[BrianR]

I don't know of any camera maker offering a prime in that range and speed that is not at least nudging $7K. That was the initial price on the DA 560 as well. I would not assume a cheap prime. If Sigma keeps making Pentax mount lenses, that would be the best bet.

I think only Canon has a 400/4? It does use diffractive optics to make it more compact and I think this might up the price. For what it's worth, Nikon has two 300/4 lenses, a standard one for ~1,300USD and one using diffractive optics (or phase fresnel as they call it) for ~2,000USD.


Either way, I can't see it falling into what I'd consider budget territory, and it's going to be on the massive size which puts a crimp on casual use. As it is, I find the 300/4 to be big enough that it only goes in the pack if I actually have a specific use planned for it.

I wonder how many of the FA*300/2.8 or larger lenses were sold in their time, absolute numbers and to what percent of Pentax slr owners.

[GeneV]

I think only Canon has a 400/4? It does use diffractive optics to make it more compact and I think this might up the price. For what it's worth, Nikon has two 300/4 lenses, a standard one for ~1,300USD and one using diffractive optics (or phase fresnel as they call it) for ~2,000USD.


Either way, I can't see it falling into what I'd consider budget territory, and it's going to be on the massive size which puts a crimp on casual use. As it is, I find the 300/4 to be big enough that it only goes in the pack if I actually have a specific use planned for it.

I wonder how many of the FA*300/2.8 or larger lenses were sold in their time, absolute numbers and to what percent of Pentax slr owners.

I'm not seeing a current 400/4 from any other maker, either. Nikon had a 500/4 in a similar (high) price range. For $11k, you can get a 400/2.8.

300mm/4 seems to be the last point before the price really takes off. Others may have different needs, but for me the only big advantage to faster extreme telephoto is the availability of a teleconverter. A 400/4 lets you make a 560/5.6, and Pentax offers that as a single lens. Price has gone back up on that one now, but it is still less than the Canon 400/4.

[normhead]

but for me the only big advantage to faster extreme telephoto is the availability of a teleconverter.

Exactly, 300 2.8 and 1.7x give you a relatively lightweight 510 ƒ4.5. With the 1.4 TC, 420 ƒ4. Sure you can buy a 560, but look at the flexibility you'd lose, and the 510 4.5 combo is 2/3s stop faster.

[GeneV]

Exactly, 300 2.8 and 1.7x give you a relatively lightweight 510 ƒ4.5. With the 1.4 TC, 420 ƒ4. Sure you can buy a 560, but look at the flexibility you'd lose, and the 510 2.8 at is 2/3s stop faster.

Maybe, but not for me when it gets to this price range. The price of either of those lenses from a camera manufacturer is not far off a Sigma 500/4.5, or a Pentax 560 (some Canon models are significantly more), and it weighs about the same. There is a huge jump in weight from 300/4,to 300/2.8 or 400/5.6 to 400/4.

[normhead]

Maybe, but not for me when it gets to this price range. The price of either of those lenses from a camera manufacturer is not far off a Sigma 500/4.5, or a Pentax 560 (some Canon models are significantly more), and it weighs about the same. There is a huge jump in weight from 300/4,to 300/2.8 or 400/5.6 to 400/4.

And the old Pentax optimized it's lenses to have the best performance for a given weight, hence a 200 2.8 and a 300 ƒ4, designed to be easily manageable in a camera bag... the new Pentax, not so much. 150-450 is big, the 70-200 is the heaviest in it's class, or close to, I suspect we've seen the last of that old philosophy.

[photoptimist]

And the old Pentax optimized it's lenses to have the best performance for a given weight, hence a 200 2.8 and a 300 ƒ4, designed to be easily manageable in a camera bag... the new Pentax, not so much. 150-450 is big, the 70-200 is the heaviest in it's class, or close to, I suspect we've seen the last of that old philosophy.

I fear you are right and it reflects the deeper divergence in the photography industry between low-cost casual photography (now done on a smartphones) and high-end photography where nothing less that the brightest apertures and highest image performance are competitive. It also reflects Pentax's shift from high-volume sales of lower-end cameras (in retail shops where novice photographers can find them) and toward sales to more discerning photographers who have the confidence to pick a non-Canikon camera and expect more performance from that equipment.

[GeneV]

And the old Pentax optimized it's lenses to have the best performance for a given weight, hence a 200 2.8 and a 300 ƒ4, designed to be easily manageable in a camera bag... the new Pentax, not so much. 150-450 is big, the 70-200 is the heaviest in it's class, or close to, I suspect we've seen the last of that old philosophy.

I started as a screw mount user and stayed with Pentax decades ago in large part because I loved the M series lenses and the compact size of the mx and lx. Back when a different ISO meant another body, that small size was even more critical. The DA Ltd series continued the philosophy. I hope the FF will not end it completely. The 28-105 is a nice size.

[normhead]

I was MF until my *ist. I never saw the need for an AF film body. The 28-015 is nice, but if you are used to an 18-135, it's pretty limited. But it's beautiful lens.

[GeneV]

I was MF until my *ist. I never saw the need for an AF film body. The 28-015 is nice, but if you are used to an 18-135, it's pretty limited. But it's beautiful lens.

I use and enjoy both. I do not see APSC disappearing from my kit. The difference in weight and range is not justified by the difference in quality most of the time. Sony makes a 24-240 for its FF A7 line. I'm thinking of renting one for my A7r to see how it handles and performs. This might be where Pentax should go before fast esoteric primes. A one lens solution gets one attached to a system.

[clackers]

Sony makes a 24-240 for its FF A7 line. I'm thinking of renting one for my A7r to see how it handles and performs.

A 'super zoom' ... I'm loathe to pay good money for the image quality of a FF camera then put more than a 3x zoom on the front of it, Gene! ;-)

The 28-105 'pushes the envelope' for me.

[GeneV]

A 'super zoom' ... I'm loathe to pay good money for the image quality of a FF camera then put more than a 3x zoom on the front of it, Gene! ;-)

The 28-105 'pushes the envelope' for me.

I guess I disagree a bit with that philosophy. I'm not too worried about sullying my K1; I'd just like to keep a one body solution where possible. There are times when you are traveling but want both convenience and the availability of superior quality when you need it. A superzoom with a compact prime or two at hand could do that. I do that with the K3/18-135 and DA ltd. primes now.

I would also expect the quality of the super zoom shots on 36mp FF are a bit better, too. The reviews of the Sony are pretty decent. I'm more concerned that a FF superzoom for a DSLR will be too honking big to be handing. Testing that theory is what Lensrentals is for.

[photoptimist]

I guess I disagree a bit with that philosophy. I'm not too worried about sullying my K1; I'd just like to keep a one body solution where possible. There are times when you are traveling but want both convenience and the availability of superior quality when you need it. A superzoom with a compact prime or two at hand could do that. I do that with the K3/18-135 and DA ltd. primes now.

I would also expect the quality of the super zoom shots on 36mp FF are a bit better, too. The reviews of the Sony are pretty decent. I'm more concerned that a FF superzoom for a DSLR will be too honking big to be handing. Testing that theory is what Lensrentals is for.

Exactly! It's better to get a picture with a superzoom than no picture at all. Sure, I'll have the bag full of primes but if I'm on the move (hiking, cars, buses, boats, airplanes) and know there will be no time to stop, then a longer-range zoom will be on the camera.

[angerdan]

The 400mm 4.5 optical design by Jun Hirakawa still waits
US4904070A - Telephoto lens system - Google Patents

An excellent D FA 400mm 4.5 ED DC AW with covered focus ring for secure AF functions without unwanted interfering through contact by hand would be great.
Realistic price seems to be 2800€.
Preisentwicklung für Konica Minolta AF 400mm 4.5 G APO schwarz (2651116) (90 Tage) | heise online Preisvergleich / EU

Role model can be the Minolta AF 400mm f/4.5 APO G HS, which has only 1.920g and 27,5cm lengh.
Including the retractable focus ring cover, this kind of design is perfect for the AF-Era.
dyxum.com/lenses/Minolta-AF-400mm-F4.5-HS-APO-G_lens22.html

[angerdan]

There's a new thread about an possible FA400/4:
DA* 400mm F4 coming! - PentaxForums.com

[zapp]

There's a new thread about an possible FA400/4:
DA* 400mm F4 coming! - PentaxForums.com

The „new thread“ started in 2009 and you created a circular reference.