[Kerrowdown]

Will we ever get a 400mm f2.8 lens for sports photographers?

They already have... albeit manual focus and it's not expensive for a working pro.

SMC Pentax-A* 400mm F2.8 ED [IF] Reviews - A Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

I used one back in the day, when I used to do a wee bit of sports coverage, trust me... on a sidelines, a good monopod is a must to relax the arms.

[HoutHans]

Damn, that's like a Shih Tzu mating with a St. Bernard.

Please, make me unsee this image....

[Chris Mak]

There are wishes for a 400mm f4.0, which probably wouldn't be fulfilled in the next years.
DA* 400mm F4 coming! - PentaxForums.com
Pentax - Thoughts on making a DA*/DFA 400mm F4? - PentaxForums.com

So a 400/2.8 would be double the price of the DA560 and only generate 1/4 of buyers. Doesn't seem realistic to develop such formula for Pentax.

A very good 400mm f4 prime lens would make sense, like the Canon 400mm f4 DOII lens that I now use. You have the lightweight, relatively fast 400mm f4 for e.g. BIF. Put a 1.4TC on, and you have a still very good, and not too slow aperture 560mm f5.6 lens. Put a 2xTC on and you get 800mm f8 for ultimate reach. Not being a diffractive optics lens, a Pentax version would be larger and heavier though.

It does take a very good prime to make this work, otherwise CA, loss of sharpness and AF degredation make it less worthwhile. And it also takes a very good 2.0TC. Pentax has the lens making capabilities to design and produce such a lens, but a 400mm f2.8 will never happen.

[MossyRocks]

A lens like the 400/2.8 is really a specialty piece of glass. I happen to own a copy of the A* 400/2.8 and it is a monster and love it for what I do with it. While you do mention that it is a specialty piece of glass you have to keep in mind that something like that is really special purpose and for a small company like Pentax/Ricoh that means a lens that they would sell in the tens of copies a year. Even Canon and Nikon aren't selling many of those monsters a year and they basically own the sports photography market. If wanting Pentax to make some speciality glass I would prefer that they pick a niche that they already do well in like astrophotography. Here they could probably do well making some interesting lenses that are optimized for astro. Low CA wide open, low distrotion, fast, manual focus, no close focusing, no variable aperture, include a bahtinov mask for each lens to nail the focus. A 400/4 like that would be a great lens and only slightly slower at astro than my 400/2.8 as I have to stop it down to 3.5 to clean up the slight CA. I know that it is just wishful thinking but there is a market they could cater to.

[MossyRocks]

If you want a 400 2.8 in K mount then search out a A series lens. If you are lucky you could pick one up for $3000

That is about the going rate for one but they take a while to find. I looked fairly regularly for about a year before finding mine. So luck isn't really required but just some effort. Unfortunately mine won't be making it back onto the market probably until I'm dead.

[Kerrowdown]

mine won't be making it back onto the market probably until I'm dead

So all we need now is an address... for the "Hitman".

[boriscleto]

I think it'd be pretty neat if they tried to make a lens similar to Sigma's 300-800 f5.6. Or even if they tried to license and rebrand it.

That is even less likely than a fast telephoto from Ricoh.

[mlt]

At least long, prime lenses have not been put on Ricoh’s k mount roadmap, to sit there forever and cause endless forum posts

[Ontarian50]

Around here, where I speak with a large number of bird photographers, a 400mm f2.8 isn't on their radar. Those who shoot Canon or Nikon aren't putting one on their dream list.

What they do want is the similar sized and priced 600mm f4.0. That's their dream lens, while they make do with the Tamron or Sigma 150-600mm zooms.

The 400mm 2.8's are primarily indoor sports lenses. If you shoot football, baseball, or track and field events, that lens is on your list.

About the only argument for a bird photographer to make for a 400mm f2.8 is that it can take a 2x converter to make a 800mm f5.6, if you don't mind the loss of light and some optical loss. But the 600mm f4.0 can do the same with a 1.4x converter. So....?

So as the earlier commenters suggested, unless Pentax is prepared to release a 12fps speed demon body with state of the art autofocus, and go after the pro sports market, there's not much reason to make a new 400mm f2.8.

Bringing back the 600mm f4.0 would be a better bet and use of resources, methinks. Even then the market for that would be pretty small.

[PocketPixels]

That's definitely right, but Ricoh has released niche items before, such as an IR only KP... doesn't cost $12,000 though haha

As far as niche lenses go, I'd love to see a tilt/shift lens come from Pentax. I think that it fits well in their portfolio of being a solid stills camera..

Oof. I thought I had finally gotten over the pain of not being able to buy an IR-only KP, and you just ripped off the bandage.

[FozzFoster]

not being able to buy an IR-only KP

News to me! Thanks for bringing this to my attention..

??????PENTAX KP IR /???????? / ?? | RICOH IMAGING

"Because this model is for specialized institutions such as libraries, museums, research institutions, and government agencies,
you must conclude a “PENTAX KP IR Usage Agreement” that specifies the conditions of use when purchasing. In addition, we do not sell to general customers for personal use."

[MossyRocks]

So all we need now is an address... for the "Hitman".

Careful there you have a bunch of lusted after old glass a well and turnabout is fair play

[KiloHotelphoto]

Around here, where I speak with a large number of bird photographers, a 400mm f2.8 isn't on their radar. Those who shoot Canon or Nikon aren't putting one on their dream list.

What they do want is the similar sized and priced 600mm f4.0. That's their dream lens, while they make do with the Tamron or Sigma 150-600mm zooms.

The 400mm 2.8's are primarily indoor sports lenses. If you shoot football, baseball, or track and field events, that lens is on your list.

About the only argument for a bird photographer to make for a 400mm f2.8 is that it can take a 2x converter to make a 800mm f5.6, if you don't mind the loss of light and some optical loss. But the 600mm f4.0 can do the same with a 1.4x converter. So....?

So as the earlier commenters suggested, unless Pentax is prepared to release a 12fps speed demon body with state of the art autofocus, and go after the pro sports market, there's not much reason to make a new 400mm f2.8.

Bringing back the 600mm f4.0 would be a better bet and use of resources, methinks. Even then the market for that would be pretty small.

For birding and wildlife the 600/4 is the most useful. When I bought my Canon 600/4 IS II I looked at the 400/2.8 also but he extra reach is used more than an extra stop of light is needed and then being able to get to 840/5.6 with the 1.4tc and 1200/8 with the 2x tc is great.

The 2x does soften the image some so I only use it when I have no other options. I was in Yellowstone in September and saw a brown bear on an elk carcass and it didn't like the ravens getting close so I wasn't going to try to get closer, I just put the 2x on and took what I could at a safe distance.

[normhead]

600ƒ4 or 500 ƒ4 is all I'd look at personally. My 300 2.8 with the 1.4 on it already gives me an awesome 420 F4. Or 500 ƒ4.5 with the F 1.7x AF adapter or 600 ƒ5/6 which I use only with the K-1. If they did go for say a 600 ƒ4, I'd hope it would be a lightweight fresnel design.

[jpzk]

We don't even have the 1.4x/2x teleconverters yet ...

Says who?

I have those two TC's:

Pentax HD 1.4x teleconverter
Pentax 1.7x teleconverter/AF adapter