dear pentax: please make a 200/2 :-)

kenyee · 07-12-2009, 08:13 PM

Major bokeh droolage:

Senior Portraits with 200/2 wide open. - FM Forums

legacyb4 · 07-12-2009, 08:27 PM

Wow, those are some nice portraits.

Would love to be able to get to that level at some point.

danielchtong · 07-12-2009, 09:05 PM

Originally Posted by kenyee

Major bokeh droolage:

Senior Portraits with 200/2 wide open. - FM Forums

Not really . I tend to disagree. Pentax can mount a challenge anytime. You have to remember at a FL of 200mm the DoF is very little indeed even for F8.

Bokeh of 200/2 of Canon as shown in your example

Bokeh of 200/2.8 of Pentax ... And this was taken at F3.2

F3.2

And this was taken even at F5.6

Daniel, Toronto

danielchtong · 07-12-2009, 09:09 PM

Originally Posted by kenyee

Major bokeh droolage:

Senior Portraits with 200/2 wide open. - FM Forums

I suppose you are aware of how big the Nikon 200/F2 is

Length 8" (203mm)
Maximum Diameter 4.9" (124mm)
Weight 6.4 lb (2.9 kg)

*Blue* · 07-12-2009, 09:29 PM

Originally Posted by danielchtong

I suppose you are aware of how big the Nikon 200/F2 is

Length 8" (203mm)
Maximum Diameter 4.9" (124mm)
Weight 6.4 lb (2.9 kg)

Either way, I'd like to see Pentax develop a DA* 200mm f3.5 macro or re-release the FA 200mm macro before even thinking about a 200mm f2.

*Light_Horseman* · 07-12-2009, 09:43 PM

Keep in mind those pics were taken on a full frame camera. For an equivilant FOV on a pentax DSLR you need a 135/2.

That's what I want to see, a 135-150/2 Pentax DA (star or limited) lens!

*gofour3* · 07-12-2009, 09:49 PM

For your consideration, the Pentax K200/2.5 and it’s not made of plastic!!

K 200/2.5

jstevewhite · 07-13-2009, 12:29 AM

Tamron SP Adaptall-2 180mm F/2.5 LD-IF Model 63B

As above - it's not made of plastic. It's also a very sharp and contrasty lens.

deejjjaaaa · 07-13-2009, 12:41 AM

Originally Posted by Light_Horseman

Keep in mind those pics were taken on a full frame camera. For an equivilant FOV on a pentax DSLR you need a 135/2.

~135/1.4 to have the same DOF in addition to FOV.

*KungPOW* · 07-13-2009, 12:55 AM

Yup nice photos in you link.

$14,600.00 of gear used there...

*Blue* · 07-13-2009, 07:40 AM

Originally Posted by jstevewhite

Tamron SP Adaptall-2 180mm F/2.5 LD-IF Model 63B

As above - it's not made of plastic. It's also a very sharp and contrasty lens.

You are the only person besides me that I know of that has one of these.

KEH may be getting one in soon.

*kristoffon* · 07-13-2009, 07:53 AM

If what you're after is minimum possible DOF, there's medium and large format for you. A film MF setup will cost much less than the Canon 200/2 setup and offer even thinner dof. Heck, even a digital MF setup may cost less if buying used lens and body.

2Thumbs · 07-13-2009, 08:00 AM

Originally Posted by deejjjaaaa

~135/1.4 to have the same DOF in addition to FOV.

Hmmm, Takumar 135mm f/1.8's exist. Good luck finding one though, I've seen more teeth on hen's.

Those shot's are lovely, truely inspiring in my opinion. Wish I could afford the 1Ds MkIII he's using let alone the lens as well.

Lowell Goudge · 07-13-2009, 08:04 AM

as many have noted, it is more about photographic technique than equipment cost.

it all goes back to the fact that a good photographer can take a good image iwth any camera simply because he knows how to use it.

kenyee · 07-13-2009, 08:23 AM

Originally Posted by Blue

Either way, I'd like to see Pentax develop a DA* 200mm f3.5 macro or re-release the FA 200mm macro before even thinking about a 200mm f2.

I'd like to see the FA200mm macro first too. But those 200/2 photos are amazing. I did chase a 135/1.8 for a while since it seemed like a decent compromise but no luck..

And sorry, Daniel. The 200/2's photos are way better than what you posted. The subjects do an almost 3D "pop" off the background (like some of the stuff you see off the 43Ltd or 77Ltd when something just works right). It's a fairly common effect from a 200/2 (similar for the Canon/Nikon variants) from the images I've seen.