[edin_togger]

Folks,

I've been contemplating some options for getting "longer" with the K1, I've currently got a Tamron 70-200 f2.8 which I picked up relatively cheaply and its a cracking lens IQ wise but if I'm honest I don't "need" the f2.8 and I'd like a bit more range, also with having picked up a 100mm I feel that the shorter end of the range is effectively covered if needs be (and the 70mm end of the 24-70 isn't bad!).

I tend to shoot landscapes and I wouldn't mind being able to maybe do a little wildlife shooting.

I've been considering options to go longer and ideally I'd buy the 150-450 but frankly the £1700 cost in the UK is way over the top for my needs.

I've been offered a 300mm f4 DA lens which seems a great lens and was thinking that with a 1.4x TC it would also deliver some serious length if needed but how does it perform on the K1?
Are there any other options I'm missing? I was thinking that given the relatively low price of the 70-200 I have that I could maybe keep that and pair it with the 300mm rather than outright replacing it.

I've also seen good things written about the 60-250 but is it easy to adapt for full frame use?

[clackers]

A standard serious setup is like a 600mm f4, Edin-togger.

Pentax do save you some money by currently offering a 560mm f5.6.

Next down is that 150-450 you mention.

Wildlife isn't really my thing, but I do enjoy it, so I make do with two cheaper combinations: the Sigma 150-500, and an older FA*300 f4.5 paired with the 1.4 TC.

The last two do push it, since the moment the widest aperture can't make f5.6 your AF system is now being asked to do something it isn't rated for.

[KiloHotelphoto]

I love the 560 on the K1. Most of my shooting is wildlife so when I was looking to upgrade from a Sigma 150-500 I narrowed it down to two lenses, a new DA 560 or a used FA*600. At the time the K1 wasn't out and I really had no interest in it, I was still learning the K3. I went with the 560 because it was about $2000 cheaper and I liked the idea of getting a brand new lens and it turns out the money I saved I used for the K1.

If you don't mind a manual lens you could get a 1000/F8 for around $1000, not sure what the pound conversion is. I was looking at one from a member here but I waited to long and he sold it so I have been checking them out on ebay. That maybe a way to get some reach and stay in your budget. You will also need to have a good tripod and head for a long lens so keep that in mind with your budget.

[UncleVanya]

I love the 560 on the K1. Most of my shooting is wildlife so when I was looking to upgrade from a Sigma 150-500 I narrowed it down to two lenses, a new DA 560 or a used FA*600. At the time the K1 wasn't out and I really had no interest in it, I was still learning the K3. I went with the 560 because it was about $2000 cheaper and I liked the idea of getting a brand new lens and it turns out the money I saved I used for the K1.

If you don't mind a manual lens you could get a 1000/F8 for around $1000, not sure what the pound conversion is. I was looking at one from a member here but I waited to long and he sold it so I have been checking them out on ebay. That maybe a way to get some reach and stay in your budget. You will also need to have a good tripod and head for a long lens so keep that in mind with your budget.

I know someone who may be willing to sell his. Let me know via pm and I can put you in touch. He sold on eBay to several members here to everyone's satisfaction.

[monochrome]

The SMC 1000/8 is a very nice and effective lens for the money, but it is a beast to carry - 5.3 Kg - and support. It has a 30m minimum focus distance and not the best balanced tripod foot on earth. But I000mm for $650-$800 is worth manual focus, manual metering and hiring a porter when you go shooting.

One word of caution - there aren't many in the virtually collector condition as the one offered last fall on the Forum. Plan to add a CLA to your purchase price.

[Tas]

I've been offered a 300mm f4 DA lens which seems a great lens and was thinking that with a 1.4x TC it would also deliver some serious length if needed but how does it perform on the K1?

Mate, the smc DA*300/4 is very good on the K-1. Unless they changed it in an FW update the K-1 will default to the APSC crop mode when you fit the DA*300, but it works fine in FF mode and you can change that in the menus. Some examples can be found in this Flickr album: Chased through the corner | Grant | Flickr

I picked up the 150-450 but for me the DA*300 is a better lens as it is AW and quite sharp at f4 (assuming you don't miss your focal point as it's pretty shallow at 300mm and f4). I've not tried it with the 1.4x converter, but have used it with a pretty ordinary Kenko 2x converter and this is where the quality of the lens optics makes this a good option to keep on the table for now. The DA*300 being a prime isn't as flexible as the long zooms of course, but I'd be surprised if any of the zooms, even the 150-450 were sharper at 300mm. Good luck with the decision.

Tas

[jatrax]

I've been offered a 300mm f4 DA lens which seems a great lens and was thinking that with a 1.4x TC it would also deliver some serious length if needed but how does it perform on the K1?

The DA*300 f/4 works very well on the K-1. As @Tas noted the camera will default to crop mode but that can be changed in the menu so no worries. The 1.4x TC also works but the combination vignettes a good bit. Quite usable, but you will likely need to crop the image a bit. You still get a larger image than you would have in crop mode so it is a win. Wish Ricoh had thought ahead a bit and made the TC fully FF compatible.

[rozand]

k1 plus 300 da and ext 1.4: very good, some vignetting of course

[WPRESTO]

I think most of the options have been covered, but here is my list:
560mm Pentax
500mm Sigma
150-450 Pentax

Old lenses that are good.

400mm f4 Tamron, works well with 1.4XL or 2XL Pentax converters, a massive lens, built to hold up small buildings.

400mm f5.6 SMCA Pentax, apparently works well with several Pentax 1.4X converters and also the 1.7X AF. I think the Tamron has the edge in IQ, but this lens is beautifully made, lighter, but not significantly shorter than the Tamron.

500mm f4.5 Pentax, sometimes available at a bargain price, but very big and has a very poor minimum focus distance. Early versions have rack-and-pinion focusing, later versions (all K-mount versions SFAIK) have double helical

600mm f4 Pentax, an absolutely outstanding big telephoto, if you can find one, can afford it, have a really sturdy tripod + head, and have a porter to transport it (unless you don't mind almost 16lb before adding any other equipment)

600mm f5.6 SMCA Pentax, much less expensive than the f4, manual focus, smaller, lighter, cheaper. Apparently has quite a bit of CA.

Nikon 600mm f5.6 EDIF, relatively small & light for 600mm, can be Leitaxed or use a no-glass N to K mount = give up infinity but get somewhat better minimum focus distance (will it be used @ infinity or nearby for wildlife & small birds?). Set @ f8 and use as you would a no-diaphragm mirror lens.The focus is one finger silky-smooth. Better, cheaper and more available than the 600mm f5.6 Pentax.

Nikon 600mm f4, older manual focus versions, MUCH bigger heavier and at least three times as expensive as the f5.6, but is thought to have better IQ. Same options for mounting on a Pentax.

500mm f8 Zeiss Mirotar, pretty much every evaluation of mirror lenses rates this the very best mechanically and optically. No Leitax available, but again, a no-lens Contax-Pentax adapter would make it usable for wildlife, especially birding. This is a really beautiful, compact "elegant" lens, but it has the major drawback of all mirror lenses: doughnut highlights.

Tamron 500mm f8 mirror. Second best to the Zeiss and much cheaper. Just need an Adaptall K-mount and be willing to accept doughnut-highlights or spending time to PP them out

560mm f6.8 Leica, has "trombone" focusing, comes apart in two sections for easier traveling, if complete, it comes with a very nice shoulder brace with pistol grip for hand-holding. This is a simple long-focus lens, not a "true telephoto" so it is VERY long, but not especially heavy (it looks like a metal wrapping-paper tube). Very easy to Leitax because the diaphragm is manual. All reviews I've found indicate that the earlier f5.6 version of this lens is significantly inferior. I've been skeptical about the ease & precision of push-pull focusing, but it may be a little quicker than helical or rack-and-pinion.

[normhead]

I think most of the options have been covered, but here is my list:
560mm Pentax
500mm Sigma
150-450 Pentax

Old lenses that are good.

400mm f4 Tamron, works well with 1.4XL or 2XL Pentax converters, a massive lens, built to hold up small buildings.

400mm f5.6 SMCA Pentax, apparently works well with several Pentax 1.4X converters and also the 1.7X AF. I think the Tamron has the edge in IQ, but this lens is beautifully made, lighter, but not significantly shorter than the Tamron.

500mm f4.5 Pentax, sometimes available at a bargain price, but very big and has a very poor minimum focus distance. Early versions have rack-and-pinion focusing, later versions (all K-mount versions SFAIK) have double helical

600mm f4 Pentax, an absolutely outstanding big telephoto, if you can find one, can afford it, have a really sturdy tripod + head, and have a porter to transport it (unless you don't mind almost 16lb before adding any other equipment)

600mm f5.6 SMCA Pentax, much less expensive than the f4, manual focus, smaller, lighter, cheaper. Apparently has quite a bit of CA.

Nikon 600mm f5.6 EDIF, relatively small & light for 600mm, can be Leitaxed or use a no-glass N to K mount = give up infinity but get somewhat better minimum focus distance (will it be used @ infinity or nearby for wildlife & small birds?). Set @ f8 and use as you would a no-diaphragm mirror lens.The focus is one finger silky-smooth. Better, cheaper and more available than the 600mm f5.6 Pentax.

Nikon 600mm f4, older manual focus versions, MUCH bigger heavier and at least three times as expensive as the f5.6, but is thought to have better IQ. Same options for mounting on a Pentax.

500mm f8 Zeiss Mirotar, pretty much every evaluation of mirror lenses rates this the very best mechanically and optically. No Leitax available, but again, a no-lens Contax-Pentax adapter would make it usable for wildlife, especially birding. This is a really beautiful, compact "elegant" lens, but it has the major drawback of all mirror lenses: doughnut highlights.

Tamron 500mm f8 mirror. Second best to the Zeiss and much cheaper. Just need an Adaptall K-mount and be willing to accept doughnut-highlights or spending time to PP them out

560mm f6.8 Leica, has "trombone" focusing, comes apart in two sections for easier traveling, if complete, it comes with a very nice shoulder brace with pistol grip for hand-holding. This is a simple long-focus lens, not a "true telephoto" so it is VERY long, but not especially heavy (it looks like a metal wrapping-paper tube). Very easy to Leitax because the diaphragm is manual. All reviews I've found indicate that the earlier f5.6 version of this lens is significantly inferior. I've been skeptical about the ease & precision of push-pull focusing, but it may be a little quicker than helical or rack-and-pinion.

That's a great list....
And while he'll never find one, I'm convinced my Tamron SP AF 300mm 2.8 LD [IF] with the F 1.7x AF Adapter on it, for 510mm ƒ4.5 is the cats meow. I can even shoot it hand held for 10 minutes before my strength gives out.

There's also the Sigma 300 2.8
Sigma 300mm f/2.8 EX DG Lens for Pentax 195109 B&H Photo Video that might work with the Sigma 2x adapter. ( I've never investigated that.)

Then to go super light, the DA*200 ƒ2.8 with stacked 1.7 and 1.4 TCs give you 476mm ƒ6.3 on APS-c, although that 1.4 might cause problems with vignetting on a K-1. But on a K-3 that 476mm is about 745mm of FF reach.

And last but probably the least functional my A-400 5.6 with F 1.7x AF Adapter for 680mm ƒ 9.3. Not the sharpest and needs bright conditions to focus, but, you can get results with it. (shot on a K-1) That close to 700mm for $700- $800. Anytime your creeping up on $1 a mm you're doing good.

[UncleVanya]

Why do you lose infinity focus with the Nikons? Typically Nikon lenses should be possible to focus past infinity since they use a longer flange focal distance than Pentax. Shorter flange focal distance lenses are the ones that typically fail to reach infinity. (Like Pentax on Nikon for example).

[WPRESTO]

Why do you lose infinity focus with the Nikons? Typically Nikon lenses should be possible to focus past infinity since they use a longer flange focal distance than Pentax. Shorter flange focal distance lenses are the ones that typically fail to reach infinity. (Like Pentax on Nikon for example).

I lose infinity focus because I use a no-lens adapter, basically a very short extension tube with a female Nikon mount at one end and a male K-mount at the other. So the lens focuses a bit closer, but you lose infinity. However, at the resulting maximum focus distance you could easily capture an elephant with FOV to spare. There are adapters with a lens that do allow infinity focus, but at a substantial price in IQ. To keep infinity focus I would have to convert my Nikon 600 with a Leitax adapter, but I'm not sure it's worth it as the lens is primarily used for birding so it is never used at anything close to infinity, and the extra close focus is a boon. Also, the Leitax conversion is a little touchy as you must file or grind down one component of the Nikon mount to make it work.

[jrpower10]

A lot of the advice you've gotten is out of your budget if 1700 pounds is too much. 2nd hand Sigma 50-500 or 150-500 are probably doable. A DA 300 plus the HD 1.4 tele is probably going to run you between 900-1000, and will vignette but is otherwise good. You could also look for a 2nd hand F 300, which by reputation is outstanding and a little smaller than the DA, but won't be much if any cheaper. If that's still too much, some of the older manual focus 300's or 400's are it. Another option is get the teleconverter first and use it with your 70-200. The K-1 has plenty of resolution for heavy cropping, unless you want to print big. Later, if you want more again, you could pick up a longer lens.

[Rupert]

I'm pretty happy with my Sigma 50-500 HSM OS. Focus is fast at any aperture on my K1 and the results are plenty good enough for me......though I am not as particular as many.

Shot this morning....
Handheld ISO 800 1/200 F 7.1 @ 500mm (Crop Mode.....I love the K1 Crop Mode!)



A little pricey, but I had the older model for 10 years and it was just as good but not as fast to focus. I see the older model from time to time at bargain prices. These are well made lenses, hold up well and get 'er done if you are not too picky!

Regards!

[ChatMechant]

I've been using the 60-250 on K-1, it's really nice, compact and light for hiking. I've also used the Sigma 100-300 f/4 which is also really nice, but larger. With the 1.4 TC it's kind of a poor mans 150-450.