[jatrax]

If things go well for Pentax in the future the use of the 20 million legacy lenses will be for the loyalest of fans (and/or hipsters in plaids) Everyone else will try to have the latest and greatest...

That is really profound, and something many of us here tend to forget. New users are going to come to Pentax for NEW cameras and lenses, not legacy stuff. It matters very little that we think a used FA 31mm is reason enough to own a Pentax. Many (most?) new users are not going to be interested in old used film lenses, they want to see what the latest and greatest is.

I am not sure we realize how important these two new lenses (and the 24-70 f/2.8 ish) are to Pentax. IMHO, literally make or break. If they fall flat it shows Ricoh is not capable of competing and that's the end. No excuses, no "Hoya did it", no "R&D budget was cut", no "Pentax was struggling and the project got shelved". No excuses. This is all on Ricoh for good or bad. I have high hopes but time will tell.

[rawr]

Another way to look at the cost of the Pentax lens is to look at the next step up in zooms, as offered by rivals:

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II Lens - USD$6299
Canon EF 200-400mm f/4L IS USM Lens with Internal 1.4x Extender - USD$10999

In the Pentax 150-450 f4.5-5.6, you almost get everything those lenses offer, for a fraction of the price!

[monochrome]

And by the way, if you can't afford the lens Pentax isn't making it for you. They are building it for people who can afford it, and have high expectations.

All price debate should end after this incisive response. But it won't.

Because envy.

[D1N0]

The lens is not too expensive, people have to little money or a mean old wife.

[Kunzite]

I had an opinion about the price. Only an opinion. But the fact that I have this opinion seems to disturb some people. I wouldn't continue this debate, but the fact that someone consider that he can tell me what to think and what to say make me a little upset.

And I had a different opinion about the price (and what means to have a cheaper product instead of this one). That's all, nothing personal and no censorship involved. I'm sorry if it seemed otherwise.

I am not sure we realize how important these two new lenses (and the 24-70 f/2.8 ish) are to Pentax. IMHO, literally make or break. If they fall flat it shows Ricoh is not capable of competing and that's the end. No excuses, no "Hoya did it", no "R&D budget was cut", no "Pentax was struggling and the project got shelved". No excuses. This is all on Ricoh for good or bad. I have high hopes but time will tell.

Indeed, they are important (and the 15-30, too); Pentax is moving one step further/higher-end.
And they need this. Volumes are shrinking, if they want to survive they need high end/higher margin products - to make up for volume with value, and to make the K-mount overall more attractive, fighting the downward trends. If they want to be taken seriously they need high end products. If they want to keep their best spending customers (instead of having them migrate to Canikonwhatever) they need high end products.
The alternative? Shrink and die.

[Zygonyx]

the lens is not too expensive, people have to little money or a mean old wife.

lol !!!

Contrats OJGoreng !
+1 with Stavri, jatrax and Kunzite !
We all have the chance/opportunity to contribue to Pentax's success if we want it !

[OJGoreng]

I personally learned to skim through long posts and search only for pictures and links. Congrats on your purchase, create an album for the 150-450 shots on you Flickr for all of us to see when you get a chance. Regards.

I definitely will. I just took it into the field for a couple of hours, and so far it seems to closely match my expectations (which might just be confirmation bias, but anyway)... Highly preliminary first-impressions review:

• IQ not completely all the way up there with the DA*300 but pretty darned close, and @450mm it is significantly sharper than the 300mm with converter; that alone makes it a keeper for me, because I mainly got it for the long end. In turn it works flawlessly with the converter itself (no AF hunting at all in pretty low light - keep in mind the thing wasn't made to be used with the converter), but with open aperture the IQ noticeable suffers to the point the resulting image is only acceptable for birding purposes ("record shots"). Again, this is an extremely preliminary judgement based on a few shots of a hawk flying over my balcony just before I left the house; I haven't tried it with a stationary subject, a subject in a non-extreme contrast scene, nor have I tried with stopped down aperture.
• AF speed is the best thing about it; it's very fast, with a bit of a curve to the speed; it accelerates during focusing. Faster than the DA*, and the Bigma doesn't even approach it. Keeper rate with birds in flight seems higher that usual, even though it was very cloudy and late in the afternoon/early in the evening. Focusing is near-silent, not noisier than with the DA* 300mm; similar loudness, but a different quality to the sound. Non-obtrusive; focusing didn't make any bird or animal turn its head at the lens.
• The preset button function is absolutely brilliant, although for an eventual mk II version of the lens I suggest a slightly different placement of the buttons; finding them while looking through the viewfinder wasn't intuitive for me. Of course, with a bit of practice this will become a moot point.
• MF goes very smoothly. Normally I prefer the focusing ring this close to the mount, but in this case the weight distribution made me wish it was a bit closer to the front, funnily enough.
• It feels rock-solid, which also means it's a bit top-heavy when fully extended; I need to adjust my technique a bit to be able to comfortably use those handy buttons or the MF ring - in all likelihood I'll start using my shoulder stock again, it seems perfect for that purpose.
• It's about twice as heavy as the DA*300, but it doesn't feel twice as heavy (Weber/Fechner law still applies, I guess). It is big, looks big, and may look a bit to intrusive in certain situations. Then again, that's probably also true for the DA*300. Still, I biked around with the thing around my neck, hanging from the camera strap. This somehow felt like a bad idea (didn't I once read here that the lens mount isn't screwed into the metal chassis, but only into the plastic mirror box?), so I guess I'm going to get a new strap that screws into the extra tripod mount socket, just for peace of mind. And a bigger bag. And a Sherpa, because I can imagine there being situations where I'd prefer the DA* and others where I prefer this one, which means I'll have to carrry the both of them with me at all times .

Bottom line: I'm very happy I got it, and keep in mind I'm saying that while I still have the right to return it for a full refund, so in essence I'm under no pressure to like it at all.

OK, you may now continue your fighting.

---

Last edited by OJGoreng; 05-01-2015 at 12:58 PM.

[Kunzite]

Zygonyx: Unfortunately, for some of us it's not a matter of 'want'

OJGoreng: watch out for that cat, I think she wants to snatch out your lens (hopefully to properly review it)

[JinDesu]

OK, you may now continue your fighting.

Yeah, how dare you interrupt their arguing about a lens that they don't have with your report on the lens that you do have!

[Canada_Rockies]

OJGoreng - thank you for the brief but informative appraisal of the new lens. It is definitely on my get-it list, right after I get a K-3.

[OJGoreng]

Zygonyx: Unfortunately, for some of us it's not a matter of 'want'

OJGoreng: watch out for that cat, I think she wants to snatch out your lens (hopefully to properly review it)

I guess it's more about the attention .



Oh, and trust me, a proper review will probably be forthcoming, but I tend to be rather skeptical of any review that has been written by someone who has used a piece of kit for less than six months or so.

[jatrax]

but I tend to be rather skeptical of any review that has been written by someone who has used a piece of kit for less than six months or so.

ok, so don't call it a review. Call it an "extensive first look". But no way we can wait six months. Come on we want to see pictures

[jpzk]

IQ not completely all the way up there with the DA*300 but pretty darned close, and @450mm it is significantly sharper than the 300mm with converter; that alone makes it a keeper for me, because I mainly got it for the long end. In turn it works flawlessly with the converter itself (no AF hunting at all in pretty low light - keep in mind the thing wasn't made to be used with the converter), but with open aperture the IQ noticeable suffers to the point the resulting image is only acceptable for birding purposes ("record shots").

Wonderful !!

Great thanks to you for reporting so early.
I have been waiting to se what real "users" would say about the IQ vs. that of the DA*300/4 with TC and I appreciate your short review.

This alone is worth a millions "talks" about what it should be and how it should perform (and put an end all to of that nonsense until someone, like you, actually tried it.).

Cheers and have a great weekend taking shots with this new lens ... and PLEASE !!! don't forget to post some pictures for us to see in a separate thread/web site.


Edit: " ... but with open aperture the IQ noticeable suffers to the point the resulting image is only acceptable for birding purposes ("record shots")"
Do you mean with or without the TC at wide open aperture ?

[OJGoreng]

Edit: " ... but with open aperture the IQ noticeable suffers to the point the resulting image is only acceptable for birding purposes ("record shots")"
Do you mean with or without the TC at wide open aperture ?

With the converter. Without, it's pretty nice at open aperture.

I should probably wait with posting photos until I've had a chance to shoot in better light and take shots that are relevant to other people than those familiar with taking bird shots... for that latter subgroup it's a bit easier to recognise the specific value of a lens under adverse conditions. We tend to be happy with shots Actual Photographers would completely snub, simply because we know how the shot would normally look. When you're used to birds moving through dense shrubbery when it's severelly overcast, your standards tend to be different than when you're used to, say, conditions at which you'd be able to use the sensor shift capabilities of the K-3 ml II .

Just a teaser from tonight; click for the full-sized image on Flickr.



For birding purposes, you'd end up with a crop like this: Common Buzzard - Buteo buteo 2015-05-01 | Vogelwerkgroep Amsterdam

In this one, you can see the value of the IBIS.


Flare test; strong backlight. Crop to about 35% of original frame; unfortunately I just missed the focus (it's on the flowers behind the heron instead of on the heron).

[WPRESTO]

Apologies if I'm repeating something that was posted earlier in this thread, but I'm not quite willing to read every post.
Digital camera reviews, photography techniques, photography gallery and photography forums has posted a review of the 150~450 that in brief finds: 1) excellent center soft edges @150mm wide open, corners to very good @ f8; 2) very good @ 300mm; 3) improving again @ 450mm with center into excellent range @ f8; 4) some color problems @ edges @ 450mm.