DA* 60-250 mod for FF

npc · 05-11-2016, 08:16 PM - **1 Like**

Name: tube.jpg
Views: 2655
Size: 191.8 KB

This is what it looks like when removed from the lens. The white spots around the rim are the glue that used to hold it in place.

I've just removed it from the lens for now and use it like this - but ideally the part that looks like a felt ring inside the tube should be cut out as it causes the vingetting (so the piece basically becomes just a tube ) and the remaining "tube" then glued back in place.

Gutta Perka · 05-12-2016, 01:32 AM

Originally posted by loveisageless

Sounds like Pentax could easily modify the lens design and reissue it as FF. They could offer it at a lower price point for those of us who cannot afford the DFA 70-200mm. Why lose sales to Tamron and Sigma when the lens has already recouped their R&D costs?

That Pentax Star * 60-250mm should cost more!
Rev II without baffle at least twice!

By the way - some street photographing - shows me that that damned lens shade has no influence of the result so far!!!!!!
But I'm not sure - must test it further!!!

You , npc, thread starter - what is your opinion?

Caat · 05-12-2016, 02:37 AM

It would be really nice if Pentax offered this modification as a service. But I suspect that is highly unlikely.

**UncleVanya** · 05-12-2016, 06:53 AM - **3 Likes**

Someone here could offer the service, like I offer SDM to screw drive conversion.

Gutta Perka · 05-12-2016, 01:15 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

Someone here could offer the service, like I offer SDM to screw drive conversion.

If You can administrate it - I'll be happy to do the job.

Swedish quality that is!

**Jacquot** · 05-12-2016, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by Gutta Perka

If You can administrate it - I'll be happy to do the job.

Swedish quality that is!

Worth a trip to Sweden!

**MJSfoto1956** · 05-12-2016, 02:46 PM - **1 Like**

so does this illustrate what the problem is?

Attached Images

npc · 05-12-2016, 03:07 PM

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

so does this illustrate what the problem is?

yes .

**UncleVanya** · 05-12-2016, 06:44 PM

Do you have shots to show the improvement?

Gutta Perka · 05-13-2016, 07:59 AM

Originally posted by npc

yes .

The metal baffle is pretty tuff - made of som sort of alloy-airplain-aluminium.

For me I used 4.5 grinders-rotating-cylindrical coarse sanders to grind away the baffle. (Dremmel tools aren't that cheap!)

The cost for those was for sure some dollars.

...but worth it....

**UncleVanya** · 05-13-2016, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by Gutta Perka

The metal baffle is pretty tuff - made of som sort of alloy-airplain-aluminium.

For me I used 4.5 grinders-rotating-cylindrical coarse sanders to grind away the baffle. (Dremmel tools aren't that cheap!)

The cost for those was for sure some dollars.

...but worth it....

It might be worthwhile to fabricate a version that is made of cardboard or other materials and set aside the version that came with the lens.

Gutta Perka · 05-13-2016, 11:11 AM

Or try Apples new I-****!

**UncleVanya** · 05-13-2016, 11:13 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Gutta Perka

Or try Apples new I-****!

? I really don't understand this reference. I'm also struggling to understand why you needed a grinder if the part being removed is foam or felt. The lack of pictures and the level of language ambiguity in this thread is leaving me totally unclear on what is needed to accomplish this.

Additionally the lack of A/B comparisons at multiple focal lengths and f/stop and lighting conditions leads me to think this is a risky procedure with unknown outcome. Having the original part in original condition to restore function to original purpose seems prudent. Given the fact that some have removed the tube entirely I would think it could be replaced with a cardboard version without harm. (Painted of course).

PiotrKrochmal · 05-13-2016, 12:35 PM

Ok I remove that tube. As long as I dont have proper dremmel I do nothing more. Worth mention: Hood is also FF (!)

---------- Post added 05-13-2016 at 09:45 PM ----------

Update: DA* 60-250 work ok with AF converter 1.7 that give us 105-425 f/6 FF

Gutta Perka · 05-13-2016, 01:33 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

? I really don't understand this reference. I'm also struggling to understand why you needed a grinder if the part being removed is foam or felt. The lack of pictures and the level of language ambiguity in this thread is leaving me totally unclear on what is needed to accomplish this.

Additionally the lack of A/B comparisons at multiple focal lengths and f/stop and lighting conditions leads me to think this is a risky procedure with unknown outcome. Having the original part in original condition to restore function to original purpose seems prudent. Given the fact that some have removed the tube entirely I would think it could be replaced with a cardboard version without harm. (Painted of course).

The baffle is very strong metal - also described by Pentax themselves describing their constructions.

Foam is on it!

That's it!

Don't like this thread - go on enjoy the others.

05-12-2016, 01:32 AM	#17
Gutta Perka Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 126	Originally posted by loveisageless Sounds like Pentax could easily modify the lens design and reissue it as FF. They could offer it at a lower price point for those of us who cannot afford the DFA 70-200mm. Why lose sales to Tamron and Sigma when the lens has already recouped their R&D costs? That Pentax Star * 60-250mm should cost more! Rev II without baffle at least twice! By the way - some street photographing - shows me that that damned lens shade has no influence of the result so far!!!!!! But I'm not sure - must test it further!!! You , npc, thread starter - what is your opinion? Last edited by Gutta Perka; 05-12-2016 at 01:46 AM.

05-13-2016, 11:11 AM	#27
Gutta Perka Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 126	Or try Apples new I-***! Last edited by BigMackCam; 07-10-2016 at 02:49 PM. Reason: Removed vulgarity*

05-13-2016, 11:13 AM - 1 Like	#28
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398	Originally posted by Gutta Perka Or try Apples new I-***! ? I really don't understand this reference. I'm also struggling to understand why you needed a grinder if the part being removed is foam or felt. The lack of pictures and the level of language ambiguity in this thread is leaving me totally unclear on what is needed to accomplish this. Additionally the lack of A/B comparisons at multiple focal lengths and f/stop and lighting conditions leads me to think this is a risky procedure with unknown outcome. Having the original part in original condition to restore function to original purpose seems prudent. Given the fact that some have removed the tube entirely I would think it could be replaced with a cardboard version without harm. (Painted of course). Last edited by BigMackCam; 07-10-2016 at 02:50 PM. Reason: Removed vulgarity in quoted post*

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
AS plate for the DA*60-250/300 lens foot	interested_observer	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	21	03-04-2018 03:56 PM
DA* 60-250 owners: How do you carry your 60-250 at the ready?	apisto	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	25	12-30-2017 01:49 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA* 60-250, RRS L bracket for K-5 prices reduced again	djc737	Sold Items	7	06-27-2015 05:08 AM
Backpack for DA*60-250 and 16-50	gastch	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	18	01-23-2015 11:46 AM
DA*60-250/4 - FF, sharp and fast.	ogl	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	11-01-2008 04:11 PM

05-11-2016, 08:16 PM - 1 Like	#16
npc Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 313 Original Poster	This is what it looks like when removed from the lens. The white spots around the rim are the glue that used to hold it in place. I've just removed it from the lens for now and use it like this - but ideally the part that looks like a felt ring inside the tube should be cut out as it causes the vingetting (so the piece basically becomes just a tube ) and the remaining "tube" then glued back in place.

05-12-2016, 02:37 AM	#18
Caat Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: United Kingdom Photos: Albums Posts: 927	It would be really nice if Pentax offered this modification as a service. But I suspect that is highly unlikely.

05-12-2016, 06:53 AM - 3 Likes	#19
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398	Someone here could offer the service, like I offer SDM to screw drive conversion.

05-12-2016, 01:15 PM	#20
Gutta Perka Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 126	Originally posted by UncleVanya Someone here could offer the service, like I offer SDM to screw drive conversion. If You can administrate it - I'll be happy to do the job. Swedish quality that is!

05-12-2016, 02:20 PM	#21
Jacquot Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sun City Center, FL Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,544	Originally posted by Gutta Perka If You can administrate it - I'll be happy to do the job. Swedish quality that is! Worth a trip to Sweden!

05-12-2016, 02:46 PM - 1 Like	#22
MJSfoto1956 Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Boston Posts: 1,305	so does this illustrate what the problem is? Attached Images

05-12-2016, 03:07 PM	#23
npc Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 313 Original Poster	Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 so does this illustrate what the problem is? yes .

05-12-2016, 06:44 PM	#24
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398	Do you have shots to show the improvement?

05-13-2016, 07:59 AM	#25
Gutta Perka Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 126	Originally posted by npc yes . The metal baffle is pretty tuff - made of som sort of alloy-airplain-aluminium. For me I used 4.5 grinders-rotating-cylindrical coarse sanders to grind away the baffle. (Dremmel tools aren't that cheap!) The cost for those was for sure some dollars. ...but worth it....

05-13-2016, 11:00 AM	#26
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,398	Originally posted by Gutta Perka The metal baffle is pretty tuff - made of som sort of alloy-airplain-aluminium. For me I used 4.5 grinders-rotating-cylindrical coarse sanders to grind away the baffle. (Dremmel tools aren't that cheap!) The cost for those was for sure some dollars. ...but worth it.... It might be worthwhile to fabricate a version that is made of cardboard or other materials and set aside the version that came with the lens.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-13-2016, 12:35 PM	#29
PiotrKrochmal Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Poland -> Kraków Posts: 199	Ok I remove that tube. As long as I dont have proper dremmel I do nothing more. Worth mention: Hood is also FF (!) ---------- Post added 05-13-2016 at 09:45 PM ---------- Update: DA* 60-250 work ok with AF converter 1.7 that give us 105-425 f/6 FF

05-13-2016, 01:33 PM	#30
Gutta Perka Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 126	Originally posted by UncleVanya ? I really don't understand this reference. I'm also struggling to understand why you needed a grinder if the part being removed is foam or felt. The lack of pictures and the level of language ambiguity in this thread is leaving me totally unclear on what is needed to accomplish this. Additionally the lack of A/B comparisons at multiple focal lengths and f/stop and lighting conditions leads me to think this is a risky procedure with unknown outcome. Having the original part in original condition to restore function to original purpose seems prudent. Given the fact that some have removed the tube entirely I would think it could be replaced with a cardboard version without harm. (Painted of course). The baffle is very strong metal - also described by Pentax themselves describing their constructions. Foam is on it! That's it! Don't like this thread - go on enjoy the others.