[zapp]

DA 560 is not really full frame ready - it was not designed for that in the beginning.
FA 600, 300, 250-600 are not what Pentax users will acutally buy and they need a complete redesign. These lenses are too darn heavy for today's world, AF needs work... Canon and Nikon have reduced weight and increased performance significantly lately. Canon may present a DO 4/600 with weight and length specs of a Pentax 5.6/600. Pentax is really, really far from presenting a new long telephoto line.
The DA 560 was missing the point. The 150-450 is not a replacment for a large apeture prime... up to date long glass is not Pentax territory.

Btw. if you are looking for a 2.8/300 for sport, a 5.6/560 will not do the job. Go Sigma 2.8/300 on Pentax of go somewhere else for it unless you are really dedicated and want to pay more for an 10 year old FA lens that you would have to pay for a like new one generation behind CaNikon lens plus camera. I would buy a 2.8/300 or 5.6/600 from Pentax, but a lot more people need to actually buy these lenses and other lenses will be more profitable for Pentax.

[normhead]

Pentax can lose every serious sport user using the brand and it would probably amount to 2 customers. And that amy be an exaggeration. Most people are smart enough to buy what they need for what they do. It's only loyalists from other brands who come on the forum and start thinking of reasons why Pentax needs sports lenses. Until their AF stacks up with other sports system, it's pointless for them to build sports lenses. Those who know their camera systems still won't buy them. This is a matter of do what you do well, don't compete with what others do well.

[Joshua A]

Pentax can lose every serious sport user using the brand and it would probably amount to 2 customers. And that amy be an exaggeration. Most people are smart enough to buy what they need for what they do. It's only loyalists from other brands who come on the forum and start thinking of reasons why Pentax needs sports lenses. Until their AF stacks up with other sports system, it's pointless for them to build sports lenses. Those who know their camera systems still won't buy them. This is a matter of do what you do well, don't compete with what others do well.

I won't disagree that Pentax doesn't have the best AF in the industry, but it is more than serviceable for most sports in a semi pro capacity. If you're a full time sports photographer, there are only two options on the market, the Canon 1d line and the Nikon D(X) line.

As a newspaper photography I've worked with both, along with the 400mm f2.8 lenses and teleconverters, and whilst they're fantastic bodies and lenses if you exclusively shoot sports, they aren't particularly flexible for other uses such as events and weddings. For most uses they are simply overkill and actually are counter intuitive for reportage work, as their large size does intimidate subjects.

The K-1 on the otherhand, along with D750/810, a7 and 5/6D bodies on the otherhand make for excellent multipurpose cameras, as do APS-C and m43 bodies with suitable glass.

I know a multitude of photographers locally (and I live in a town of 30,000 people) who own and shoot with 300 2.8 (also, 200mm f2) lenses, and not a single one shoots with a D4 or 1Dx equiv body. And thats because a 300mm 2.8 is a flexible lens (for a supertele), and is used for more than just sport. With teleconverters, its a great lens for birding and wildlife, without, it makes an excellent event and portraiture lens, and along with the 70-200mm 2.8 lens, it is the most common lens to be seen on the sidelines of any mid level sport event.

With what Pentax has shown with it's D-FA* 70-200mm f2.8, if they chose to release a D-FA* 300mm f2.8, it would compare very favourably with the competition.

I just personally think that a 300mm 2.8 would be a valuable lens for Ricoh to have in their linup, and would be the statement of seriousness that the DA 560mm f5.6 should have been. Anyway, sorry for the long-winded reply 😂.

On another note, maybe a 200mm f2 would be a more flexible lens to release. If they could somehow match it with 1.4x, 2x and maybe even a 3x teleconverter, and ensured that the results would still be at an acceptable level. That would leave us with a 200mm f2, 280mm f2.8, 400mm f4 and 600mm f5.6 (a 3x teleconverter would be a stretch I know) focal length options, and they'd only have to release 1 lens that way, until their marketshare hopefully increases so that they can release more lenses.

Optimistic? Definitely, but a man's gotta dream right 😂

[automorphism]

I also share the wish that Pentax would have more telephoto primes, though I'd really like a 400 f/4. I am thinking of getting a Canon to fix my desire for this prime, but keeping Pentax for the 300mm and under range. At this point I don't even mind so much because the lens is so much more expensive than a decent used Canon body that it barely makes a difference to me whether I have to get an additional body or not. Perhaps that's another reason why Pentax is reluctant to invest so much into making more advanced primes.

[Joshua A]

DA 560 is not really full frame ready - it was not designed for that in the beginning.
FA 600, 300, 250-600 are not what Pentax users will acutally buy and they need a complete redesign. These lenses are too darn heavy for today's world, AF needs work... Canon and Nikon have reduced weight and increased performance significantly lately. Canon may present a DO 4/600 with weight and length specs of a Pentax 5.6/600. Pentax is really, really far from presenting a new long telephoto line.
The DA 560 was missing the point. The 150-450 is not a replacment for a large apeture prime... up to date long glass is not Pentax territory.

Btw. if you are looking for a 2.8/300 for sport, a 5.6/560 will not do the job. Go Sigma 2.8/300 on Pentax of go somewhere else for it unless you are really dedicated and want to pay more for an 10 year old FA lens that you would have to pay for a like new one generation behind CaNikon lens plus camera. I would buy a 2.8/300 or 5.6/600 from Pentax, but a lot more people need to actually buy these lenses and other lenses will be more profitable for Pentax.

See, I already have a Tamron SP 300mm f2.8 AF lens, so I know what does and doesn't work focal length wise for my work. I do agree though, that the DA 560mm f5.6 really isn't an acceptable 300 2.8 replacement, but it is the only lens produced by Pentax that offers decent AF, a long focal length a weathersealed construction, which I value. You could argue that the DA* 300mm f4 is in contention, but the AF of that lens isn't on the same level as the new dc lenses such as the D-FA* 70-200mm f2.8.

As for the Sigma lens, I have considered it, but I've read quite a lot of reviews for the lens (In particular the lenstip.com review), and I don't honestly think that it is worth the 10x price increase over the Tamron lens. Secondhand, I would definitely consider it, but to get good sharpness out of the Tamron, I only have to stop down to f3.2 and it performs great, and it seems like the Sigma behaves in a similar way. The nail on the coffin of that lens though really is the lack of a focus limiter. The Tamron has one, the Pentax has one, but the Sigma doesn't, and for sports, the limiter is a godsend. As much as I'm glad Sigma still sells it in K-mount, it really is suboptimal at MRRP.

[normhead]

See, I already have a Tamron SP 300mm f2.8 AF lens, so I know what does and doesn't work focal length wise for my work. I do agree though, that the DA 560mm f5.6 really isn't an acceptable 300 2.8 replacement, but it is the only lens produced by Pentax that offers decent AF, a long focal length a weathersealed construction, which I value. You could argue that the DA* 300mm f4 is in contention, but the AF of that lens isn't on the same level as the new dc lenses such as the D-FA* 70-200mm f2.8.

As for the Sigma lens, I have considered it, but I've read quite a lot of reviews for the lens (In particular the lenstip.com review), and I don't honestly think that it is worth the 10x price increase over the Tamron lens. Secondhand, I would definitely consider it, but to get good sharpness out of the Tamron, I only have to stop down to f3.2 and it performs great, and it seems like the Sigma behaves in a similar way. The nail on the coffin of that lens though really is the lack of a focus limiter. The Tamron has one, the Pentax has one, but the Sigma doesn't, and for sports, the limiter is a godsend. As much as I'm glad Sigma still sells it in K-mount, it really is suboptimal at MRRP.

I have a Tamron 300 2.8 which I use for birding with the F 1.7x AF adapter or HD DA1.4. It's an incredibly versatile lens. But heavy. The 1.7x makes a great focus limiter.

I'm just not sure I could afford it at the price Pentax would ask.

[Joshua A]

I have a Tamron 300 2.8 which I use for birding with the F 1.7x AF adapter or HD DA1.4. It's an incredibly versatile lens. But heavy. The 1.7x makes a great focus limiter.

I'm just not sure I could afford it at the price Pentax would ask.

Thats understandable, at a minimum of 6k, it would be a significant investment for me too. That said, it'd be something to work towards, though I'd honestly buy a 85mm f1.4 and 50mm f1.4 beforehand just to fill the gaps I currently have before splurging for a better 300mm f2.8.

Btw, I'm loving the Tamron 300mm f2.8 AF lens both with and without the HD 1.4x Teleconverter, but I haven't had the chance to play with a F 1.4x Teleconverter. How is it, does it pair well?

[normhead]

Thats understandable, at a minimum of 6k, it would be a significant investment for me too. That said, it'd be something to work towards, though I'd honestly buy a 85mm f1.4 and 50mm f1.4 beforehand just to fill the gaps I currently have before splurging for a better 300mm f2.8.

Btw, I'm loving the Tamron 300mm f2.8 AF lens both with and without the HD 1.4x Teleconverter, but I haven't had the chance to play with a F 1.4x Teleconverter. How is it, does it pair well?

The 1.7 can cause problems with purple fringing, but only in certain light conditions. I prefer the full auto focus of the 1.4 on the K-3, but when you need it the extra reach if great, and the AF is very quick, once you manually get it in range.

[angerdan]

After the next photokina in 2020 when the D FA 70-200 4.0, D FA* 85mm 1.4 and D FA* 35mm 1.4 lenses are available/announced, the longer lenses could be on the roadmap.
Pentax K-mount Lens Roadmap Archive (from 2005 on) - PentaxForums.com

Or even in 2019, who knows what 100 years pentax will bring in?
Pentax 100 YEARS anniversary 2019! - PentaxForums.com