[MikeyBugs95]

They do pop up on eBay from Japan and Korea sellers some. Taking a bit of a chance on that front...but I've thought about it.
On APS-C(i.e. my KP), the 600 end would get me all the way out to 900 equivalent.

At this very moment, there's a FA* and a F* 250-600, 2 A* 600/5.6 and 2 FA* 600/4, and some 67 600s and 645 A* 600s on eBay.

[angerdan]

As for bringing back the 250-600mm zoom, be careful what you wish for.

There have been 13 copies available in 2017, with an average price of $8,500 / 5,500€.

And last year november two 250-600 had been auctioned for $3,600:
Best Pentax lens collection I ever saw in my life - Page 2 - PentaxForums.com

[stihlmania]

I just used the 150-450 this weekend. Sure is nice to have a featherweight long lens around at times....

[HoutHans]

There have been 13 copies available in 2017, with an average price of $8,500 / 5,500€.

And last year november two 250-600 had been auctioned for $3,600:
Best Pentax lens collection I ever saw in my life - Page 2 - PentaxForums.com

I'm really not sure whether I'd be comfortable buying a lens online for that kind of money, also taking into account the abuse such a lens may encounter on its way to the Netherlands. Still, I always find a little puddle of saliva on my keyboard after I have had a quick look. Must be a pavlov LBA thing.

[loyalt]

Why? They did make (some) sense in the film days when 100ISO or less was the norm. With today's high ISO performance the 2.8 aperture is not needed for most. A 400/4 will be half the cost and weight and for all practical purposes do the same job.
How much cost and weight penalty for one stop are people willing to take?
Pentax need some long telephotos but a 400/2.8 is probably not among them.

Why? Because all of the big manufacturers have them and are used by serious sports photographers on the sidelines of football, soccer, LaCrosse, etc. I would love to be among them with my Pentax bazooka lens.

[angerdan]

I would love to be among them with my Pentax bazooka lens.

How many DA 560 do you own?
It is the AF lens with the longest build length currently available, a real bazooka/stovepipe. Topping it with the FA* 250-600mm due to it's nice PowerZoom feature would be the next step.

[KiloHotelphoto]

If you really want to shoot long lenses just get yourself a Canon or Nikon setup, Pentax isn’t the brand for for it.

[MossyRocks]

If you really want to shoot long lenses just get yourself a Canon or Nikon setup, Pentax isn’t the brand for for it.

Yes we are but you have to go with old like I did. Maybe someday I will get this monster but for now the 400/2.8 is more than enough and going much beyond 400 I would be better served by getting a good Newtonian telescope in the 1500mm to 3000mm range, field flattner, and eyepiece adapter. Before I get that a good equatorial mount would be in order. Although I wouldn't mind trying something like this with the Pentax 1200/8 . Although I would want to go for a shot of the moon setting between the Carlson Towers from the roof of my work or a moonrise over downtown Minneapolis from a building about a mile down the road but I think my existing 400 would do either quite well.

[SteveinSLC]

Yes we are but you have to go with old like I did. Maybe someday I will get this monster but for now the 400/2.8 is more than enough and going much beyond 400 I would be better served by getting a good Newtonian telescope in the 1500mm to 3000mm range, field flattner, and eyepiece adapter. Before I get that a good equatorial mount would be in order. Although I wouldn't mind trying something like this with the Pentax 1200/8 . Although I would want to go for a shot of the moon setting between the Carlson Towers from the roof of my work or a moonrise over downtown Minneapolis from a building about a mile down the road but I think my existing 400 would do either quite well.

For pretty much static shots like that, or astro, probably cheaper just to get a refractor telescope or spotting scope. You could get a very high quality triplet refractor for a lot less than a new 600mm lens from any camera manufacturer. The benefit of a lens comes in AF for moving subjects.

[MossyRocks]

For pretty much static shots like that, or astro, probably cheaper just to get a refractor telescope or spotting scope. You could get a very high quality triplet refractor for a lot less than a new 600mm lens from any camera manufacturer. The benefit of a lens comes in AF for moving subjects.

Which is why I said for going longer than I have I would be better served with a nice Newtonian and all the gear to make it work well with a DSLR. I've looked into this enough to have some idea how to not completely fail if/wen I make that dive. I mostly shoot static things never being particularily good or interested in portraits or moving things that I couldn't prefocus a shot for at the long end. Even then I still use lots of all manual lenses and don't completely suck at focusing while moving and then papering over a missed focus by throwing some f-stop at the problem.

[stihlmania]

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.

My lens will be the same, taken from from my dead stiff fingers. Which I purchased in 1988, or somewhere around that year. I do have the original bill (1988) in my Pentax folder in the filing cabnet. Not a digital filing cabnet! This is the real Mc Coy, a hand signed original....

[stihlmania]

I must add one more comment. Possibly a long comment.....for me a REAL long comment......If Ricoh/Pentax must choose as to which market it needs to survive in then to make an autofocus 400mm f2.8 is not an option they should consider in this day and age. Yes, I do own one of the best lenses Pentax ever made but the reality of today does not support making an autofocus version of 400mm f2.8 lens. The reason this lens is so good is that you can shoot it as a 400mm, add a 1.4, a 1.7, or a 2.0 multiplier and still get superperb images from it. It is just a great lens! With low ISO , which I see as the premier resolution option for ISO under 800, which the 400 f 2.8 excellels at, no lens from Ricoh/Pentax since can better the image quality that the 400 f2.8 can produce, What would a autofocus 400 f 2.8 from Pentax cost today? Too much for most Pentax users, in my opinion..It was the same way in 1988, $3,800.00. It may seem like chump change compared to Canon or Nikon, but both Canon and Nikon were close in price back then to Pentax.so not much has changed for Pentax. Most Pentax users ( my opinion as how I see it) are not ready to invest that sum on a lens. image quality or not, that is offered from a 400 f 2.8..... My experience, 30 years of Pentax usage , custom photolabs that my wife printed at, color and b&h, ( I will mention our custom color printing lab we had at home as a plus ( Durst 16 x 20 color processor with a Durst 4x5 Pro enlarger. We also did b&w prints to 20 x 24.not to mention watching what everying else is doing. Which we all do, or should be doing!

1. Right now metal prints are selling like hot cakes in central Texas....12x18 are priced to what the market will tolerate, as for a profit to the photographer...about 30 percent.

[angerdan]

I would love to be among them with my Pentax bazooka lens.

The Pentax DA 560mm ist the currently build AF Tele prime with the most higest build lenght.

[loyalt]

Canon's newest 400/2.8L is less than half the weight of the old Pentax A* 400/2.8. If Pentax were to go for a long, exotic lens, it might actually make more sense to offer a 400/2.8 than 400/4, so there's greater differentiation from the DFA 150-450 and DA 560/5.6.

And, for us prof. sports photographers who actually need the f2.8 for indoor sports, like indoor track, this length and aperture is a must to compete with the other brands. All other major brands have one; why not Pentax?

[Wheatfield]

Being a loyal Pentax professional photographer, I would like to put in a plug for a good 400mm f2.8 lens for sports action photography. I love the Pentax lenses that I have and would like to be able to add this to my arsenal. (at least begin saving for it. )

Begin saving for a different brand. Pigs will learn to fly before Pentax makes a 400/2.8

---------- Post added Nov 23rd, 2021 at 11:04 AM ----------

Why? Because all of the big manufacturers have them and are used by serious sports photographers on the sidelines of football, soccer, LaCrosse, etc. I would love to be among them with my Pentax bazooka lens.

For what you want to make sense, there needs to be more than a snowball's chance in hell of them breaking into what is both a very specialized market, but also a very tiny market.
To do that they would have to be offering on-site repairs at all major sporting events, plus have a loaner service available, both at major sporting events and available as overnight delivery to photographers with broken equipment.
And then they would have to entice enough photographers away from the major brands to make it worthwhile.
Or Ricoh would have to be willing to light suitcases full of money on fire and throw them out the window.

Frankly, the snowball has a better chance in hell than any the above happening.