[jro]

Are there any f/2.8 telephoto zooms actually available for Pentax mount? I was hoping for something that has a top end above the 135 of the Pentax DA*. The Sigma 70-200 is unavailable (or stupidly expensive used). Sigma's 50-150 is also impossible to find. The old Pentax 80-200 FA* goes for way too much money used if you can find it. Tamron announced a 70-200 back in March that hasn't been released six months on.

Looks like I'll just have to get by with some old manual primes until someone gets their act together. It's nice to have that option, but is it wrong to just want ONE of these lenses to actually become available?

[philmorley]

The only mistake you've made is the 50-150 is not made for pentax (rather than not available). 135mm is as long as gets at f2.8 at the moment. The tamron is *supposed* to be released *soon*

[jro]

Various press releases I found through google said the 50-150 was supposed to be released for Pentax mount. But so was the 70-200. Who knows if Tamron will actually have the Pentax version available?

[SupremeMoFo]

The 50-150 Sigma will be released for Pentax yes, but the 50-135 is a much better performer.

[Lowell Goudge]

Are there any f/2.8 telephoto zooms actually available for Pentax mount? I was hoping for something that has a top end above the 135 of the Pentax DA*. The Sigma 70-200 is unavailable (or stupidly expensive used).

Can you define "stupidly expensive"?

There is another thread specifically on this lens, and the apparent selling price used is between 75 and 100% of the price when I bought mine new in early 2004.

Considering the use I give this lens, providing it has been taken care of the price is well justified.

I would consider "stupidly expensive" as double the retail price when new.

It does, however, identify that there is a great market to be tapped for a pentax mount in this focal length and apature. It makes you wonder what is going on behind the scenes to prevent it.

[roy]

for just about ANY lens ove5 150mm with an ap of f2.8 you are going to have to get out the wallet.. good, fast glass costs $$$s. it's like boats, you pay x$ for a 22 footer and 10x$ for a 44'

[Toshi]

If widely available f/2.8 telephoto zooms are what you need, unfortunately Pentax is not an ideal brand. Telephoto f/2.8 zooms that are available may seem expensive, but the same lens made in a Canon/Nikon mount will be considerably more. Same holds true for other quality lenses; the Pentax mount version is a deal when comparing with other systems.

[jro]

Can you define "stupidly expensive"?

Yes. Used copies selling for about a 40% premium over the price of a brand new, generally-considered-better version of the same lens with a different mount. And that's when you find one being offered for sale. I don't doubt that your lens may have warranted a $1500 (or whatever) price tag when new. But the macro version of that lens now sells for under $900 new (with a C or N mount). I don't see how that's what Toshi calls "considerably more".

I wouldn't mind paying good money for a good lens. But I'm not going to pay a $300+ premium for a lesser, used version of what's available for other mounts.

[Toshi]

I should clarify that when I said a Canon/Nikon mount, I meant a similar fast telephoto zoom produced by those companies, not Sigma. There isn't much support for Pentax so the slight rarity factor will drive the price up on the Sigmas.