[asahi man]

Sigh. The so-called "35-80 patent" correspond perfectly to the D FA 28-105 f/3.5-5.6. There are 5 example implementations specified for that patent; a 35-80 f/4 is the last of them. Why call it a "35-80 patent"? It doesn't make any sense.

I already said the so-called "100-300 patent" correspond to the D FA* 70-200. Again, why call it a "100-300 patent"?

Again: read the patents, or rather, the egami articles. The information is there.

Because it has its own patent.
It is also absolute possible that the 100-300 is direct related to the 70-200.
We will talk next March again about the next lenses if you want.
Remember,you told that the current 70-200 is completedifferent with the old 70-200-100-300 patent
Do not hold you to tight on the public roadmaps or patents.
We only see a small part of all,but i can tell you that thereis a real optical system of a 100-300.
Doyou remember the different patent of the current 5.6 560?
Do you know that the first patent of this system was a 520 with a reducible body in two parts?
and there was a prototype of it.
Also there was a 4xxmm lens with this system.
and than we got the 5.6 560.
If you can talk with somebody who is planning and engineer lens systems,do this please.
It is more than only talk about patents and paper,it will fascinate you.
Best regards

[Kunzite]

What "has its own patent"? A patent is not about a specific focal length and aperture ranges; they do (usually) specify several examples of possible implementations. For the "100-300" there are 2 100-300-ish, and 3 70-200-ish examples given.

I cannot discuss what I do not see. I'm talking here about the patents mentioned by egami.

And I don't think we'll see a 100-300 f/4 so soon after the 150-450mm; there are many gaps to fill, before starting with redundant lenses.

[asahi man]

Maybe it is the "replacement"of the DA*300,cause it is out of production next time.
I think we will see the 4.0 100-300 not before autumn 2017.
With more lightwight body and not so overmassive like the tank 70-200 and 150-450.
But there is enough on stock to sell it.
Not the problem like the K-1 and minimum procuction and no stock till end of this year.

[Pål Jensen]

Do you know that the first patent of this system was a 520 with a reducible body in two parts?
and there was a prototype of it.

Aha! I knew I was right...

[asahi man]

It was a main tube and a separate front tube with bayonet mount between both parts.
My ex Pentax colleague explained it a couple of days after Pentax headquarter showed it.
It's more than 4 years ago.
But it was to freaky and it's now a boring standard construction
There is also a patent in the web of this lens.
Best regards

[mee]

It was a main tube and a separate front tube with bayonet mount between both parts.
My ex Pentax colleague explained it a couple of days after Pentax headquarter showed it.
It's more than 4 years ago.
But it was to freaky and it's now a boring standard construction
There is also a patent in the web of this lens.
Best regards

Any idea if we'll see a 24-105 f/4 or 70-200 f/4? What about weather sealed primes?

[Zygonyx]

I'm affraid Ricoh is keen to avoïd cannibalism, therefore at this stage, they will probably issue other FLs.

[afan137]

And I don't think we'll see a 100-300 f/4 so soon after the 150-450mm; there are many gaps to fill, before starting with redundant lenses.

Maybe you are right, should be better to have 100-300mm, and 200-500mm like the nikon one.

[ogl]

And I don't think we'll see a 100-300 f/4 so soon after the 150-450mm; there are many gaps to fill, before starting with redundant lenses.

150-450/4.5-5.6 is different lens, slower, bigger and heavier and no 100-149 mm range, but it has 301-450 mm.

[Kunzite]

I'm all for Ricoh launching lots of high-quality Pentax K lenses; I just try not to expect much, besides what's on the roadmap.

[ogl]

As for roadmap - only primes there and fish-eye zoom.

[siva.ss.kumar]

Maybe you are right, should be better to have 100-300mm, and 200-500mm like the nikon one.

+1 to this. I would love to see a more affordable version of the 150-450 but keeping the f5.6 as is. 200-500 has seen people jump ship to Nikon just to get this lens (among birders on budget )

[bhairavp]

I think the Sigma 150-600 contemporary is also a steal around the same price as the Nikon. Sadly, not available on Pentax.

[Mistral75]

Pentax 4.0 / 100-300 is not only a sleeping patent.
Best regards

The Patent of the 70-200 is much older and it's a standard process that a badge of prototypes and patents developed together.
The current patent of the 100-300 is not a prototype like the first here known patent of the 70-200.
It's a preseries patent.
There were 2 different own projects of the current lens and the 100-300.
Since 2 years 100-300 project,70-200 start up is 4 years old.
There are minimum 3 full patents of the 70-200.
And take everything with a little bit more fun and humor maybe,life is hard enough

Best regards

asahi man, may I respectfully suggest you to:

- go to this page https://www4.j-platpat.inpit.go.jp/eng/tokujitsu/tkbs_en/TKBS_EN_GM101_Top.action

- enter the number of the so-called (by egami) "100-300mm f/4 patent", i.e. 2016-80717 in the second (from top to bottom) field on the right

- click 'Search'

- click on the 'JP,2016-080717,A' hyperlink

- click on 'Detailed Description'

- read the patent

- consider that five example are illustrating the patent, of which the two first ones are 102-293mm f/4.1 and the three last ones are 72-194mm f/2.9

- have a detailed look at the fifth example ('Numerical working example 5') and its optical formula (Fig.25)



- compare it with the optical formula of the HD Pentax-D FA★ 70-200mm f/2.8ED DC AW



- and eventually reconsider what you said on the former page of this thread .

[Mistral75]

35-80 is funny, correct.
Do not think that this will be real.
Looks like a project and one of many patents.
(...)
Best regards

Same mistake / clickbait from egami with their so-called "35-80mm f/4" patent. Patent number is 2016-99586. Reproducing the process above, one finds that the five examples illustrating the patent are:

Example #1: 28.86-105mm f/3.6-5.4
Example #2: 28.70-102.38mm f/3.6-5.7
Example #3: 28.82-102.34mm f/3.6-5.7
Example #4: 28.78-102.35mm f/3.6-5.7

Example #5: 36.11-79.07mm f/4.1

Let's now compare the optical formula of example #2 (the four optical formulas in the the patent are very close but this one is the most resembling)...



...with the optical formula of HD Pentax-D FA 28-105mm f/3.5-5.6ED DC WR