[mee]

I'm of the general opinion that changing format is not an upgrade path but a sidestep.....
You don't upgrade formats, you change them....

In the change there are upgrades..

[Mistral75]

To those of you who were wondering about the price of the 'High Magnification Super Zoom' a.k.a. 'Tele Zoom', a mock-up of which was on display at Photokina, Canon will announce its direct competitor, the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM, in a couple of days at a suggested retail price of $2,199.

[totsmuyco]

Wow! The pressure is on! Come on Pentax, give us the lens and let it be a much better version!

P.S. please don't let it be so expensive. Thanks

[Zygonyx]

To those of you who were wondering about the price of the 'High Magnification Super Zoom' a.k.a. 'Tele Zoom', a mock-up of which was on display at Photokina, Canon will announce its direct competitor, the EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS II USM, in a couple of days at a suggested retail price of $2,199.

Will this version be another "pump-lens" ?

[thibs]

Wow! The pressure is on! Come on Pentax, give us the lens and let it be a much better version!

P.S. please don't let it be so expensive. Thanks

It will be about the same.

That the price to pay (so to speak) to get future (FF or not) competitive DSLR from Pentax.

[VoiceOfReason]

If it were at that price I will stick with my Sigma.

[woodywesty]

If it were at that price I will stick with my Sigma.

You get what you pay for. If its close to the Canon then it will be close in price.

[Mistral75]

Will this version be another "pump-lens" ?

No, it will include a conventional, rotation-type zoom ring.

[VoiceOfReason]

You get what you pay for. If its close to the Canon then it will be close in price.

There comes a point at which price/performance gains really aren't worth it. I'm fairly happy with what I have right now lens wise, so while I would like something long and WR at over 2k for a lens that might give me a what, 10%, 20% performance gain on prints, not so much on digital publishing, really isn't worth it. With the SIgma I know the sweet spot for pixel peeping sharpness, and the rest I can hammer out in post. That's why I don't have all that many first party lenses, I can't justify the performance gains. Now if Ricoh got the Tamron 150-600, slapped WR and a Pentax name tag on it, and raised the price 200-300 then I could see that for the extra reach and WR.

[thibs]

There comes a point at which price/performance gains really aren't worth it. I'm fairly happy with what I have right now lens wise, so while I would like something long and WR at over 2k for a lens that might give me a what, 10%, 20% performance gain on prints, not so much on digital publishing, really isn't worth it. With the SIgma I know the sweet spot for pixel peeping sharpness, and the rest I can hammer out in post. That's why I don't have all that many first party lenses, I can't justify the performance gains. Now if Ricoh got the Tamron 150-600, slapped WR and a Pentax name tag on it, and raised the price 200-300 then I could see that for the extra reach and WR.

I hear ya but the point of a couple guys here is that performance does not equal sharpness, even taking into account your post techniques.
It might be fine for you (really I mean it), but that doesn't change the validity of the said point.

Pentax lenses just are no sharpness optimized (till now at least) lenses. It isn't surprising recent Sigma lenses suits you more.

[RuiC]

I did another size estimation of the gold-ring Pentax lens to another currently in the lineup, since their photos were shot in a more similar angle:



if my estimates here are close to real then there's a good chance it's really going to be a 70-200 f2.8

58mm is for the filter screw diameter !! Not the front element !

[RuiC]

I did another size estimation of the gold-ring Pentax lens to another currently in the lineup, since their photos were shot in a more similar angle:



if my estimates here are close to real then there's a good chance it's really going to be a 70-200 f2.8

Either it's incredibly large for an f/4 lens, or it's indeed an f/2.8. I didn't had a measuring tape with me - this is my eyestimation, but I'm pretty confident in it

80-200mm

upcoming FF camera? is it such fantasy?

The 70-200 f2.8 zoom is a FF lens !

I also think the camera will have high specifications. Ricoh would otherwise have planned to launch a 24-105/120mm f/4 or a 28-75 f/3.5-5.6 together with it, not a 70-200ish f/2.8 lens.

Short Focal Length Intermediate Long Focal Length Extremity Focal Length Extremity FNO. 2.9 3.0 2.9 f 70.21 118.15 198.32

F 2.9 3.0 2.9

70-200 f2.8 optics :

[Mistral75]

[B]
(...)

Short Focal Length Intermediate Long Focal Length Extremity Focal Length Extremity FNO. 2.9 3.0 2.9 f 70.21 118.15 198.32

F 2.9 3.0 2.9

70-200 f2.8 optics :

As surprising as this might be, the optical formula you are showing and the corresponding patent are that of 06 Telephoto Zoom (15-45mm f/2.8 in Q mount). In the patent's description, 5 embodiments correspond to 06 Telephoto Zoom (Tables 2, 5, 8, 11 et 17) and one to a 70-200mm covering the 24x36 image circle (Table 14).

See Publication Images for further details (this is the US extension of the Japanese patent).

[robjmitchell]

As surprising as this might be, the optical formula you are showing and the corresponding patent are that of 06 Telephoto Zoom (15-45mm f/2.8 in Q mount). In the patent's description, 5 embodiments correspond to 06 Telephoto Zoom (Tables 2, 5, 8, 11 et 17) and one to a 70-200mm covering the 24x36 image circle (Table 14).

See Publication Images for further details (this is the US extension of the Japanese patent).

That is clearly not the optical formula of the Q 06 zoom, check the lens database where the 06 formula is shown.

[Mistral75]

That is clearly not the optical formula of the Q 06 zoom, check the lens database where the 06 formula is shown.

Indeed, I expressed myself wrongly. Let me rephrase it for the sake of clarification.

The optical formula above is described in a patent request filled on March 10, 2011 (an eternity in the digital world), the patent itself having been granted on October 4th, 2012.

In the patent's description, 5 embodiments (see Tables 2, 5, 8, 11 et 17) correspond to a 15-45mm f/2.8 covering the image circle of a 1/1.7" sensor and only one (see Table 14) to a 70-200mm covering the image circle of a 24x36 sensor.

See Publication Images for further details (this is the US extension of the Japanese patent).

I therefore consider the 70-200mm in the patent to be some kind of 'red herring' and the patent itself to be the basis on which the Q's 06 Telephoto Zoom has been further developed.