[Paul the Sunman]

Their case is pretty compelling, the images look excellent, and the seemingly genuine comments of the professional photographers give good practical perspectives. However, I already have the 70-200 f/2.8, and am not seriously thinking about the 70-200 f/4, unless an amazing deal pops up sometime in the future.

But at this stage, my thoughts for FF extend in a less fashionable direction. The rarely-mentioned but oft-maligned 65-300 "consumer zoom" on the FF roadmap seems to me a better travel option that I would certainly pick up, if it ever appears. If it's optically in the 28-105 class, I certainly wouldn't look down my nose at it.

[Biff]

Looks good. Creating a dilemma for me with this vs the 55-300 for Africa.

[Kevin B123]

I am in the market for this lens when the price settles, I have too many other commitments at the moment.
With the 28-105 and Samyang 14mm I will want for nothing.

[rawr]

With any luck there are 3rd-party equivalents at some point.

There are already third-party tripod collars for the Tamron f70-210 on eBay for AUD $79:



But with a lens diameter of 78.5mm, any old tripod collar with in inner diameter of 80mm should fit OK. A tripod collar for the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM lens
and Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM lens should do the job, even with an inner diameter of 81mm. These are on eBay for about $20.

[StiffLegged]

Well, it's not an f/2.8 blunderbuss beast, zoom and focus are internal, it's WR and has Pentax-native electronics and Pentax HD coatings, so as long as that isn't a Sudden Death Motor driving the focussing it sounds good to me and worth saving up for.

Yay!

[Sandy Hancock]

I'm stoked about this lens. I'm pretty sure it will replace my DA* 50-135, DA* 60-250 and probably my DFA* 70-200.

I can see it getting some landscape use, so a tripod collar will be a necessary third party purchase. I'm a little disappointed Pentax didn't engineer one of their clever mounts into the barrel design, but I'll get over it

[baro-nite]

That is nice to hear. Before it appeared, there were so many naysayers claiming that it was a lens without a market. I too might be interested

For me it would replace both the DA*200 (which, BTW, weighs a few grams more and also doesn't have a tripod collar), and also the M75~150 I still use some (excellent lens, actually). I need something I can carry on for airline travel, which is one reason the DFA*70~200 is out of the question for me (on a recent trip I was nearly over the carry-on weight limit on one flight segment).

[RobA_Oz]

There are already third-party tripod collars for the Tamron f70-210 on eBay for AUD $79:



But with a lens diameter of 78.5mm, any old tripod collar with in inner diameter of 80mm should fit OK. A tripod collar for the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM lens
and Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM lens should do the job, even with an inner diameter of 81mm. These are on eBay for about $20.

That latter one should be good with some shim material to save marking the lens barrel, although I do wonder about anything too soft affecting vibration.

[RobA_Oz]

Their case is pretty compelling, the images look excellent, and the seemingly genuine comments of the professional photographers give good practical perspectives.

Matt Bishop should be familiar to many here, and his enthusiasm for the D FA* lenses is pretty well known, so his praise for this lens carries a fair bit of weight.*

* unlike the lens.

[Serkevan]

For me it would replace both the DA*200 (which, BTW, weighs a few grams more and also doesn't have a tripod collar), and also the M75~150 I still use some (excellent lens, actually). I need something I can carry on for airline travel, which is one reason the DFA*70~200 is out of the question for me (on a recent trip I was nearly over the carry-on weight limit on one flight segment).

In my experience, carrying the camera + heaviest lens on your strap/belt/harness of choice tends to free up quite some weight at the cost of some comfort. In my case, I double down and throw the M20/4, 50/1.7, 90/2.5 and extra battery in assorted pockets of my ski jacket because 8 kg of carry-on is basically nothing

[baro-nite]

In my experience, carrying the camera + heaviest lens on your strap/belt/harness of choice tends to free up quite some weight at the cost of some comfort. In my case, I double down and throw the M20/4, 50/1.7, 90/2.5 and extra battery in assorted pockets of my ski jacket because 8 kg of carry-on is basically nothing

OK, fair enough! Still, the smaller/lighter each lens, the more I can carry.

[Wheatridger]

As an infrequent tele user, looking at this lens makes me more interested in buying the cheaper, older alternative. Something faster and more modern than my F 70-210, but not so big and heavy as this. It's certainly no travel lens. I never thought of the DA*50-135 as a travel lens either, but it's 100 grams lighter (not much) and 1.5 inches shorter (considerable). The DA will still give me 18 MPX of sweet-spot central image on the K-1, or 24 MPX on a K-3. When have I ever enjoyed such image-capturing capability?

I can see why Pentax needed this lens, but I don't think I do.

[RobA_Oz]

As an infrequent tele user, looking at this lens makes me more interested in buying the cheaper, older alternative. Something faster and more modern than my F 70-210, but not so big and heavy as this. It's certainly no travel lens. I never thought of the DA*50-135 as a travel lens either, but it's 100 grams lighter (not much) and 1.5 inches shorter (considerable). The DA will still give me 18 MPX of sweet-spot central image on the K-1, or 24 MPX on a K-3. When have I ever enjoyed such image-capturing capability?

I can see why Pentax needed this lens, but I don't think I do.

There are lots of older zooms that are lighter than the new 70-210, including the FA-J 70-300, and the similar-weight FA 100-300 (I have one), and if those satisfy anyone’s needs, that’s great.

The main attraction of the new lens is the WR and the (probable) AF speed, coupled with its weight. I can see why the DA*50-135 looks attractive in crop mode, though. I wouldn’t be confident about its AF speed for any action work, nevertheless, which is why I’m not thinking about using mine for that purpose.

I am starting to think about the new 70-210. It would be a travel lens for me – I’d leave the FA*80-200 at home, as much as I love its IQ.

[Rondec]

As an infrequent tele user, looking at this lens makes me more interested in buying the cheaper, older alternative. Something faster and more modern than my F 70-210, but not so big and heavy as this. It's certainly no travel lens. I never thought of the DA*50-135 as a travel lens either, but it's 100 grams lighter (not much) and 1.5 inches shorter (considerable). The DA will still give me 18 MPX of sweet-spot central image on the K-1, or 24 MPX on a K-3. When have I ever enjoyed such image-capturing capability?

I can see why Pentax needed this lens, but I don't think I do.

The 50-135 is a very nice lens, but it lacks in two areas compared to this lens -- maximum magnification and speed of auto focus. But obviously this is probably more focused on K-1 owners than folks shooting APS-C (although plenty of people use lenses like the DFA *70-200 on APS-C).

[rawr]

Matt Bishop should be familiar to many here, and his enthusiasm for the D FA* lenses is pretty well known, so his praise for this lens carries a fair bit of weight.

Alas his work makes this lens seem only suitable for landscape or still life (as do Ricoh's official image samples for the 70-210 lens).

There seems to be no recognition that 70-200's are also classic event lenses - weddings, motorsports, news gathering, music gigs etc.

It would be nice to see more examples of the lens doing that kind of work.