Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-29-2013, 01:24 PM   #31
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by kacansas03 Quote
Yes, this is a good question. In all the information in the lens database it says APS-C. Yet in the review it is said to be full frame also. So is it designed for full frame or is that a repeated typo????????? Can you help us understand Adam???
it's called a DA and not DFA, think that's enough of a clue how it's market. would be interesting to see if it might work on 135.

03-29-2013, 05:41 PM   #32
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,530
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
t's called a DA and not DFA, think that's enough of a clue how it's market. would be interesting to see if it might work on 135.
It has already been tested on FX format, and frankly it doesn't hold up well.
03-29-2013, 06:56 PM   #33
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
For APS-C That is actually good news, means it's being optimized for it. Cut the excess weight and such.
If only the price was lower.... The lens is quite simple design right, why can it not cost below $2000?

ps, wasn't i on you ignore list
03-29-2013, 11:25 PM   #34
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,530
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
wasn't i on you ignore list
Temporarily, yes you were. I don't like to have people on my ignore list, the Internet is about the free exchange of Ideas and Ignoring people isn't conducive to that purpose.

04-01-2013, 12:19 PM   #35
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Photos: Albums
Posts: 650
Ok, I read more in the review and answered my own question which is that it is optimized for APS-C, Pentax size circle, but was tested on a film camera and worked well at f8 and above. That is quite a bit different than most APS-C lenses which leave significant areas black on a FF camera. Ask any Canon or Nikon user about this and they would agree. Now maybe that is mostly a shorter focal range but since I shoot a lot outdoors and wildlife we are usually discussing longer focal length lenses.
About the price, I see no problem with a lens of this length and quality that you can buy around 5700 to 6K odd. It is just like the sport cars I have owned. If I wanted a low maintenance inexpensive car then I bought the wrong car, sports cars require more money to be spent to get the fun out of them so I paid the price. I have managed to collect relatively good long telephoto lenses for low prices by being willing to wait for the right price and then buying. I have obtained a 300, 400, 500 and 800 for only 325 dollars. It took about 7 years. Today the 800 would sell for more than the total and the 400 for possibly many times the total. However I am not sure I would give them all up for the 560. I probably would give up the 2 longest but the 400 is a real collectors item which I have owned the longest at 14 years and now sell for 10 to 20 times what I paid however it still turns out excellent shots. The cost of a lens is always a consideration for me since I am a budget driven photographer and if I bought this lens it would be the most expensive in my collection but I believe well worth it. I will probably wait to buy till I acquire a FF Pentax digital body. In my opinion I think a lot of Pentax owners are waiting for the FF body.

Last edited by kacansas03; 04-01-2013 at 12:21 PM. Reason: clarification
04-10-2013, 10:03 AM   #36
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Photos: Albums
Posts: 650
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
it's called a DA and not DFA, think that's enough of a clue how it's market. would be interesting to see if it might work on 135.
Yes, you are correct. I was still surprised that it could fill the frame on a 35mm size of film. I suppose that's because it is a super telephoto lens. I have noticed over the years of working with my long lenses that they really throw a lot of light onto the APS-C sensor with some of them it adds a full stop according to the way the camera reads the light. So I get to stop down the lenses which gets me even better pics. I like that part!
04-10-2013, 04:09 PM   #37
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
Not sure what you mean.
The lights that gets throwed out is the same right?
04-10-2013, 08:02 PM   #38
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Photos: Albums
Posts: 650
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Not sure what you mean.
The lights that gets throwed out is the same right?
My long lenses are all film lenses with 2 of them being 6 x 7 format so there is a lot of light coming out the back of the lens that fills the inside of the camera. This causes problems at times in bright light with reflections inside the body that impact the sensor at the wrong angles. To reduce the effect I stop down the lenses and do not have the problem for the light is less intense. Even though these lenses have the correct adapter to K mount on them that is for a full film frame and since the adapter must adjust the light to focus on the sensor/film plane of a Pentax body you get some to a moderate amount of extra light in the body due to a larger image circle. I have seen some Tamron Adaptall lenses that even have a blocking plate in the size of the full film plane on them for a particular camera. I am referring to Canon FD mount film cameras. I hope that helps I am tired tonight so I may not be very clear.

04-11-2013, 01:59 AM   #39
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
Actually, because light is an radiation it doesn't work that way as far as i know.
04-11-2013, 09:27 AM   #40
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Photos: Albums
Posts: 650
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Actually, because light is an radiation it doesn't work that way as far as i know.
Ok well I was just repeating what I have has explained to me. All I know is my 300 f4 acts like it is 1 stop faster in bright sun and the 400 f5.6 acts like it is 2 stops faster in bright sun. Yes I do know how to set the cameras for manual lens use. As far as this 560mm lens I just don't think any of the problems of old lenses will apply. I still want it.!!
04-12-2013, 02:45 AM   #41
Junior Member
RyukyuMike's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Okinawa, Japan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28
Thanks for the review. I agree with some of the above; high price to pay and not impressed with performance.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
560mm, k-mount, pentax lens, review, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K-5 II / IIs Review Posted! Adam Pentax K-5 99 01-08-2016 09:08 AM
Pentax K-01 Review Posted Adam Pentax K-01 88 06-07-2013 02:46 PM
Small Leather Case for Q - Review (Cross Posted) monochrome Pentax Q 2 01-26-2013 09:57 PM
Just Posted: Pentax K-5 in-depth review ohce Pentax K-5 60 12-21-2010 03:39 AM
DPR posted K5 Review Buckeye Pentax News and Rumors 28 12-20-2010 05:30 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:18 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top