New zoom 70-200 F4

fsge · 03-27-2019, 09:27 AM

Originally posted by TwoUptons

I think I read that Sony has two separate motors in some of their lenses to move two groups simultaneously during focusing to increase speed and precision. That would be cool...

-Eric

Cool but last time I checked Sony glass was ... pricey!

repaap · 03-27-2019, 10:21 AM

Originally posted by TwoUptons

I think I read that Sony has two separate motors in some of their lenses to move two groups simultaneously during focusing to increase speed and precision. That would be cool...

-Eric

You mean latset 135/1,8 G and 400/2,8? yes. Prize tag is 2000 for 135 and bit more for 400 mm. Cool, yes almost freezing.

**TwoUptons** · 03-27-2019, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by repaap

You mean latset 135/1,8 G and 400/2,8? yes. Prize tag is 2000 for 135 and bit more for 400 mm. Cool, yes almost freezing.

Right. But the scheme apparently works... it would be an interesting way to implement a PLM solution on a complex optic...

-Eric

repaap · 03-27-2019, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by TwoUptons

Right. But the scheme apparently works... it would be an interesting way to implement a PLM solution on a complex optic...

-Eric

Lot of things would be interesting. Way I see it is that there is just more things to be broken, more complex it gets..but ofcourse there are interesting ways. Especially with big heavy(expensive) lenses it is also needed too, to make difference.

normhead · 03-27-2019, 02:23 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by awscreo

I'll take reduced weight over focus speed

but that's from my very biased landscape photography perspective lol

They reduced the lens to 6.3 from 5.8 because they had to reduce the weight of the focusing element so it could be driven by the PLM motor. Any PLM lens is going to be very light.

reh321 · 03-27-2019, 02:37 PM

Originally posted by awscreo

I'll take reduced weight over focus speed

but that's from my very biased landscape photography perspective lol

Originally posted by normhead

They reduced the lens to 6.3 from 5.8 because they had to reduce the weight of the focusing element so it could be driven by the PLM motor. Any PLM lens is going to be very light.

So PLM lens hits two goals - light and fast focusing.

mbukal · 03-27-2019, 02:39 PM

Originally posted by normhead

I'm still wondering why they didn't just update the 60-250 ƒ4 with a stronger AF motor and replaced baffle.

This lens seems like step backwards not forwards. The 60-250's optics are pretty amazing. The only way this lens works for me is if the optics and speed of AF are considerably better than the 60-250.

Originally posted by mbukal

If the Pentax is made with the same optic as the old DA * "new" HD DFA 60-250 / 4 ED DC AW in FA35 / 2 style, to a change from old to new, the star would be lost
then there would be a tele zum in the input rank that satisfies each beginner and advanced amateur who would have K mount and no other mount in FF, for all parts there is DFA * 70-200 / 2.8, why complicate such simple things that are proven quality, simple and quality and cheap to is proven by FA35 / 2, "I see logic in every respect"!

Pentax has never been as others, this would confirm the quality tradition it is different from other

there seems to be more who think identically

but we just dream and repeat our wishes

nocturnal · 03-27-2019, 07:08 PM

I'll not be looking for the new 70-200 f4 as I bought a used DA* 60-250 f4 instead for cheap with a 1 year warranty.

First day out I used 60mm and 250mm extensively so I wouldn't want to lose the extra reach. It is also a stellar lens and I managed the AF fine with fast moving dogs jumping into surf

As a landscape lens it is superb, great colours and renders, and as sharp as you'd want...

I compared 2 supermoon shots: First with K-30 with F*300 f4.5 @f8 against K-70 with DA* 60-250 f4 @f8 @250mm. Now the F*300 f4.5 is a stellar lens but I was able to crop further with the K-70 24MP and DA* 60-250 to achieve slightly better details of the moon.

Much of this comes down to 24MP vs 16MP but this saves me lugging around my F*300 f4.5 along with say a new 70-200mm f4.

Now I know why the DA* 60-250 f4 gets such a high rating!

normhead · 03-28-2019, 08:18 AM

The big thing here is the 60-250 with the HD DA 1.4 TC is 350mm. A 200 ƒ4 would be 280. (To non wildlife shooters this may be moot, but for me it's huge.) But if the 70-200ƒ4 is a PLM lens, I might have to rethink it. My biggest issue with the 60-250 is it's relatively slow AF speed. But, it going to need an FF 2x TC to be functional, and it's going to have to be sharp enough to benefit from a 2x TC.

reh321 · 03-28-2019, 08:49 AM

Originally posted by normhead

The big thing here is the 60-250 with the HD DA 1.4 TC is 350mm. A 200 ƒ4 would be 280. (To non wildlife shooters this may be moot, nut for me it's huge.) But if the 70-200ƒ4 is a PLM lens, I might have to rethink it. My biggest issue with the 60-250 is it's relatively slow AF speed. But, it going to need an FF 2x TC to be functional, and it's going to have to be sharp enough to benefit from a 2x TC.

My 55-300mm PLM focuses very quickly - and it is 300mm. Does f/6.3 not convey enough light or is it not sharp enough for you {I would expect TC to reduce both light and sharpness}

normhead · 03-28-2019, 09:01 AM

Originally posted by reh321

My 55-300mm PLM focuses very quickly - and it is 300mm. Does f/6.3 not convey enough light or is it not sharp enough for you {I would expect TC to reduce both light and sharpness}

You would expect that if they can make a 55-300 4.5-6.3 PLM, they could make a 200 ƒ4 PLM as well. The only question being will they?

reh321 · 03-28-2019, 09:25 AM

Originally posted by normhead

You would expect that if they can make a 55-300 4.5-6.3 PLM, they could make a 200 ƒ4 PLM as well. The only question being will they?

I don't know how 'constant f/4' would affect mass of the focusing element - might be too heavy(?)

normhead · 03-28-2019, 09:45 AM

Originally posted by reh321

I don't know how 'constant f/4' would affect mass of the focusing element - might be too heavy(?)

The focusing elements are not the front elements on internal focusing lenses. But, I assume if they can, it will be PLM and KAF4. Otherwise, why would 60-250 owners even look at it? But this will be close enough to the line that we won't know if they could pull it off until the lens comes out. Given folks like myself putting the 60-250 on the shelf except in stationary shoots in favour of the 55-300 PLM, it would be the smart thing.

At least for me, light weight and fast focusing would be all that would push it to the front of the lenses to buy line up. With no FF TC, I won't even know if I want it until the FF TC comes out. 200 is very limited on FF, and the 55-300 rules APS-c at the moment IMHO.

bobmaxja · 03-28-2019, 10:20 AM

The 55-300 PLM is probably one of the best zoom. And the new 60-200 F4, will need to bring a lot of novelty

fsge · 03-28-2019, 10:26 AM

Originally posted by bobmaxja

The 55-300 PLM is probably one of the best zoom. And the new 60-200 F4, will need to bring a lot of novelty

is there any major difference except PLM between 55-300 WR previous version and this new PLM release?

03-28-2019, 08:18 AM	#219
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	The big thing here is the 60-250 with the HD DA 1.4 TC is 350mm. A 200 ƒ4 would be 280. (To non wildlife shooters this may be moot, but for me it's huge.) But if the 70-200ƒ4 is a PLM lens, I might have to rethink it. My biggest issue with the 60-250 is it's relatively slow AF speed. But, it going to need an FF 2x TC to be functional, and it's going to have to be sharp enough to benefit from a 2x TC. Last edited by normhead; 03-28-2019 at 09:00 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: K10D+grip, DA12-24mm,14mm 2.8, 75-200 f3.8, 28-200, 70-300, 80-200 f4.7-5.6	igowerf	Sold Items	2	02-07-2018 08:33 PM
Lens tests on K-1 : 15-30, 24-70, 70-200, 31, 43, 77, 100 Macro, 28-70 and 80-200	Mistral75	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	14	06-28-2016 11:46 AM
How does the new Pentax 70-200 compare to Tamron or sigma 70-200?	Sandi in Halifax	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	04-28-2016 06:25 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax FA 100-300, FA 70-200, M 28mm; Sigma EX 28-70, Apo 70-300; Tamron Di LD 70-300	stillnk	Sold Items	17	04-08-2012 11:39 AM
Old sigma 70-200 vs New hsm 70-200	41ants	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	07-14-2010 06:38 AM

03-27-2019, 09:27 AM	#211
fsge Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Genf Posts: 1,138	Originally posted by TwoUptons I think I read that Sony has two separate motors in some of their lenses to move two groups simultaneously during focusing to increase speed and precision. That would be cool... -Eric Cool but last time I checked Sony glass was ... pricey!

03-27-2019, 10:21 AM	#212
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	Originally posted by TwoUptons I think I read that Sony has two separate motors in some of their lenses to move two groups simultaneously during focusing to increase speed and precision. That would be cool... -Eric You mean latset 135/1,8 G and 400/2,8? yes. Prize tag is 2000 for 135 and bit more for 400 mm. Cool, yes almost freezing.

03-27-2019, 11:06 AM	#213
TwoUptons Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,223	Originally posted by repaap You mean latset 135/1,8 G and 400/2,8? yes. Prize tag is 2000 for 135 and bit more for 400 mm. Cool, yes almost freezing. Right. But the scheme apparently works... it would be an interesting way to implement a PLM solution on a complex optic... -Eric

03-27-2019, 12:57 PM	#214
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	Originally posted by TwoUptons Right. But the scheme apparently works... it would be an interesting way to implement a PLM solution on a complex optic... -Eric Lot of things would be interesting. Way I see it is that there is just more things to be broken, more complex it gets..but ofcourse there are interesting ways. Especially with big heavy(expensive) lenses it is also needed too, to make difference.

03-27-2019, 02:23 PM - 1 Like	#215
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by awscreo I'll take reduced weight over focus speed but that's from my very biased landscape photography perspective lol They reduced the lens to 6.3 from 5.8 because they had to reduce the weight of the focusing element so it could be driven by the PLM motor. Any PLM lens is going to be very light.

03-27-2019, 02:37 PM	#216
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,181	Originally posted by awscreo I'll take reduced weight over focus speed but that's from my very biased landscape photography perspective lol Originally posted by normhead They reduced the lens to 6.3 from 5.8 because they had to reduce the weight of the focusing element so it could be driven by the PLM motor. Any PLM lens is going to be very light. So PLM lens hits two goals - light and fast focusing.

03-27-2019, 02:39 PM	#217
mbukal Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: zagreb Posts: 668	Originally posted by normhead I'm still wondering why they didn't just update the 60-250 ƒ4 with a stronger AF motor and replaced baffle. This lens seems like step backwards not forwards. The 60-250's optics are pretty amazing. The only way this lens works for me is if the optics and speed of AF are considerably better than the 60-250. Originally posted by mbukal If the Pentax is made with the same optic as the old DA * "new" HD DFA 60-250 / 4 ED DC AW in FA35 / 2 style, to a change from old to new, the star would be lost then there would be a tele zum in the input rank that satisfies each beginner and advanced amateur who would have K mount and no other mount in FF, for all parts there is DFA * 70-200 / 2.8, why complicate such simple things that are proven quality, simple and quality and cheap to is proven by FA35 / 2, "I see logic in every respect"! Pentax has never been as others, this would confirm the quality tradition it is different from other there seems to be more who think identically but we just dream and repeat our wishes

03-27-2019, 07:08 PM	#218
nocturnal Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 507	I'll not be looking for the new 70-200 f4 as I bought a used DA* 60-250 f4 instead for cheap with a 1 year warranty. First day out I used 60mm and 250mm extensively so I wouldn't want to lose the extra reach. It is also a stellar lens and I managed the AF fine with fast moving dogs jumping into surf As a landscape lens it is superb, great colours and renders, and as sharp as you'd want... I compared 2 supermoon shots: First with K-30 with F300 f4.5 @f8 against K-70 with DA 60-250 f4 @f8 @250mm. Now the F300 f4.5 is a stellar lens but I was able to crop further with the K-70 24MP and DA 60-250 to achieve slightly better details of the moon. Much of this comes down to 24MP vs 16MP but this saves me lugging around my F300 f4.5 along with say a new 70-200mm f4. Now I know why the DA 60-250 f4 gets such a high rating!

03-28-2019, 08:49 AM	#220
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,181	Originally posted by normhead The big thing here is the 60-250 with the HD DA 1.4 TC is 350mm. A 200 ƒ4 would be 280. (To non wildlife shooters this may be moot, nut for me it's huge.) But if the 70-200ƒ4 is a PLM lens, I might have to rethink it. My biggest issue with the 60-250 is it's relatively slow AF speed. But, it going to need an FF 2x TC to be functional, and it's going to have to be sharp enough to benefit from a 2x TC. My 55-300mm PLM focuses very quickly - and it is 300mm. Does f/6.3 not convey enough light or is it not sharp enough for you {I would expect TC to reduce both light and sharpness}

03-28-2019, 09:01 AM	#221
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by reh321 My 55-300mm PLM focuses very quickly - and it is 300mm. Does f/6.3 not convey enough light or is it not sharp enough for you {I would expect TC to reduce both light and sharpness} You would expect that if they can make a 55-300 4.5-6.3 PLM, they could make a 200 ƒ4 PLM as well. The only question being will they?

03-28-2019, 09:25 AM	#222
reh321 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: South Bend, IN, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,181	Originally posted by normhead You would expect that if they can make a 55-300 4.5-6.3 PLM, they could make a 200 ƒ4 PLM as well. The only question being will they? I don't know how 'constant f/4' would affect mass of the focusing element - might be too heavy(?)

03-28-2019, 09:45 AM	#223
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by reh321 I don't know how 'constant f/4' would affect mass of the focusing element - might be too heavy(?) The focusing elements are not the front elements on internal focusing lenses. But, I assume if they can, it will be PLM and KAF4. Otherwise, why would 60-250 owners even look at it? But this will be close enough to the line that we won't know if they could pull it off until the lens comes out. Given folks like myself putting the 60-250 on the shelf except in stationary shoots in favour of the 55-300 PLM, it would be the smart thing. At least for me, light weight and fast focusing would be all that would push it to the front of the lenses to buy line up. With no FF TC, I won't even know if I want it until the FF TC comes out. 200 is very limited on FF, and the 55-300 rules APS-c at the moment IMHO.

03-28-2019, 10:20 AM	#224
bobmaxja Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Laval, Quebec Canada Posts: 2,171	The 55-300 PLM is probably one of the best zoom. And the new 60-200 F4, will need to bring a lot of novelty

03-28-2019, 10:26 AM	#225
fsge Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Genf Posts: 1,138	Originally posted by bobmaxja The 55-300 PLM is probably one of the best zoom. And the new 60-200 F4, will need to bring a lot of novelty is there any major difference except PLM between 55-300 WR previous version and this new PLM release?