Anyone else wishing for a Q af ultra tele?

**barondla** · 06-09-2013, 08:18 PM

I want a wide prime, and macro lens like most here. I also hope Pentax pushes the ultra tele envelope with a leaf shutter, 45-.... AF zoom. This would really benefit wildlife photographers and give Pentax an advantage the others couldn't match. Anyone else interested?

thanks
barondla

Check out the winners of point and shoot contest #66, in compact camera forum. Enter #67. The Q is welcome!

hakea · 06-09-2013, 08:34 PM

I think everyone will agree with you on this one. It would be nice if they provided an update of where they are at with macro and wide prime lens also.

VisualDarkness · 06-09-2013, 08:40 PM

Something like a somewhere 100-250mm prime lens would be a dream for many!

SpartanD63 · 06-09-2013, 08:40 PM

I would love a stupidly compact ultra tele for the Q (I'm not sure how much I'd use one though...)

BTW, I still want to see a 1000mm adapted to the Q xD

kenafein · 06-09-2013, 09:41 PM

Yes! I would really love to see Pentax make a 100-300/2.8( or 4) (560-1680 equivalent). I've thought about it for awhile. It would be an excellent application for the Q, and it's something they could make pretty cheaply. It would add so much to the Q.

CheepShot · 06-09-2013, 10:14 PM

I'll post an image with a 1000mm mirror soon. It's rated at F10, it should be interesting.

pinholecam · 06-09-2013, 11:27 PM

Me!

I'd pay same aps-c price for a optical 135 or 200mm f2.8 scaled down to Q image circle with the auto speed/convinience.
The birding and macro possibilities would really open up more.

snostorm · 06-10-2013, 02:05 AM

Hi barondla,

I'm in !!!

I think we should be realistic here, though that seems to be atypical on photo fora. A very well done 45-135mm f4 (3x zoom ) that's collapsible for storage like the 06's 15-45mm would be pretty cool, and with a front element requirement of only around 34mm, it could still use the same 40.5 filter thread of the other system lenses.

Anything significantly faster would require a larger diameter front element than the barrels of the present Q system lenses -- f2.8 would need a front element of 48-49mm. f3.2 would need about 42mm. These front elements would be significantly heavier since the area of a 34mm element would be 908 sq mm compared to 1886 sq mm for a f2.8 ( so 49mm has at least over twice as much glass), and 1385 sq mm for an f3.2 (so 42mm has at least over 50% more glass). Even with internal focusing and internal zoom, the build quality of these faster lenses would have to be significantly beefier and more precise than that used in the 06 zoom to keep the elements aligned, and this would add to both additional weight and increase the price. Let's not forget the size of the DA* 50-135 f2.8. Just because this lens is for a smaller format doesn't allow for that much miniaturization since the max aperture of a lens is dependent on FL and entrance pupil (front element) size, not format.

All that being said, with and EQ FL range of 250-750mm on the 1/2.3" sensor, f4 is a very practical max aperture IMO. Though this would be reduced to 205-615mm EQ for the rumored 1/1.7" sensor, it would still be fast for this class of long to super tele zoom.

For this, I'd definitely consider bundling a somewhat miniaturized Red Dot sight with an integral hot shoe mount and an LCD loupe (with a QR mount that's built into future Q models' body) since it would still be hard to spot a subject a super tele FLx and impractical to hold at arms length. For the loupe mount, all they'd have to do is insert some sheet steel in a frame around the LCD screen and build magnets into the loupe's body with some locating pins and corresponding holes.in the back of the body. I'd also make a removable tripod ring for this lens. They might also be able to design the optics of the loupe so it would be shallower than current models (or make it collapsible). They could also design and sell an optional right angle viewer for this loupe (and incorporate the loupe mount design into the DSLR and super zoom bodies). Especially if these were cross compatible with other Pentax cameras, I think these could be good sellers for Pentax.

Scott

**Digitalis** · 06-10-2013, 08:11 AM

Originally posted by snostorm

All that being said, with and EQ FL range of 250-750mm on the 1/2.3" sensor

Wouldn't it be HILARIOUS if pentax made a minature zoom mirror lens around 300-800mm f/5.6 It would probably be only somewhat larger than a 50mm f/2 lens..and they could include the same 40.5mm filters that they use for the DA* 560mm f/5.6 and D-FA 645 25mm f/4 - the filters could be used on the front of the lens.

snostorm · 06-10-2013, 02:55 PM

Originally posted by Digitalis

Wouldn't it be HILARIOUS if pentax made a minature zoom mirror lens around 300-800mm f/5.6 It would probably be only somewhat larger than a 50mm f/2 lens..and they could include the same 40.5mm filters that they use for the DA* 560mm f/5.6 and D-FA 645 25mm f/4 - the filters could be used on the front of the lens.

It would be very cool, but I don't think that miniaturization like this would be possible since I believe that f stop for a cat lens is dependent on the diameter of the primary mirror and the FL of the lens, so it's not related to format at all. If you're talking about 300-800mm EQ, that's a different story because this would be a 53-143mm cat with the current 1/2.3" sensor, and would only need the primary mirror to be less than 30mm in diameter. They could actually probably make it even faster -- an f4 should be possible with the primary mirror at about 36mm.

Scott

**Digitalis** · 06-10-2013, 05:36 PM

Originally posted by snostorm

It would be very cool, but I don't think that miniaturization like this would be possible since I believe that f stop for a cat lens is dependent on the diameter of the primary mirror and the FL of the lens

A good point, but consider the fact that Pentax found a way to make the DA40mm f/2.8 even smaller. I think it would be possible without the lens being as large as your typical 600mm f/8 mirror lenses are.

Teddy 738 · 06-10-2013, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by barondla

I want a wide prime, and macro lens like most here. I also hope Pentax pushes the ultra tele envelope with a leaf shutter, 45-.... AF zoom. This would really benefit wildlife photographers and give Pentax an advantage the others couldn't match. Anyone else interested?

thanks
barondla

Check out the winners of point and shoot contest #66, in compact camera forum. Enter #67. The Q is welcome!

@barondla

I'm in for the Macro and Telephoto Lenses,espechially if the new Q has that new
Sony sensor.

GibbyTheMole · 06-11-2013, 04:35 AM

Originally posted by snostorm

I think we should be realistic here, though that seems to be atypical on photo fora. A very well done 45-135mm f4 (3x zoom ) that's collapsible for storage like the 06's 15-45mm would be pretty cool, and with a front element requirement of only around 34mm, it could still use the same 40.5 filter thread of the other system lenses.

Sounds like a winner to me. I'd buy it! (you know, if I had like... money.)

CheepShot · 06-11-2013, 09:15 AM

Originally posted by SpartanD63

I would love a stupidly compact ultra tele for the Q (I'm not sure how much I'd use one though...)

BTW, I still want to see a 1000mm adapted to the Q xD

Here's a short set I took yesterday with the Q and a 1000mm Rubinar reflex mirror and few comparison shots with a K-5 and a Tamron 60B 300/2.8. The reach is why I bought the Q but now I like it for all of it's other features.

Flickr link:
Pentax-Q with 1000mm reflex lens - a set on Flickr

kenafein · 06-11-2013, 12:58 PM

I wouldn't care if the native lens was as large as a DA55-300, but I would want more reach than 135mm.

06-09-2013, 08:18 PM	#1
barondla Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: midwest, United States Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,714	Anyone else wishing for a Q af ultra tele? I want a wide prime, and macro lens like most here. I also hope Pentax pushes the ultra tele envelope with a leaf shutter, 45-.... AF zoom. This would really benefit wildlife photographers and give Pentax an advantage the others couldn't match. Anyone else interested? thanks barondla Check out the winners of point and shoot contest #66, in compact camera forum. Enter #67. The Q is welcome!

06-10-2013, 08:11 AM	#9
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by snostorm All that being said, with and EQ FL range of 250-750mm on the 1/2.3" sensor Wouldn't it be HILARIOUS if pentax made a minature zoom mirror lens around 300-800mm f/5.6 It would probably be only somewhat larger than a 50mm f/2 lens..and they could include the same 40.5mm filters that they use for the DA* 560mm f/5.6 and D-FA 645 25mm f/4 - the filters could be used on the front of the lens. Last edited by Digitalis; 06-10-2013 at 08:18 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Why doesn't anyone make a CS adapter for the Q?	GibbyTheMole	Pentax Q	29	09-10-2020 02:56 AM
Manfrotto Super Clamp - anyone else feel the need for a washer?	Docrwm	Pentax Camera and Field Accessories	25	07-02-2013 02:14 PM
Anyone else had a problem with the mode dial?	rickn	Pentax K-01	2	04-10-2013 01:18 AM
Anyone else trying to get a K5IIS but can't?	AdrianM	Pentax DSLR Discussion	12	03-29-2013 10:47 PM
My Pentax Q and ultra tele image made the Pentax US facebook page!	barondla	Pentax Q	8	06-25-2012 12:27 PM

06-09-2013, 08:34 PM	#2
hakea Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Posts: 62	I think everyone will agree with you on this one. It would be nice if they provided an update of where they are at with macro and wide prime lens also.

06-09-2013, 08:40 PM	#3
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Something like a somewhere 100-250mm prime lens would be a dream for many!

06-09-2013, 08:40 PM	#4
SpartanD63 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 351	I would love a stupidly compact ultra tele for the Q (I'm not sure how much I'd use one though...) BTW, I still want to see a 1000mm adapted to the Q xD

06-09-2013, 09:41 PM	#5
kenafein Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Southern California Photos: Albums Posts: 4,082	Yes! I would really love to see Pentax make a 100-300/2.8( or 4) (560-1680 equivalent). I've thought about it for awhile. It would be an excellent application for the Q, and it's something they could make pretty cheaply. It would add so much to the Q.

06-09-2013, 10:14 PM	#6
CheepShot Forum Member Join Date: May 2013 Posts: 95	I'll post an image with a 1000mm mirror soon. It's rated at F10, it should be interesting.

06-09-2013, 11:27 PM	#7
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,706	Me! I'd pay same aps-c price for a optical 135 or 200mm f2.8 scaled down to Q image circle with the auto speed/convinience. The birding and macro possibilities would really open up more.

06-10-2013, 02:05 AM	#8
snostorm Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA Posts: 1,535	Hi barondla, I'm in !!! I think we should be realistic here, though that seems to be atypical on photo fora. A very well done 45-135mm f4 (3x zoom ) that's collapsible for storage like the 06's 15-45mm would be pretty cool, and with a front element requirement of only around 34mm, it could still use the same 40.5 filter thread of the other system lenses. Anything significantly faster would require a larger diameter front element than the barrels of the present Q system lenses -- f2.8 would need a front element of 48-49mm. f3.2 would need about 42mm. These front elements would be significantly heavier since the area of a 34mm element would be 908 sq mm compared to 1886 sq mm for a f2.8 ( so 49mm has at least over twice as much glass), and 1385 sq mm for an f3.2 (so 42mm has at least over 50% more glass). Even with internal focusing and internal zoom, the build quality of these faster lenses would have to be significantly beefier and more precise than that used in the 06 zoom to keep the elements aligned, and this would add to both additional weight and increase the price. Let's not forget the size of the DA* 50-135 f2.8. Just because this lens is for a smaller format doesn't allow for that much miniaturization since the max aperture of a lens is dependent on FL and entrance pupil (front element) size, not format. All that being said, with and EQ FL range of 250-750mm on the 1/2.3" sensor, f4 is a very practical max aperture IMO. Though this would be reduced to 205-615mm EQ for the rumored 1/1.7" sensor, it would still be fast for this class of long to super tele zoom. For this, I'd definitely consider bundling a somewhat miniaturized Red Dot sight with an integral hot shoe mount and an LCD loupe (with a QR mount that's built into future Q models' body) since it would still be hard to spot a subject a super tele FLx and impractical to hold at arms length. For the loupe mount, all they'd have to do is insert some sheet steel in a frame around the LCD screen and build magnets into the loupe's body with some locating pins and corresponding holes.in the back of the body. I'd also make a removable tripod ring for this lens. They might also be able to design the optics of the loupe so it would be shallower than current models (or make it collapsible). They could also design and sell an optional right angle viewer for this loupe (and incorporate the loupe mount design into the DSLR and super zoom bodies). Especially if these were cross compatible with other Pentax cameras, I think these could be good sellers for Pentax. Scott

06-10-2013, 02:55 PM	#10
snostorm Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA Posts: 1,535	Originally posted by Digitalis Wouldn't it be HILARIOUS if pentax made a minature zoom mirror lens around 300-800mm f/5.6 It would probably be only somewhat larger than a 50mm f/2 lens..and they could include the same 40.5mm filters that they use for the DA* 560mm f/5.6 and D-FA 645 25mm f/4 - the filters could be used on the front of the lens. It would be very cool, but I don't think that miniaturization like this would be possible since I believe that f stop for a cat lens is dependent on the diameter of the primary mirror and the FL of the lens, so it's not related to format at all. If you're talking about 300-800mm EQ, that's a different story because this would be a 53-143mm cat with the current 1/2.3" sensor, and would only need the primary mirror to be less than 30mm in diameter. They could actually probably make it even faster -- an f4 should be possible with the primary mirror at about 36mm. Scott

06-10-2013, 05:36 PM	#11
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by snostorm It would be very cool, but I don't think that miniaturization like this would be possible since I believe that f stop for a cat lens is dependent on the diameter of the primary mirror and the FL of the lens A good point, but consider the fact that Pentax found a way to make the DA40mm f/2.8 even smaller. I think it would be possible without the lens being as large as your typical 600mm f/8 mirror lenses are.

06-10-2013, 09:39 PM	#12
Teddy 738 Forum Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Vancouver BC Posts: 54	Originally posted by barondla I want a wide prime, and macro lens like most here. I also hope Pentax pushes the ultra tele envelope with a leaf shutter, 45-.... AF zoom. This would really benefit wildlife photographers and give Pentax an advantage the others couldn't match. Anyone else interested? thanks barondla Check out the winners of point and shoot contest #66, in compact camera forum. Enter #67. The Q is welcome! @barondla I'm in for the Macro and Telephoto Lenses,espechially if the new Q has that new Sony sensor.

06-11-2013, 04:35 AM	#13
GibbyTheMole Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Iowa Photos: Albums Posts: 2,275	Originally posted by snostorm I think we should be realistic here, though that seems to be atypical on photo fora. A very well done 45-135mm f4 (3x zoom ) that's collapsible for storage like the 06's 15-45mm would be pretty cool, and with a front element requirement of only around 34mm, it could still use the same 40.5 filter thread of the other system lenses. Sounds like a winner to me. I'd buy it! (you know, if I had like... money.)

06-11-2013, 12:58 PM	#15
kenafein Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Southern California Photos: Albums Posts: 4,082	I wouldn't care if the native lens was as large as a DA55-300, but I would want more reach than 135mm.