[BruceBanner]

See, you're another like me. A Pentaxian values these qualities, not the biggest, heaviest, latest.

I have the Sigma 35mm Art, but frequently head out with the K-1 and either my FA31 Ltd or even K28 f3.5.

I have the Sigma 85mm, but often take the FA 77 Ltd or even K 85mm f2 instead.

I get superb quality in these small packages, and really only miss out on that fraction of pictures where f1.4 makes a meaningful difference to f1.8.

We're not the only forum members who think like that, but all companies - Sigma, Canon, Sony, Nikon and Pentax - are going with large, expensive premium lenses because low margin, high turnover doesn't work anymore.

I think Pentaxians are less ostentatious than other brand owners, and love a second hand bargain more than them too, so we're a frustrating customer base for the Star lens designers. The DFA*50 may never have been made if Tokina didn't agree to resell it as the Opera in EF and F mounts. They must be very worried about the upcoming DFA*85!

Definitely agree here. Starting to use my camera and earn some coin has shifted my mindset as well, can I justify 'x' lens when in reality it might come out only for a few shots? I picked up a second hand DA 12-24 for a few wide angle shots, was I going to buy a new one for $1k? Nope... a second hand one for $400AUD seemed fine. I settled on a 55-300PLM mainly for the price tag, zooms aren't really something I will use for paid work much so I find it hard to justify $1.4-2k for a lens that will seldom pay for itself. FA77 and 43 however, they're workhorses for paid gigs, light, compact, great IQ, no brainer.

[monochrome]

Enough! We're going to go ahead and try to compete in a few of these areas." They're a business, and there are only so many cameras and lenses they can sell to retired landscape shooters who can't stand EVFs.

That’s pretty funny

[MegaPower]

A bit premature conclusion as the specification of the camera is still unknown.....

Hope to kick pentax on their back so they can give us more.
Like a promising K1 when it was released.

[SSGGeezer]

Can I ask what those obvious reasons are? When I first started out with photography, I came across the K-50 when looking for a camera. For the same price as the Canikon entry level offerings, I got much more for my money - a much more capable camera that I am still happy enough using six years later...

I found the same thing as Robert. K-50 and 16K images to see if I enjoyed it, then I got a KP, and a K-1 and a K-5IIs. I like gear and I have liked every piece I have had, even what a sold along.

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

Just posting the image so others won't be unduly biased by your prejudice.

I like to have more subject isolation for one















I also like to use faster shutterspeeds when they are called for



---------- Post added 05-24-2020 at 09:17 PM ----------

Just another kick ass lens Pentax put out, lighter and better than the competition,

It probably is but for what I like to shoot its something that does not interest me.

The fact that you think you couldn't find uses for it shows the limitations of your perspective and lack willingness to give anything Pentax a chance.

It has nothing to do with this in the least. If I am going out to photograph wildlife I like to use something more like a 300 2.8 on a cropped camera. The issue I have is that there is no 300 2.8 in production from ether pentax or other sources, and when you find one used you windup paying more than what it costs if I where in another mount.

Then post images of their own that in their own minds are better, further confusing the conversation.

This can be said for anyone including yourself. Take your Nuthatch If it was mine I would not have kept it unless it was some 1 in a 1,000,000 shot. If you are happy with it that is all that matter for yourself.

In this case, I suspect he doesn't believe what the DA 5-300 can do, because it's not available on Nikon mount. A 300mm lens that works well with a TC in good light and weighs 442 grams and can be found for less than $500, and fits in the small detachable side pocket of a lens holster. How could something be useful to anyone if it doesn't have the Nikon label on it?

Its funny how you always bring in this rant into every discussion, it has nothing to do with Nikon but rather I don't like the IQ that a 50-300 and TC will give you. If I was going out to photography wildlife ( meaning I am going specially taking out a camera to photograph wildlife) a 300 2.8 for cropped is what I am after. What you get from a 50-300 + 1.4 tc is not what I am looking for and the time and cost to get into those shooting conditions to photograph wildlife would not be worth it in my mind.



Even when photographing in precarious shooting conditions I have opted for something faster than f9 on a cropped body

[monochrome]

Hope to kick pentax on their back so they can give us more.
Like a promising K1 when it was released.

I don’t understand this post.

[MetteHHH]

I like to have more subject isolation for one

[...]

Even when photographing in precarious shooting conditions I have opted for something faster than f9 on a cropped body

...Wow.

Yes, the 55-300mm + tc is NOT what you are looking for. I try to specialize in BIFs, but you are simply far above my level. Wow.

I am happy with my DA* 300mm f4 though, in terms of subject isolation, and with better AF / better high ISO in the next body, I expect I will just keep cropping rather than using the tc. Cropping is more flexible anyway, particularly for BIFs.

[Chris Mak]

Pentax does have a beautiful and unique lens to pair with the new APS-C flagship, if you can live with its limitations, ánd provided the new APS-C flagship does not inherit the K3's AF inconsistency and reluctancy to snap into focus. The KP was better in both regards, so I am optimistic.

I went from Pentax to Canon and to Nikon. But it's very hard to find anything like the DA560 anywhere else, except the 600mm f4 lenses from the big brands. I have tried to get there with teleconverters, but there is no easy road to 560mm with the solid IQ of the DA560 without going into the 400mmf2.8 +1.4TC or 600mmf4 region, and then of course you gain a very valuable stop of light.

If you want light weight fast focussing and mèh IQ, then there is always a Canon or Nikon lens that will do the trick with a TC on. But when you want the clarity and detail and outright sharpness and top IQ in áll circumstances of the DA560, then you are back to the superguns. Forget the CA of the DA560, it can be awful at 100%, but plays no vital role in real world images on screen or in print. The haziness, softness and light starvation of lenses with a TC on (with its extra 6-8 glass elements) has far more impact in real images, and on many times more images too.

The thing is that people often judge a lens' optical performance by the images in best, favourable light. I have come to judge a lens by its performance in harsh, brutal light. I see the Canon 400DOII or the Nikon 500PF fail from my own experience, and read how the Sony 200-600 fails in harder circumstances. But people are very forgiving in general as long as the lens will not skip a beat in a sequence of 20 BIF shots.
The first couple of shots I took with the 7DII+400DOII+1.4TC outright shocked me. I could not get a decent image in bright spring light of a fairly distant white egret, where the DA560 casually used to nail shots like that. I have seen many images end up in the bin since then, and have also taken beautiful BIF shots of black terns with exactly the same combo that the K3+DA560 would have néver nailed.

So I am considering keeping my current Nikon set-up : Z7+500PF for all the flight work, and re-buy the DA560 with the 1.4TC and the coming APS-C flagship for static hardcore medium to distant shooting. You really get to appreciate a lens like the DA560 when you start to compare it firsthand with "compromise" lenses.

[reh321]

So I am considering keeping my current Nikon set-up : Z7+500PF for all the flight work, and re-buy the DA560 with the 1.4TC and the coming APS-C flagship for static hardcore medium to distant shooting. You really get to appreciate a lens like the DA560 when you start to compare it firsthand with "compromise" lenses.

We clearly have different goals. Even if I have sufficient light at f/4, with a "long" lens, I will tend to go more to f/8 to give more DOF, and often I shoot near f/11 because I find DOF at f/8 to be too confining sometimes. In addition, I go walking with my wife; when I leave, I do not know whether I want the view of a 100mm, a 200mm, or a 400mm lens - so the 55-300mm +1.4X gives them all to me without having to lug several long lenses with me, only to find out that I used only one of them.

But. this discussion is about lenses. This thread is supposed to be about the "K-3ii replacement" that Pentax finally has on the way. I am happy with my KP - I think you others who have waited and waited for this camera would finally be happy - once you have the camera, you can use the lens of your choice.

[BruceBanner]

Pentax does have a beautiful and unique lens to pair with the new APS-C flagship, if you can live with its limitations, ánd provided the new APS-C flagship does not inherit the K3's AF inconsistency and reluctancy to snap into focus. The KP was better in both regards, so I am optimistic.

I went from Pentax to Canon and to Nikon. But it's very hard to find anything like the DA560 anywhere else, except the 600mm f4 lenses from the big brands. I have tried to get there with teleconverters, but there is no easy road to 560mm with the solid IQ of the DA560 without going into the 400mmf2.8 +1.4TC or 600mmf4 region, and then of course you gain a very valuable stop of light.

If you want light weight fast focussing and mèh IQ, then there is always a Canon or Nikon lens that will do the trick with a TC on. But when you want the clarity and detail and outright sharpness and top IQ in áll circumstances of the DA560, then you are back to the superguns. Forget the CA of the DA560, it can be awful at 100%, but plays no vital role in real world images on screen or in print. The haziness, softness and light starvation of lenses with a TC on (with its extra 6-8 glass elements) has far more impact in real images, and on many times more images too.

The thing is that people often judge a lens' optical performance by the images in best, favourable light. I have come to judge a lens by its performance in harsh, brutal light. I see the Canon 400DOII or the Nikon 500PF fail from my own experience, and read how the Sony 200-600 fails in harder circumstances. But people are very forgiving in general as long as the lens will not skip a beat in a sequence of 20 BIF shots.
The first couple of shots I took with the 7DII+400DOII+1.4TC outright shocked me. I could not get a decent image in bright spring light of a fairly distant white egret, where the DA560 casually used to nail shots like that. I have seen many images end up in the bin since then, and have also taken beautiful BIF shots of black terns with exactly the same combo that the K3+DA560 would have néver nailed.

So I am considering keeping my current Nikon set-up : Z7+500PF for all the flight work, and re-buy the DA560 with the 1.4TC and the coming APS-C flagship for static hardcore medium to distant shooting. You really get to appreciate a lens like the DA560 when you start to compare it firsthand with "compromise" lenses.

Interesting to hear someone speak (whom uses other brands) so highly of the DA 560 + Pentax combo (when it worked). Shooting with something that long is not my genre so I am really clueless beyond FA77 reach. But I've always felt Pentax has superb IQ and it's major strengths are it's lenses. I can't help feel that they are really trying to rectify the camera body to make users like you 'come back' to them.

[Smolk]

I may have missed this in the by now very long thread, but looking at the announcement of the 85mm and price just today, I accidentally clicked on an old link. Turned out this was the camerabody of the K-1 before it was released, but as it was shown on CP+ in 2015.
Now what is interesting here, is that it had no articulating screen. See The rest of the new Pentax full frame K-mount DSLR camera *UPDATED* - Photo Rumors This was a year before it was released.
Perhaps the entire discussion about the screen is premature. It may still have no articulating screen, but such a prototype body is possibly not a solid basis to draw any conclusions.

[bxf]

I may have missed this in the by now very long thread, but looking at the announcement of the 85mm and price just today, I accidentally clicked on an old link. Turned out this was the camerabody of the K-1 before it was released, but as it was shown on CP+ in 2015.
Now what is interesting here, is that it had no articulating screen. See The rest of the new Pentax full frame K-mount DSLR camera *UPDATED* - Photo Rumors This was a year before it was released.
Perhaps the entire discussion about the screen is premature. It may still have no articulating screen, but such a prototype body is possibly not a solid basis to draw any conclusions.

Ha, if the K-new shows up with an articulating screen, I'm going to have to go out and shoot a bunch or crows for some people's lunch.

[Larrymc]

I may have missed this in the by now very long thread, but looking at the announcement of the 85mm and price just today, I accidentally clicked on an old link. Turned out this was the camerabody of the K-1 before it was released, but as it was shown on CP+ in 2015.
Now what is interesting here, is that it had no articulating screen. See The rest of the new Pentax full frame K-mount DSLR camera *UPDATED* - Photo Rumors This was a year before it was released.
Perhaps the entire discussion about the screen is premature. It may still have no articulating screen, but such a prototype body is possibly not a solid basis to draw any conclusions.

Surely you don't think those photos represent an early version of the K-1. That is a plastic mock-up of what the proposed basic shape might be for the K-1 and nothing else and one could argue that the bulk of the rear screen on the mock-up represented what the articulated screen might look like stowed. Clean your glasses dude and clear your mind.

[monochrome]

I may have missed this in the by now very long thread, but looking at the announcement of the 85mm and price just today, I accidentally clicked on an old link. Turned out this was the camerabody of the K-1 before it was released, but as it was shown on CP+ in 2015.
Now what is interesting here, is that it had no articulating screen. See The rest of the new Pentax full frame K-mount DSLR camera *UPDATED* - Photo Rumors This was a year before it was released.
Perhaps the entire discussion about the screen is premature. It may still have no articulating screen, but such a prototype body is possibly not a solid basis to draw any conclusions.

The photos in that post clearly show the retracted Moon Lander articulating screen outline on the 3-D printed K-1 mockup. The current K-new working samples show no such thing. There is NO articulating screen on the cameras shown so far.

[lotech]

Pretty much, unlike pretty much all the other Dslr companys who upcoming cameras are pretty much "leaked" like 6+ months in advanced before being "officially" announced, any "leaks" on upcoming Pentax dslr's are usually followed by an official announcement like a few days after

Coz Pentax having the world class weather sealing nothing leaks

---------- Post added 05-30-20 at 09:14 AM ----------

"1.05x magnification on the optical viewfinder just like a K-1."

What do you mean "just like a K-1"?

Such a viewfinder magnification is unheard of for an APS-C camera!

For some, an important perk of an FF camera is the higher viewfinder magnification. Now the same (probably not quite as bright) experience is available for APS-C users. That is remarkable!

So combine with the 1.2x eyepiece I will get medium format