[starjedi]

A question. How many people do you know with multiple camera bodies? Not old ones, but current ones that they use? I know 5 including myself. You know what characterizes our shooting? We shoot long lenses. We all have multiple long lenses as well. We are all amateurs that produce near professional level work. We wear equipment out.

Don't tell me there is no market for high performing long lenses.

I couldn't take a human portrait shot if I wanted to, I don't know how. And frankly have no interest. I don't know anyone who uses a 70ish mm lens on a full frame for portraits. Yet Pentax is making a body and lens for that market. Expensive and high performing ones. They must be making a mistake. I don't know anyone who would buy and use such things.

After announcement of K-1, the roadmap will be updated. We can see a lot of new prime lenses. 85 1.4 and 50 1.2 should be there. 135 1.8, 600 F4, 300 F2.8 et al will all be there if K1 sells excellent... The good things are that Pentax produced those lenses before and so just needs to optimize the designs with computers...

[Zav]

LOL, please, it's time to replace/upgrade a few of them. The FA 50 1.4 should go for example.

Lol please, please not an OTHER 50 or so mm ^^. Look at the current FF primes line up:
- 31 f1.8
- 35 f2
- 35 f2.4 (DA lens, to be tested but reported as working)
- 40 f2.8 (DA lens, to be tested but reported as working)
- 43 f1.9
- 50 f1.4
- 50 f1.8 (DA lens, to be tested but reported as working)
- 50 f2.8
- 55 f1.4
- 70 f2.8 (DA lens, to be tested but reported as working)
- 77 f1.8
- 100 f2.8
- 200 f2.8
- 300 f4
- 560 f5.6 (DA lens, to be tested but reported as working with a little vignetting)

12 lenses out of 15 are in the 31-100mm range, and 6 are in the 40-55. 3 of them are 50mm.
I really hope we are not about getting a 52mm f1.57

[filoxophy]

The FA 50/1,4 should be updated with HD coatings to a D-FA variety with WR and modernized look. It should be an optional kit lens for the K-1.

Such as the 55/1.4 with Aero Bright coatings which covers 36x24? That's a great kit for FF, though I'm more of a 43/1.9 type of guy.

[christiandre]

33 AF points !
??????K-1??????? - ????info

[thibs]

Such as the 55/1.4 with Aero Bright coatings which covers 36x24? That's a great kit for FF, though I'm more of a 43/1.9 type of guy.

No way in its current form. A normal with such slow focus is unacceptable.
Updates with modern DC, maybe.

[Glorfindelrb]

33 selectable at least

[redpit]

It's at least strange and incomprehensible that some people here claim that Pentax who is getting into the pro-game again with WR and outdoor oriented equipment doesn't need to make new high quality tele lenses. Just a reminder for which company we are talking about:

SMC Pentax-FA* 250-600mm F5.6 ED [IF] Reviews - FA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
SMC Pentax-FA* 600mm F4 ED [IF] Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
SMC Pentax-F* 600mm F4 ED [IF] Reviews - F Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
SMC Pentax-FA* 300mm F2.8 ED [IF] Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

New teles with new glass and construction technology are as important as every other lens in Pentax arsenal. I hope Pentax realizes that. Otherwise I once again will buy a Sigma or Tamron tele lens as I'm SURE that the Pentax FF will be a success and these companies will take advantage... So no concerns from my part... It's just that I would love my long lens to bear the PENTAX logo instead of anything else...

[thibs]

The 400~600mm mirror is available fairly regularly on EBAY for around $400~$600 depending on condition. I looked up a test/review of the lens years back when I was contemplating a purchase, the lens being so compact for traveling. However, the best images obtained were only marginally acceptable with poor contrast (latter is a problem with all mirror lenses). The lens was unique, but in terms of IQ very disappointing.

For a short time I had a Pentax 1000mm f11, the most unsatisfactory lens I've ever used. Went through about 10 rolls of film (360 exposures) and tried everything, including mounting it on a massive converted wooden surveyor's tripod (weight over 20lb), Using it in bright sun, triggering the LX with a cable release, I never obtained a single chrome that was a keeper.

In several comparison tests I've looked through, the Zeiss 500mm f8 Mirotar always comes out as the best of all the mirror lenses, with the Tamron adaptall second, better than a Nikkor or SIgma's 600mm f8. BTW: Leitax does not make a mount conversion for the Mirotar. Apparently the mount is different from that on any other Contax/Yashica lens, and there is insufficient demand to machine such a mount for the Mirotar only.

Not surprised. Mirror lenses.
I got the Tamron (without hood though) and regularly wonder if I should sell it. Mirrorless are opticaly bad, all of them. Some are usable but that's it.
I only have one real long lens, the Tamron (and an old Chinon 300/5.6), so never sold it but as it is a so low satisfaction lens, I probably should.

[asahi man]

Thanks,never a mirror lens.
That's the last what we need and the last what we get ��
What's about an optical perfect quality like in the current 4.0 300 but in a new 5.6 600?
5.6 because of size and wight and enough for current ISO quality?
What's about a complete new 2.8 300 and a new dedicated 2x converter?
Both possible maybe,cause they have talked about.
Best regards

[Franc]

those would be very nice

[redpit]

What's about an optical perfect quality like in the current 4.0 300 but in a new 5.6 600?
5.6 because of size and wight and enough for current ISO quality?
What's about a complete new 2.8 300 and a new dedicated 2x converter?
Both possible maybe,cause they have talked about.
Best regards

Both great options provided that the FF high ISO performance will be stellar! (I'm sure it will)

I wish they find their way to the roadmap soon!

[thibs]

Thanks,never a mirror lens.
That's the last what we need and the last what we get ��
What's about an optical perfect quality like in the current 4.0 300 but in a new 5.6 600?
5.6 because of size and wight and enough for current ISO quality?
What's about a complete new 2.8 300 and a new dedicated 2x converter?
Both possible maybe,cause they have talked about.
Best regards

Ok, let's be clear, I would never expect Pentax to produce a mirror lens. The 400-600 thing is remarkable as a mirror lens zoom but that's the only remarkable thing

What you're talking about though is music to my ear

[timautin]

Yep a 600 f5.6 could be a good idea to compensate the weight. But they'll have to make it lighter than the new Nikon (or compete on the price). Still, a "classic" 500 f4 would have my preference

[robbiec]

FFS the uber tele brigade are climbing out from under their rocks. The core lens line-up for this camera have already been announced. 15-30, 24-70, 70-200 with the latter 2 the typical most sought & bought lens for this market segment. If you need a bit longer then there is the 150-450 to keep you going. Before any monster teles will be announced or designed a wider prime in the 20s is needed, a repackage of the DFA50 with WR body and DC motors and possibly a update / release of the 200/4 Macro. That would give you 2 'Pro' spec (whatever that means) zooms, a wide zoom and a long zoom. There are currently 8 primes within that zoom range that I would consider fit for purpose, one being marginal. 31, 43, 50 Macro, 55, 77 and 100 Macro, 200, 300. 3 of these need new motors - SDM is outclassed.
Wide prime is most needed first and foremost. Everything else is fantasy.

[Rondec]

A question. How many people do you know with multiple camera bodies? Not old ones, but current ones that they use? I know 5 including myself. You know what characterizes our shooting? We shoot long lenses. We all have multiple long lenses as well. We are all amateurs that produce near professional level work. We wear equipment out.

Don't tell me there is no market for high performing long lenses.

I couldn't take a human portrait shot if I wanted to, I don't know how. And frankly have no interest. I don't know anyone who uses a 70ish mm lens on a full frame for portraits. Yet Pentax is making a body and lens for that market. Expensive and high performing ones. They must be making a mistake. I don't know anyone who would buy and use such things.

I have read the things you have written, Derek, and my guess is that the initial people who purchase the K-1, for the most part, will be using it for portraits (narrow depth of field) and landscapes (printing bigger than APS-C allows). You said elsewhere that most photos that aren't telephoto could be taken with a camera phone and I would disagree with that statement -- there are plenty of photos, either because of being taken in low light or because narrow depth of field is desired, where a larger sensor is pretty important.

I wouldn't be surprised if Pentax does fill in the fast, super-telephoto lens slot at some point down the road, but it feels like it probably isn't in their top five list of lenses that they need to create and get out the door. We can tell that they are stretched pretty thin at this point by the fact that they will be relying on Tamron to fill the 24-70 f2.8 and 15-30 f2.8 zoom slots. Clearly they feel like they need to get lenses into these spots and don't have time or, perhaps the personnel to design these lenses from scratch.

I'm sure there is a market for high end long lenses. I was pretty surprised at how many people have purchased the 150-450 (although that is pretty cheap on the scale) and the 560. But certainly the more expensive you go, the more rarefied the lenses will be.

I hope Pentax does eventually make a better DFA 600 f4 -- and a 135 f1.8 -- and a 50mm f1.2, but first they need to get the basic zooms and primes into place before they start dealing with specialty glass.