[Frogfish]

I NEED this sort of focal length ... been wanting it for a long time.

JP

The DA*300 and AFA x1.7 will get you to 510mm ... that's not a big jump at all to 560mm.

These were taken a few days ago with said combo :

300+x1.7=510mm


300+x1.7=510mm


100% crop from 300+x1.7=510mm

[thibs]

Mmm if the 560mm is a budget lens, the DA300+TC may be comparable if not better. And it is more flexible.

[Ishpuini]

Mmm if the 560mm is a budget lens, the DA300+TC may be comparable if not better. And it is more flexible.

Depends on its IQ wide open. The above pictures are all stopped down to f/8, which is required by the TC to get good IQ on this combo. My FA*300/4.5 is similar on the Tamron 1.4x: it starts getting good from f/8 and it's best at f/11, but at f/5.6 it's really not good. The DA560/5.6 might be better wide open? Anyway, let's hope so...

Wim

[ogl]

Mmm if the 560mm is a budget lens, the DA300+TC may be comparable if not better. And it is more flexible.

I doubt. How to make from 300 mm - 784 (560 + 1.4x TC) or 952 mm (560 +1.7x TC)? Don't forget about crop-factor 1.5.
560/5.6 is lens - "must be" lens in system. To satisfy fish, birds and animals shooters.

It's really right focal length IMO...400 mm is not too long. 560 is close to 600 mm. It's sweet spot lenght IMO. To satisfy the fan of long telelenses.

---

Last edited by ogl; 02-23-2012 at 05:40 AM.

[garyk]

My hats off to the Marketing dept. of Ricoh. This thread is doing exactly what they wanted. If it is even close to what is speculated here it will be laughed out of the business. It cannot be brought out at this price point either. It would be a disaster Ricoh would never recover from. The more I read the more I just do not see how it can ever come about.

[ogl]

My hats off to the Marketing dept. of Ricoh. This thread is doing exactly what they wanted. If it is even close to what is speculated here it will be laughed out of the business. It cannot be brought out at this price point either. It would be a disaster Ricoh would never recover from. The more I read the more I just do not see how it can ever come about.

Clear your idea, please...DA560/5.6 - anybody who need it will buy it this year and will be happy..What are you talking about?
Every manufacturer wants only one thing - to sell product.

[eddie1960]

Worse than that--- we have been looking at a mock up and speculating on the features.

Well we have more to go on than the endless FF speculations

[Frogfish]

Depends on its IQ wide open. The above pictures are all stopped down to f/8, which is required by the TC to get good IQ on this combo. My FA*300/4.5 is similar on the Tamron 1.4x: it starts getting good from f/8 and it's best at f/11, but at f/5.6 it's really not good. The DA560/5.6 might be better wide open? Anyway, let's hope so...

Wim

Hi Wim. f8 is not required to get good IQ on this combo. It starts at f6.7 with the TC it is still excellent, however at f8 I'm getting a touch more DoF (when shooting birds) and that is now my default setting for this combo.

I didn't realise the FA* wasn't great with a TC wide open. The DA* is superb wide open and that's most often where I use it (unless with a TC for birds, or in this case yachts)

[Frogfish]

My hats off to the Marketing dept. of Ricoh. This thread is doing exactly what they wanted. If it is even close to what is speculated here it will be laughed out of the business. It cannot be brought out at this price point either. It would be a disaster Ricoh would never recover from. The more I read the more I just do not see how it can ever come about.

I know 22 pages is a lot to go through .... but you wouldn't have made that post if you had.

Canon's 400/5.6 is the right price ($1,200) and FL for that market, Pentax's 560/5.6 will be perfect for this, it's what anyone who shoots birds/wildlife with a Pentax has been waiting for.

[derekkite]

A Bigma is less than $2k. The 300 f4, which by most accounts is a pretty nice lens is about the same. If the design description is close, it has fewer elements than most long tele's. I'd expect somewhere short of $3k as a price range.

[jpzk]

The DA*300 and AFA x1.7 will get you to 510mm ... that's not a big jump at all to 560mm.

These were taken a few days ago with said combo :

300+x1.7=510mm


300+x1.7=510mm


100% crop from 300+x1.7=510mm

As a matter of fact, I knew that: I have this TC !

I did take several dozens of shots using that combo (300/4 + TC 1.7X) and it must be my bad technique because I hardly ever obtained sharp pictures with it.
Most of those shots were of birds at a fair distance, maybe that would account for the difference between a contrasty ship on a clear day vs. birds at a fair distance under mediocre light conditions.

I still believe that a prime lens, hence 560mm, on its own would have better IQ than a lens + TC.

Time will tell how this will develop once we have reviews from users "in the real world".

JP

[jpzk]

Mmm if the 560mm is a budget lens, the DA300+TC may be comparable if not better. And it is more flexible.

Hopefully this will not be a "budget" lens. I expect some good IQ but, we don't know that yet.

[jpzk]

Canon's 400/5.6 is the right price ($1,200) and FL for that market, Pentax's 560/5.6 will be perfect for this, it's what anyone who shoots birds/wildlife with a Pentax has been waiting for.

(Bold added).

Well ... that's what I was talking about earlier.

JP

[Ishpuini]

Hi Wim. f8 is not required to get good IQ on this combo. It starts at f6.7 with the TC it is still excellent, however at f8 I'm getting a touch more DoF (when shooting birds) and that is now my default setting for this combo.

I didn't realise the FA* wasn't great with a TC wide open. The DA* is superb wide open and that's most often where I use it (unless with a TC for birds, or in this case yachts)

The IQ wide open not being great on the FA*300/4.5 + 1.4x TC is probably as much related to the TC as to the lens. Note however that I might be a bit picky... The combo is still better than the average telezoom of course, and some may even find it more than acceptable wide open. Without TC, however, the lens just performs much better wide open, and with a visible difference (no pixel peeping). Starting at f/8 is when you no longer see this difference in IQ with or without TC, which is "important" when showing pictures with TC and without TC next to one another. I believe that consistency in a series is key.

However, I prefer to use the my 300mm at f/8 as well for the same reasons as you, regardless the addition of the TC.

I must admit I never used the DA*300/4 so I might have jumped to the conclusion of its similarity to the FA*300/4.5 in terms of IQ. No... that's a lie. I did use it for two or three shots once during a Pentax demo in a local store. I wanted to find out whether it worked on my Tamron 1.4x. I wasn't impressed, but that was mainly because of the SDM AF not locking focus on the TC (I had hoped this "problem" would have been for the first two DA* lenses only, that Pentax had "fixed" it in the DA*300/4). I didn't really compare IQ with what I got from my FA*300/4.5. Of course, on the F1.7xAF converter you wouldn't have that AF problem. I used to own that one as well BTW, but found it not very practical, hence I preferred keeping my Tamron 1.4x (on the screw driven tele lenses I use) and sold the F1.7x on the marketplace here.

I'm not going to get me a F1.7x again (prices have gone up too much for that one), so the DA560/5.6 is certainly an option for me. Looking forward to using it some day...

Wim

[nicolas1970i]

I'm just back from a trip to Thailand where I was shooting the whole time (birds) with a Sigma AF 300/2.8 + 2x TC (its dedicated EX APO TC).
A few reflections after a month' use:

. as ogl said, 560/600mm is an ideal focal lenght for that: not too short, and not too long either - you can frame the smaller birds that you tend to shoot from closer range just right, same as the bigger ones that won't let you come too close. You get anything from "portraits" to shots where the bird is part of the scenery, so definitely the right FL in my opinion.

. when using the Sigma with TC, and I believe the same would be true of any lens + TC combination, the body (K-5) does not see the effective focal lenght, but only that of the lens - in my case 300mm, instead of 600mm. Therefore, Shake Reduction is ineffective (I would tend to think it over-compensates): in the end I shot handheld (in TAv mode, shutter speed 1/640, down to 1/200 or 1/160 if I could somehow rest the whole against a tree trunk, or whatever I could find - obviously I was often in the ISO 500-6400 range, lots of PP to do afterwards!) and with the SR turned-off, because the results were better that way. In that respect, the DA 560/5.6 would be in practice 2 to 3 stop faster (equivalent to the benefits of SR) than my makeshift 600/5.6, at the same f-stops.

. Other advantage of the DA560 over my Sigma 300/2.8 and its TC, the AF should be faster: my K-5 has to drive the shaft of the TC, which in turn has to drive that of the lens. For those who use their DA* or FA* 300s with the 1.7x AF TC, the AF is only partial, and you have to pre-focus manually. I used to use it with my A*300/2.8, and I didn't find it that easy at all.

I also have the FA*600/4, which I can't take on my trips abroad because of its bulk, and at first I thought (before I knew its specs) that the DA560 could be a replacement for it, and the Sigma 500/4.5. However, with a f/5.6 max aperture, and the corresponding "low" weight, it is the perfect alternative to my Sigma 300/2.8, which I only use with the 2x TC. If I want a 300mm FL, I have an FA*300/4.5, or a Sigma 100-300/4, which are a lot easier to handle (albeit not the same quality wide open, but with the K-5 high ISO capabilities one can stop down without too much hesitation).
I'll be waiting for the first tests of that DA560 for confirmation of its performance (I'm a little dubious about it being allegedly optimised for far-away subjects, often you shoot birds that are 3-4m to 10m away), and if it is good I'll probably sell the Sigma 300/2.8.