Pentax 560mm ?

Sandy Hancock · 07-10-2012, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

What other lenses on the roadmap suggest FF? All says strictly APS and neither do the focal lenghts suggest FF.

The DA* zoom at the bottom of the page is a classical focal length range for 24x36 - roughly reproducing the angles of view of the current DA*16-50 on APS-C.
Four existing DA* lenses cover full frame, so there is a lazy chance this could too.

Anyway, enough thread hijacking. Back to the 560mm bazooka

french_mike · 07-10-2012, 11:35 PM

i dont think its gonna be a DA* lense because of the red rubber at the mount, like the WR lenses but mor the "star"

Mehlsack · 07-11-2012, 03:07 AM

I think this thing is a very early prototype, or maybe only an eye-catcher, to have something "to show", I would not bet on any of these specs, 560mm yes, maybe telescopic( the length suggests that) but other than that? Nothing...

And I cant think that pentax would be THAT stupid not to seal its biggest and most "wildlife" lens....(just my thought)

**Pål Jensen** · 07-11-2012, 06:18 AM

Originally posted by Sandy Hancock

The DA* zoom at the bottom of the page is a classical focal length range for 24x36 - roughly reproducing the angles of view of the current DA*16-50 on APS-C.

A 16-85/2.8 (approx) a classic range for FF? It also clearly state by both symbols and color coding that it is an APS lens.

**Pål Jensen** · 07-11-2012, 06:19 AM

Originally posted by french_mike

i dont think its gonna be a DA* lense because of the red rubber at the mount, like the WR lenses but mor the "star"

It says DA (no star). It won't be as expensive as traditional ED IF lenses.

Asahiflex · 07-11-2012, 06:53 AM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

It says DA (no star). It won't be as expensive as traditional ED IF lenses.

It makes no sense at all. Bringing out a non-WR supertele would be super stupid for a brand which is now heavily advertising it is WR (see the K-30). If it's non-WR though I can say nothing else than...

**Pål Jensen** · 07-11-2012, 09:21 AM

Originally posted by Asahiflex

It makes no sense at all. Bringing out a non-WR supertele would be super stupid for a brand which is now heavily advertising it is WR (see the K-30). If it's non-WR though I can say nothing else than...

Who says it is non WR?

RonHendriks1966 · 07-11-2012, 09:44 AM

Originally posted by Asahiflex

It makes no sense at all. Bringing out a non-WR supertele would be super stupid for a brand which is now heavily advertising it is WR (see the K-30). If it's non-WR though I can say nothing else than...

Why wouldn't it be WR, just I don't expect it to be DA*.

Clavius · 07-11-2012, 09:47 AM

I think there's a misconception here that all WR lenses are DA*, which is incorrect. For example the DA 18-135 has WR too, but no *. So, the red ring on the 560 prototype can still point towards WR, even though it doesn't have the * designation.

Asahiflex · 07-11-2012, 09:52 AM

Sorry I meant that it should have DA*-level weather resistance.

Blue · 07-11-2012, 09:59 AM

Originally posted by Asahiflex

Sorry I meant that it should have DA*-level weather resistance.

Given that it is a tele and not a zoom or macro, it should not be too difficult to make it a DA* unless special elements are cost prohibitive but really doubt that would be the case.

audiobomber · 07-11-2012, 10:00 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Sandy Hancock

What makes you think it's telescopic?

Probably the announcement from Pentax:

Model name (tentative): smc PENTAX-DA 560mm F5.6
•Unifocal super-telephoto lens for use with K mount interchangeable-lens digital cameras
•Sharp, well-defined images — particularly with distant subjects — thanks to the adoption of optics used in astronomical telescopes
•Market launch scheduled for 2012

and this:

french_mike · 07-11-2012, 10:03 AM

what are those dots ?

Blue · 07-11-2012, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by french_mike

what are those dots ?

There were speculations about this early in the thread but nothing definitive was determined.

ElJamoquio · 07-11-2012, 10:56 AM

I think the primary speculation was a collapsible lens for ease of transport.

07-11-2012, 10:00 AM - 1 Like	#672
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Sandy Hancock What makes you think it's telescopic? Probably the announcement from Pentax: Model name (tentative): smc PENTAX-DA 560mm F5.6 •Unifocal super-telephoto lens for use with K mount interchangeable-lens digital cameras •Sharp, well-defined images — particularly with distant subjects — thanks to the adoption of optics used in astronomical telescopes •Market launch scheduled for 2012 and this: Last edited by audiobomber; 07-11-2012 at 10:16 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DA 50mm, DA 560mm, D-FA 645 90mm to be revealed at CP+	Adam	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	56	02-10-2012 08:56 AM
Leitz 560mm f/6.8 Telyt-R - first shots and impression	Piotr	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	1	05-11-2009 02:42 AM

07-10-2012, 06:29 PM	#661
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,275	Originally posted by Pål Jensen What other lenses on the roadmap suggest FF? All says strictly APS and neither do the focal lenghts suggest FF. The DA* zoom at the bottom of the page is a classical focal length range for 24x36 - roughly reproducing the angles of view of the current DA16-50 on APS-C. Four existing DA lenses cover full frame, so there is a lazy chance this could too. Anyway, enough thread hijacking. Back to the 560mm bazooka

07-10-2012, 11:35 PM	#662
french_mike Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Ireland and France Posts: 167	i dont think its gonna be a DA* lense because of the red rubber at the mount, like the WR lenses but mor the "star"

07-11-2012, 03:07 AM	#663
Mehlsack Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Innsbruck Posts: 283	I think this thing is a very early prototype, or maybe only an eye-catcher, to have something "to show", I would not bet on any of these specs, 560mm yes, maybe telescopic( the length suggests that) but other than that? Nothing... And I cant think that pentax would be THAT stupid not to seal its biggest and most "wildlife" lens....(just my thought)

07-11-2012, 06:18 AM	#664
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by Sandy Hancock The DA* zoom at the bottom of the page is a classical focal length range for 24x36 - roughly reproducing the angles of view of the current DA*16-50 on APS-C. A 16-85/2.8 (approx) a classic range for FF? It also clearly state by both symbols and color coding that it is an APS lens.

07-11-2012, 06:19 AM	#665
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by french_mike i dont think its gonna be a DA* lense because of the red rubber at the mount, like the WR lenses but mor the "star" It says DA (no star). It won't be as expensive as traditional ED IF lenses.

07-11-2012, 06:53 AM	#666
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	Originally posted by Pål Jensen It says DA (no star). It won't be as expensive as traditional ED IF lenses. It makes no sense at all. Bringing out a non-WR supertele would be super stupid for a brand which is now heavily advertising it is WR (see the K-30). If it's non-WR though I can say nothing else than...

07-11-2012, 09:21 AM	#667
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by Asahiflex It makes no sense at all. Bringing out a non-WR supertele would be super stupid for a brand which is now heavily advertising it is WR (see the K-30). If it's non-WR though I can say nothing else than... Who says it is non WR?

07-11-2012, 09:44 AM	#668
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by Asahiflex It makes no sense at all. Bringing out a non-WR supertele would be super stupid for a brand which is now heavily advertising it is WR (see the K-30). If it's non-WR though I can say nothing else than... Why wouldn't it be WR, just I don't expect it to be DA*.

07-11-2012, 09:47 AM	#669
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	I think there's a misconception here that all WR lenses are DA, which is incorrect. For example the DA 18-135 has WR too, but no . So, the red ring on the 560 prototype can still point towards WR, even though it doesn't have the * designation.

07-11-2012, 09:52 AM	#670
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	Sorry I meant that it should have DA*-level weather resistance.

07-11-2012, 09:59 AM	#671
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Asahiflex Sorry I meant that it should have DA-level weather resistance. Given that it is a tele and not a zoom or macro, it should not be too difficult to make it a DA unless special elements are cost prohibitive but really doubt that would be the case.

07-11-2012, 10:03 AM	#673
french_mike Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Ireland and France Posts: 167	what are those dots ?

07-11-2012, 10:31 AM	#674
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by french_mike what are those dots ? There were speculations about this early in the thread but nothing definitive was determined.

07-11-2012, 10:56 AM	#675
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873 Original Poster	I think the primary speculation was a collapsible lens for ease of transport.