[derekkite]

I'm apparently not communicating well because I'm not disagreeing with you. I agree that a consumer 400mm zoom is necessary, and both Nikon and Canon have had them for a while to great success. But I'm thinking long term and the secondary and tertiary effects of the pro f/4 zoom. Here's the difference as I see it long term.

....

Now magnify that across many, many shooters. More money brought into the system, huge attention and legitimacy across the professional side of the industry (which is what drives the brand perception - that and marketing are the only reason Canikon continue to sell garbage entry level cameras over the K-30 and K-50). Which then leads to more 3rd party support, for example Sigma's eye gets caught and the 120-300 f/2.8 SPORT is now made available for K-mount, bringing even more pro/advanced amateur shooters to the brand - further increases brand legitimacy. More money = more R&D, more marketing, and the 135-380mm f/4-5.6 eventually brought into the mix as well (yes, later than this seemingly imminent arrival).

I'm thinking long term. Not what *I* personally want in a lens right now, because yes, the f/4-5.6 is absolutely more appealing and practical to me personally. But I am not what matters individually to the long term prosperity of the brand and its attractiveness to those who still shun Pentax with "Pentax?! They still make cameras?!"

We have the K-3 guys. It's undisputed that it kicks the crap out of every crop camera out there, competing with some at the FF level for IQ and features. But the lenses aren't there to persuade the vast majority of pros from giving the K mount a chance. How many times have you heard "I wish the K-3 had an F/EF mount." ?

Just the view from my fox hole, anyway. I won't belabor the point further.

....

-Heie

That is what they are doing with the 645DII. And they will make a profit with it.

[GlassJunkie]

Absolutely.... They could "pass" on FF... And have a "Pro" platform. As Heie infers, the Large Aperture Glass gas often been considered "Pro". Likely so. Pentax DA* kind of blows that up. Need a longer macro too...

[rangercarp]

They could "pass" on FF... And have a "Pro" platform

I think FF provides a needed bridge between apsC and 645d. Filling the gap would help sell more 645's IMHO.

[jogiba]

I think FF provides a needed bridge between apsC and 645d. Filling the gap would help sell more 645's IMHO.

So a full frame Pentax that works with all 25 million Pentax SLR lenses would help sell more 645's that don't work with any of the 25 million lenses ? Really ?

[Reptilezz]

I know this isnt really on topic with what you guys are talking about now, but i just thought id mention that the canon 100-400 isnt truly 400mm. Its actually closer to 380. I cant remember where i read it but maybe pentax have noticed that and dont think its fair to call it 400mm? Dunno

[rangercarp]

So a full frame Pentax that works with all 25 million Pentax SLR lenses would help sell more 645's that don't work with any of the 25 million lenses ? Really ?

Yes, it really would. A FF Pentax would prevent many of the defectors who head over to CaNikon land because we do not have a FF. By keeping those users in the fold, a small number of them would later upgrade to 645d. K5/K3 to 645d is a bridge too far. Kind of like jumping form a 7100 to a 1DX. You need a stop in between.

I do not disagree with your lens argument; it is a valid point. Still, it does not negate the idea of a bridge product.

[Uluru]

FF as a bridge for Pentax.
FF+bridge ... A Pentax Fridge

But on a more serious note, I'm quite concerned there is no bridge in between Q and the K-3.
Users are lamenting big time because the difference between the Q and the K-3 is too wide for many to swallow.

[rangercarp]

But on a more serious note, I'm quite concerned there is no bridge in between Q and the K-3. Users are lamenting big time because the difference between the Q and the K-3 is too wide for many to swallow.

Doesn't the k-50 fit nicely in that gap? I do think Pentax needs a true entry level DSLR (the k-500 is only available in certain markets and really is not entry level).

[Uluru]

Doesn't the k-50 fit nicely in that gap? I do think Pentax needs a true entry level DSLR (the k-500 is only available in certain markets and really is not entry level).

No, users are lamenting for 1" or m 4/3 sensor.
Something needs to bridge the gap between the 1/1.7" sensor and APS-C, because the gap is ways bigger than APS-C to 645 gap.

[rangercarp]

No, users are lamenting for 1" or m 4/3 sensor.
Something needs to bridge the gap between the 1/1.7" sensor and APS-C, because the gap is ways bigger than APS-C to 645 gap.

Okay, that makes sense. If they were to do that it would "have to" use existing lenses. Another new mount and well, we might as well be Sony.

[liquid0]

Have the 55-300 HD WR. Great lens. Issue is reach... Need 400 Cropped and hand held. Could get a hernia with the FA*300 F2.8 and a TC. Tripod only. Too old here... I use the 55-300 HD WR as my walk-around. My wife needs the 135-380 (400 better) so she can dump the Siggy, OK IQ but bigger than she is. Pentax "should" as history would suggest, get her a smaller/better for APS-C. She wants a 2 lens solution (with overlap to drop the number of lens changes. 18-270 SDM and 135-380+ for a 2 lens kit. We have the "WR" kit for walk arounds (18-135WR and 55-300 WR) as we live in wet Florida, but limited for birding, so I use a FA*300 F2.8 and a Tammy PZ 1.4x 0r 2.0x (until the HD comes). We'll check IQ and dump the lesser IQ 1.4.

On IQ with the Tamrons: lose 5-10% on contrast, else is ok, so PS can correct in 10 secs. NO sharpness issue with 300 or 60-250. We have studied the 1.4 in depth...

The 55-300 HD WR is a decent lense, but it would be allot better if it had a silent motor especially for birding.

[GordonZA]

I found the email from the South African Pentax importer... I had asked him if he had more information on the 100-400 and the price for the 560mm, this was his response:

The 560mm is R72999 ex VAT. I have a demo model coming through in December for 2 weeks if you would like to give it a try? Pentax have not announced the 150—450 yet but it is on their development timeline for late 2014. No technical specs yet though.

Interesting that HE said it's expected to be a 150-450.... his inside info as a distributor?

[asahi man]

I found the email from the South African Pentax importer... I had asked him if he had more information on the 100-400 and the price for the 560mm, this was his response:



Interesting that HE said it's expected to be a 150-450.... his inside info as a distributor?

Hey,yes he is right.
Internal it is a 150-450mm for full frame.
Best regards

---------- Post added 04-22-14 at 04:47 PM ----------

I found the email from the South African Pentax importer... I had asked him if he had more information on the 100-400 and the price for the 560mm, this was his response:



Interesting that HE said it's expected to be a 150-450.... his inside info as a distributor?

It was,month ago,on the same list with the converter and the 90 mm for 645.

[Miguel]

Hey,yes he is right.
Internal it is a 150-450mm for full frame.

This is a great focal range that would really add a lot of value to the K-3. What's taking Ricoh so long? In a fair part of the world this is peak wildlife and sports shooting season. The back orders on the Tamron 150-600mm lens are significant.

M

[Uluru]

This is a great focal range that would really add a lot of value to the K-3. What's taking Ricoh so long?...

Developing an all new lens motor and a solid camera platform to mount on those lenses?
SDM is a goner. Welcome new tech.