[mikeSF]

OK, now I'm really peeved, I was looking at the Kenko site and their TCs for Canon and Nikon... guess who makes the glass for them? ya that's right... Hoya.. they can make the glass for Canikons, but they can't put together a metal tube and a couple of couplings for their own brand. What kind of company is this? IN the old days not only did they make every conceivable lens, you had to buy a Pentax body to use their glass. Now, you have to buy a competitors camera body to use their glass. This is backasswards with a capital B.

it certainly seems that way to us, but this is very common with corporate acquisitions. We cannot expect that Hoya would come in and buy Pentax and suddenly there is a marriage of products, employees, production lines, vision, company culture, etc...it very often does not work that way at all. Assuming they plan to further the Pentax brand, Hoya may take years before we see much intermingling of the products.
Hopefully some sharp leaders at Hoya see fit to make this happen sooner than later.

[gofour3]

SMC

re your list

you say the K300F4 is just OK, what is wrong with it other than the typical CA of the era,. I find it a workable long lens when coupled with the 1.7x TC?

As for the K 135-600, WHo really cares below 400mm any way but it looks terribly unbalanced on a tripod. Also didn't it come with a low diopter front attachment for close focus (i.e. reading glasses)

the K400, you don't mention it, but isn't it preset like the K500/4.5?

The K400/5.6, K500/4.5 and the K1000/8 have a manual diaphragm, but are not preset. The only K series lens that was preset is the K28/3.5 Shift. As Steve mentioned the K135-600 did come with a close-up attachment, something that would have been nice for the above three primes.

Phil.

[Class A]

Everybody thinking the Bigma rivals a prime, may want to have a look here:

tloader

(go to the long end ...)

Yes, but note that they write

"I suspect our sample of the lens may have a slight issue with one or more de-centered elements, owing to the curious performance we occasionally found."

There is definitely something wrong with one of the corners and that problem might impact on the centre performance as well.

[jlaubza]

Since you want sharpness have you considered using DxO software, which has lens specific sharpening algorithms? It really makes a visible difference without the halos produced by USM methods. It is specific to certain lens/camera combos only which may be the deal breaker.

I bought a Pentax 55-300mm and the sharpness is outstanding at 300mm. Possibly a 1.4x converter would work on this to increase your reach.

Otherwise all comments I have seen on the three Sigma offerings - 150 - 400, 150-500 and 50 500mm indicate that the 50-500mm gives the best resolution and sharpness at the long end. Plus it has OS and HSM, both of which are great - I tried the bigma and the HSM was a revelation after using the built in motor in my K-X.

[normhead]

I'm starting to warm up to the Bigma, but the 4 pounds thing is tough. My 60-250 is 36 ounces, and I think it's heavy. The Bigma is 67oz. But it is strong in the 250-500 range, where I'd need it.

[normhead]

So... I just phoned the guy at McBains, the guy I got was also their Pentax purchaser. He's known the Pentax sales rep for 30 years. Basically he said there's nothing in the works for us. All the R&D at the moment is going to the 645. He is a Pentax user himself, has an interest in wildlife, and with all his contacts in the industry he hasn't found a solution. One of his more notable quotes was that the Kenko 2x works with so few camera and lens combinations he doesn't even know why they released it. He said it physically will not work with most lenses because it interferes with the rear element of your lens. It's not a matter of just going to manual focus, it's more, you shouldn't even put it on your camera.

I guess I'm just going to have to make do with 250mm. If this guys as the Pentax buyer for a chain of stores can't get this done.... it's probably not doable.

The good thing was, he has the TC , he has access to a large assortment of Pentax mount lenses, and he's spent his time trying to make it work and understand what it will or won't work with. So at least he put my mind at ease in giving up the quest. He has been hounding the Pentax rep for a 1.4 converter f0r a couple years now. Pentax isn't listening.

[falconeye]

He has been hounding the Pentax rep for a 1.4 converter f0r a couple years now. Pentax isn't listening.

Pentax Europe did and does offiicially and categorically request a 1.4x TC. Pentax Japan refuses saying that digital cameras don't need it. It is an ongoing battle between Europe and Japan and I guess US is allied for a TC too here So, it is *not* the point Pentax isn't listening.

[sjwaldron]

So... I just phoned the guy at McBains, the guy I got was also their Pentax purchaser. He's known the Pentax sales rep for 30 years. Basically he said there's nothing in the works for us. All the R&D at the moment is going to the 645.

That's a pretty depressing statement if true. Was there anymore context to that? Was he only talking long telephoto or all resources in general are going into 645? Unless Pentax releases a "cheap" 645, I can't see the market being that big to justify a complete company resource grab.

[normhead]

Was he only talking long telephoto or all resources in general are going into 645?

Depressingly, all resources in general. He said nothing coming in terms of a 400mm or 500mm lens, or anything longer than the DA*300 , and nothing in terms of a TC.

[RonHendriks1966]

What about using a spotting scope? Any info on that and image quality?

From a site:
Focal Lengths on Digital Bodies:
Pentax PF-100ED Spotting Scope = 1910mm
Pentax PF-80ED Spotting Scope = 1530mm
Pentax PF-65ED II Spotting Scope = 1190mm
This is including the crop that small sensors are giving. To compare with lenses the PF-65ED II is a about 790mm.

[GibbyTheMole]

I just bought a 500mm Russian 3M-5CA f:8 500mm mirror lens from a fellow forum member for around $100. I think it's pretty sharp:









I just took these as quick & dirty test shots today. Nothing fancy. All were taken at ISO 800 (which accounts for the grain), handheld, with an *ist DS body.

I've never had great luck with 2X teleconverters, btw. I've always found I would've been better off just taking the shot with no TC and cropping it. The 2X teleconverters add CA (usually purple fringing) and compromise sharpness, in my experience. your mileage may vary, tho.

If you're on a budget, and ok with shooting at a fixed aperture, either a Russian 3M or a Tamron SP 500mm mirror lens would be a good choice, IMO. I'll be hanging onto mine for sure. But then again, if you have several hundred dollars to spend, you could probably get a pretty good (and faster) conventional tele for that kinda money.

Cheers,
Bobbo :-)

[Lowell Goudge]

just to hammer home a point, the 300F4 and SMC-F 1.7x AF TC, or any 300F4 and this TC are a good way to get to 500mm

see todays back yard play time, this is a horizontal crop out of a K7 vertical frame, Resized and lightened a little to post

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

You can use the IMGWIDE tag instead of IMG.

[jandrewdickson]

Norm,

Have you considered a 1.4x teleconverter? I'm using the Tamron version (PZ-AF MC-4) with contacts that allow SDM focusing with a DA* 200 2.8 lens. It is a pretty sharp combo - sharp enough that I was able to part with my FA* 300/4.5 lens. I'm guessing it will be an OK fit with the 60-250, however the Shake Reduction gets less effective since my copy only reports the lens' focal length to the camera, not the effective focal length through the converter.

This would get you to a 350mm focal length at f/5.6 (field of view equivalent to 525mm on a full frame if you add in the 1.5x crop factor), and won't take up much space in your bag. To be fair, there is a bit of image degradation thorough any teleconverter, and with my combo it is pretty hard to see the difference between upsampled and cropped images and ones shot using a teleconverter.

[jandrewdickson]

Norm,

If you would like even more reach, the combination of a spotting scope, a Pentax FA35/2 or DA35/2.4 lens and your DSLR would probably get you reach of somewhere between 800mm and 1200mm. This combo is only manual focus and would be best suited for static subjects, and you would need to turn SR off. Here's a link to an overview from Luminous Landscape...

Vortex-Digiscoping