vivitar 28mm lenses (for there are many varieties) are distinctly superior to the Pentax A 28mm. I am not sure why you "hope" otherwise.