[eurostar]

But a 1.4 TC shouldn't cost much more than $300 and would probably have sold better than either the 15 limited or the 60-250, the other products announced at Photokina 2008. So why did Pentax decide not to release their TC?

Maybe because they are not able to make it work reliably and not random like the Kenko 1,5x?

[Blue]

Pentax's failure to release the TC promised two years ago at Photokina is a great mystery. It's understandable why they have failed to make good on their lens road map promise of a 400 f4 lens: that piece of glass would be by a wide margin their most expensive product, and Pentax seems uncomfortable selling anything for much more than $1,500. But a 1.4 TC shouldn't cost much more than $300 and would probably have sold better than either the 15 limited or the 60-250, the other products announced at Photokina 2008. So why did Pentax decide not to release their TC?

There NEVER was a 400mm lens on the road map. The road map never went beyond 300mm. Plus the super tele had a line through it and 300mm. Show me otherwise.

[audiobomber]

the super tele had a line through it and 300mm.

I don't think the placement of the box on the 300mm line means the lens was 300mm. There's no dot on the line, and supertelephoto indicates that it would be above 300mm, according to pretty much everyone I've heard discuss it.

[blende8]

The plan was, if my information is correct, a 560mm tele.
But they investigated and came to the conclusion that not enough people would buy it to make profit. So they canceled it.
This I was told at the Photokina.

The newer rumor is a 400mm lens next year, but nobody knew if it will really come into existence. Let's hope!

[philbaum]

The plan was, if my information is correct, a 560mm tele.
But they investigated and came to the conclusion that not enough people would buy it to make profit. So they canceled it.
This I was told at the Photokina.

The newer rumor is a 400mm lens next year, but nobody knew if it will really come into existence. Let's hope!

Sigma has a HSM 500mm, f4.5 lens for pentax thats in our lens database. Gets a 9.0 rating, very high.

But the cost is msrp of $3500 with some buying it for $2400 and others at $4000.

Weight is 3 lbs.

But i don't see a lot of people running out to buy it or talking about it on the lens forum.

If i wanted to do birding, i would get it.

So why should Pentax duplicate this lens when they have other priorities. Not wanting to be argumentative, but a small company has to be wise in where to place their assets. I do want the TC although my 1.4 Tamron seems to work ok when i use it with the DA300. Also on flashes, Pentax ought to just recommend the METZ and put it on their WEB site so its official. I have the smaller one and its fine. don't use it outside so don't need it WR.

IMO,

[Blue]

I don't think the placement of the box on the 300mm line means the lens was 300mm. There's no dot on the line, and supertelephoto indicates that it would be above 300mm, according to pretty much everyone I've heard discuss it.

What exactly on that Map indicates it to be above 300mm when there is nothing above 300mm on the map? Why would the put the box on the dotted line and not mean it? They put everything else in the appropriate place. There have been tons of threads speculating about a 400mm. However, they called it a DA super tele and not even a DA* super tele. If the * was there, I would wonder if they were working on a DA* 300/2.8. They could very well be working an a DA 400/5.6 based on the old FA 400/5.6 but its a big piece of glass and a bit hard to hand hold due to the speed so a 400/4 would be more practical since a monopod or tripod would be needed anyway. However, I have seen nothing from Pentax or affiliates that indicate a longer than 300mm lens in the making. They may not have even decided what they were going to do when they put that on the map. I believe the 400 was wishful thinking by many.

[Blue]

The plan was, if my information is correct, a 560mm tele.
But they investigated and came to the conclusion that not enough people would buy it to make profit. So they canceled it.
This I was told at the Photokina.

The newer rumor is a 400mm lens next year, but nobody knew if it will really come into existence. Let's hope!

If they plan to roll it out in 1 year, it better be more than a rumor somewhere.

[eurostar]

The newer rumor is a 400mm lens next year, but nobody knew if it will really come into existence. Let's hope!

A 400mm fits with the Pentax policy of adapting old FA lenses to the digital crop factor.

As 600mm was the longer lens then, I expect today either a 400mm prime or a 170-400 zoom. Both f/5,6, I fear.

[eurostar]

They could very well be working an a DA 400/5.6 based on the old FA 400/5.6 but its a big piece of glass and a bit hard to hand hold due to the speed so a 400/4 would be more practical since a monopod or tripod would be needed anyway

The FA*400/5,6 is not heavy or big to hand hold at all.

On the contrary, a 400/4 would have a large front element and would be quite heavy. But it would be useful to be coupled with an AF rear coverter...

[Christopher M.W.T]

The plan was, if my information is correct, a 560mm tele.
But they investigated and came to the conclusion that not enough people would buy it to make profit. So they canceled it.
This I was told at the Photokina.

The newer rumor is a 400mm lens next year, but nobody knew if it will really come into existence. Let's hope!

I can understand that, but whats their excuse for delaying the teleconverter?


I find it annoying that at the latest Photokina nobody asked any of these questions.

[Blue]

The FA*400/5,6 is not heavy or big to hand hold at all.

On the contrary, a 400/4 would have a large front element and would be quite heavy. But it would be useful to be coupled with an AF rear coverter...

I wasn't arguing that the f4 wouldn't be bigger. My point was that a lens that comes with a tripod ring may as well be an f4 or even better be based on the A* f2.8. The FA 400/5.6 is 1140 grams compared to 1240 grams for the A 400/5.6. While I can hand hold it on very bright days, I don't buy it when some one tells me they can hand hold it as a primary technique. Both are heavier than the DA* 300/4. Furthermore, the A 400 was a better lens optically than the FA 400. Both were big and slow.

Edit: I would guess a DA* 400/4 may be ~ $3500 but a f2.8 would probably be double that.

[Blue]

I can understand that, but whats their excuse for delaying the teleconverter?


I find it annoying that at the latest Photokina nobody asked any of these questions.

Actually someone did and they got a surprised look and Pentax acted like they had never heard of a 400.

[mattdm]

I can understand that, but whats their excuse for delaying the teleconverter?


I find it annoying that at the latest Photokina nobody asked any of these questions.

I'm not sure it would have helped. They're not going to give out any secret information that they hadn't planned to release publicly. In fact, the people that the general public can talk to at the booth probably don't know anything that isn't public information.

[Christopher M.W.T]

I'm not sure it would have helped. They're not going to give out any secret information that they hadn't planned to release publicly. In fact, the people that the general public can talk to at the booth probably don't know anything that isn't public information.

I can't see what's so super secretive about a Teleconverter :P unless it breaks the laws of physics.

An indication of there P-Tax is heading would be nice.

[blende8]

Of course we asked about the TC.
They said, as I already wrote, that it would be quite expensive, perhaps about 400 Euro. Pentax Japan does not seem to think that it is profitable. But it is high on the wish-list, so there is hope.