PENTAX DFA70-300 SR patent public

fsge · 06-11-2020, 04:54 AM

Originally posted by normhead

I was just thinking 400mm is really nice on APS-c , 600mm equivalent, but it's a sort of half way there number on FF. On FF 600 is the magic number. MY guess is a 400 ƒ4, while awesome in that it would give you 560 ƒ5.6 with a TC, would be pricey.

Check out the Canon 400 ƒ4

$9,000 dollars Canadian

I wonder if Pentax even has any of that type of customer left, people who want to drop $9000 on a lens.

A 400 ƒ4 would be as much glass as the 560 ƒ5.6 which costs over $5000 Canadian.

So yes a 400 ƒ4 would be nice, but it's unlikely many would buy it. And with other brands having 500 ƒ4, and 600 ƒ4, I'm not sure it would help Pentax much. Anyone going for really long lenses is probably not still with Pentax, although some of the big spenders that are left have bought legacy glass, where those kinds of numbers are common.

My choice would be a replacement for my Tamron 300 2.8 and a matched 2x TC. YOu'd still be looking at $4000 CDN minimum.

Or were you looking to drop $10k ?

There's little more frustrating than trying to find affordable long glass solutions.

I doubt there are a lot of pentax customers for this kind of pricy lens.
150-450 seems to sell well for 2000 USD+ which is significant but still affordable. I own this zoom and I find it too heavy to carry it as often as possible or as often as I wish to. A 400 f4 should not be lighter and 3 times the price...

Kunzite · 06-11-2020, 05:02 AM - **4 Likes**

What did I say about negativity? We're the only brand for which a newly announced (or plausible) lens is met with "is it a Tamron? what if it's a Tamron?"
Even Tamrons are less suspected of being Tamrons.

**Serkevan** · 06-11-2020, 05:14 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

What did I say about negativity? We're the only brand for which a newly announced (or plausible) lens is met with "is it a Tamron? what if it's a Tamron?"
Even Tamrons are less suspected of being Tamrons.

Come on, there was one comment!

All of this talk about long lenses has me looking at 400mm teles (I have nothing over 210mm). There's a basically never used Tokina RMC 400/5.6 with tripod foot for about a hundred locally... or I could just splurge some more and grab the PLM... decisions.

EDIT: Screw it, I'm inquiring. Moon shots and dramatic sunsets, here I go.

bertwert · 06-11-2020, 06:51 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Serkevan

Come on, there was one comment!

All of this talk about long lenses has me looking at 400mm teles (I have nothing over 210mm). There's a basically never used Tokina RMC 400/5.6 with tripod foot for about a hundred locally... or I could just splurge some more and grab the PLM... decisions.

EDIT: Screw it, I'm inquiring. Moon shots and dramatic sunsets, here I go.

For a hundred, do it. The results on the review page are better than I'd expect too. Though I do suggest an A 400 instead, it's an awesome little (big I mean...) lens. And you don't need any tripod like that blabber earlier. Actually, what is a tripod? Only handheld shooting here

repaap · 06-11-2020, 06:54 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by thibs

If the said lens is indeed relateds to this patent, it can't be Tamron or the patent would be labelled with Tamron on it and not Pentax.
But Ricoh might end with the same decision as the 70-210/4. Might.

Exactly, Why would Ricoh file a patent of their lens, if it is Tamron?

**Serkevan** · 06-11-2020, 06:58 AM

Originally posted by bertwert

For a hundred, do it. The results on the review page are better than I'd expect too. Though I do suggest an A 400 instead, it's an awesome little (big I mean...) lens. And you don't need any tripod like that blabber earlier. Actually, what is a tripod? Only handheld shooting here

No longer available unfortunately

. But the A might be a more practical option anyway... hmm.

**TwoUptons** · 06-11-2020, 11:34 AM

Originally posted by Serkevan

No longer available unfortunately

. But the A might be a more practical option anyway... hmm.

I had the Tokina... the Pentax A 400 is better... I really like mine...

-Eric

thibs · 06-11-2020, 07:06 PM

Originally posted by repaap

Why would Ricoh file a patent of their lens, if it is Tamron?

That's what I wrote didn't I ?

**RobA_Oz** · 06-11-2020, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by repaap

Isn’t there 560/5,6 already available? That should be good

The DA560/5.6 is a telescope-type design. If they changed the rear element cluster (and presumably shortened the body in the process), they could produce a 400/4 using a fair amount of the componentry from the 560/5.6.

I’d assume, though, that the thought had occurred to them. Maybe they’ll do it when the D FA150-450 development costs have been written off.

repaap · 06-11-2020, 09:41 PM

Originally posted by thibs

That's what I wrote didn't I ?

Indeed you did. Have to say, that perhaps I should have added a word -exactly- in beginning of my quite.

---------- Post added 06-12-20 at 07:49 ----------

Originally posted by RobA_Oz

The DA560/5.6 is a telescope-type design. If they changed the rear element cluster (and presumably shortened the body in the process), they could produce a 400/4 using a fair amount of the componentry from the 560/5.6.

I’d assume, though, that the thought had occurred to them. Maybe they’ll do it when the D FA150-450 development costs have been written off.

I think that they wanted to make that telescope design for a purpose to get better quality at long distances.

---------- Post added 06-12-20 at 07:50 ----------

Originally posted by RobA_Oz

The DA560/5.6 is a telescope-type design. If they changed the rear element cluster (and presumably shortened the body in the process), they could produce a 400/4 using a fair amount of the componentry from the 560/5.6.

I’d assume, though, that the thought had occurred to them. Maybe they’ll do it when the D FA150-450 development costs have been written off.

I think that they wanted to make that telescope design for a purpose to get better quality at long distances.

06-11-2020, 05:14 AM	#93
Serkevan Site Supporter Join Date: May 2019 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,976	Originally posted by Kunzite What did I say about negativity? We're the only brand for which a newly announced (or plausible) lens is met with "is it a Tamron? what if it's a Tamron?" Even Tamrons are less suspected of being Tamrons. Come on, there was one comment! All of this talk about long lenses has me looking at 400mm teles (I have nothing over 210mm). There's a basically never used Tokina RMC 400/5.6 with tripod foot for about a hundred locally... or I could just splurge some more and grab the PLM... decisions. EDIT: Screw it, I'm inquiring. Moon shots and dramatic sunsets, here I go. Last edited by Serkevan; 06-11-2020 at 05:25 AM.

06-11-2020, 06:54 AM - 1 Like	#95
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	Originally posted by thibs If the said lens is indeed relateds to this patent, it can't be Tamron or the patent would be labelled with Tamron on it and not Pentax. But Ricoh might end with the same decision as the 70-210/4. Might. Exactly, Why would Ricoh file a patent of their lens, if it is Tamron? Last edited by repaap; 06-11-2020 at 09:46 PM. Reason: Added Exactly to clear things up

06-11-2020, 07:20 PM	#99
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,197	Originally posted by repaap Isn’t there 560/5,6 already available? That should be good The DA560/5.6 is a telescope-type design. If they changed the rear element cluster (and presumably shortened the body in the process), they could produce a 400/4 using a fair amount of the componentry from the 560/5.6. I’d assume, though, that the thought had occurred to them. Maybe they’ll do it when the D FA150-450 development costs have been written off. Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
“Fish Gut Sword”DFA70-210/4 review	OoKU	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	37	05-05-2020 04:16 PM
DFA70-210 price down	biz-engineer	Pentax Price Watch	6	04-26-2020 03:30 AM
Ricoh public DFA*50/1.4 patent in Japan	OoKU	Pentax News and Rumors	32	08-25-2019 02:27 AM
"Rules" when photographing the public in a public place?	Mr. H	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	11	09-12-2007 11:05 PM

06-11-2020, 04:54 AM	#91
fsge Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Genf Posts: 1,138	Originally posted by normhead I was just thinking 400mm is really nice on APS-c , 600mm equivalent, but it's a sort of half way there number on FF. On FF 600 is the magic number. MY guess is a 400 ƒ4, while awesome in that it would give you 560 ƒ5.6 with a TC, would be pricey. Check out the Canon 400 ƒ4 $9,000 dollars Canadian I wonder if Pentax even has any of that type of customer left, people who want to drop $9000 on a lens. A 400 ƒ4 would be as much glass as the 560 ƒ5.6 which costs over $5000 Canadian. So yes a 400 ƒ4 would be nice, but it's unlikely many would buy it. And with other brands having 500 ƒ4, and 600 ƒ4, I'm not sure it would help Pentax much. Anyone going for really long lenses is probably not still with Pentax, although some of the big spenders that are left have bought legacy glass, where those kinds of numbers are common. My choice would be a replacement for my Tamron 300 2.8 and a matched 2x TC. YOu'd still be looking at $4000 CDN minimum. Or were you looking to drop $10k ? There's little more frustrating than trying to find affordable long glass solutions. I doubt there are a lot of pentax customers for this kind of pricy lens. 150-450 seems to sell well for 2000 USD+ which is significant but still affordable. I own this zoom and I find it too heavy to carry it as often as possible or as often as I wish to. A 400 f4 should not be lighter and 3 times the price...

06-11-2020, 05:02 AM - 4 Likes	#92
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	What did I say about negativity? We're the only brand for which a newly announced (or plausible) lens is met with "is it a Tamron? what if it's a Tamron?" Even Tamrons are less suspected of being Tamrons.

06-11-2020, 06:51 AM - 1 Like	#94
bertwert Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Golden, BC Posts: 15,173	Originally posted by Serkevan Come on, there was one comment! All of this talk about long lenses has me looking at 400mm teles (I have nothing over 210mm). There's a basically never used Tokina RMC 400/5.6 with tripod foot for about a hundred locally... or I could just splurge some more and grab the PLM... decisions. EDIT: Screw it, I'm inquiring. Moon shots and dramatic sunsets, here I go. For a hundred, do it. The results on the review page are better than I'd expect too. Though I do suggest an A 400 instead, it's an awesome little (big I mean...) lens. And you don't need any tripod like that blabber earlier. Actually, what is a tripod? Only handheld shooting here

06-11-2020, 06:58 AM	#96
Serkevan Site Supporter Join Date: May 2019 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,976	Originally posted by bertwert For a hundred, do it. The results on the review page are better than I'd expect too. Though I do suggest an A 400 instead, it's an awesome little (big I mean...) lens. And you don't need any tripod like that blabber earlier. Actually, what is a tripod? Only handheld shooting here No longer available unfortunately . But the A might be a more practical option anyway... hmm.

06-11-2020, 11:34 AM	#97
TwoUptons Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,214	Originally posted by Serkevan No longer available unfortunately . But the A might be a more practical option anyway... hmm. I had the Tokina... the Pentax A 400 is better... I really like mine... -Eric

06-11-2020, 07:06 PM	#98
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by repaap Why would Ricoh file a patent of their lens, if it is Tamron? That's what I wrote didn't I ?

06-11-2020, 09:41 PM	#100
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	Originally posted by thibs That's what I wrote didn't I ? Indeed you did. Have to say, that perhaps I should have added a word -exactly- in beginning of my quite. ---------- Post added 06-12-20 at 07:49 ---------- Originally posted by RobA_Oz The DA560/5.6 is a telescope-type design. If they changed the rear element cluster (and presumably shortened the body in the process), they could produce a 400/4 using a fair amount of the componentry from the 560/5.6. I’d assume, though, that the thought had occurred to them. Maybe they’ll do it when the D FA150-450 development costs have been written off. I think that they wanted to make that telescope design for a purpose to get better quality at long distances. ---------- Post added 06-12-20 at 07:50 ---------- Originally posted by RobA_Oz The DA560/5.6 is a telescope-type design. If they changed the rear element cluster (and presumably shortened the body in the process), they could produce a 400/4 using a fair amount of the componentry from the 560/5.6. I’d assume, though, that the thought had occurred to them. Maybe they’ll do it when the D FA150-450 development costs have been written off. I think that they wanted to make that telescope design for a purpose to get better quality at long distances.