[Jeff]

Left field 135

I'd sell a kidney for that.

My worry is that I'll have aged too much by the time it gets released! Greenland will have melted completely by then...

[Wheatfield]

I'd not priced a 300mm f2.8 before. Using one of the big NY stores as reference, and obviously other mounts since this doesn't exist for k-mount, $5k to $6k seems likely. That surprised me. I don't think the Pentax user base, by and large, could stomach anything like that.

That's what they said about thousand dollar 50mm lenses and two thousand dollar 85mm lenses........

[SSGGeezer]

That's what they said about thousand dollar 50mm lenses and two thousand dollar 85mm lenses........

Folks bought the DFA 150-350 at $3K, and a few bought the 560 at a lot more. I would buy something like a long Focal length modernized copy of the FA* series Teles. Just to go with my 150-450, and for a bit more speed.

[BROO]

I think there is a difference now with both ASP-C format and FF format lenses/cameras available compared to film days where there was only FF K-mount lenses.

For example, would a 135 mm f 2 FF lens be worth the time and money to develop when the 85 mm f 1.4 on the K new would give similar results as a portrait lens, with the K-new having equivalent OVF coverage to a FF camera (x1.05), more AF points and better AF tracking etc? Even if it does have 26 mp sensor (potentially 32 or 36 Mp into the future for ASP-C format), that is more than enough for portrait type of work.

As you go further into the realm of FF telephoto lenses the argument for them becomes weaker. (cost, size, weight and sales potential)

Personally I would like Ricoh to make a 250mm f 2.0 DA* lens. It would be a perfect accompaniment for the K-new and quite unique selling point.

[SSGGeezer]

Folk

Personally I would like Ricoh to make a 250mm f 2.0 DA* lens. It would be a perfect accompaniment for the K-new and quite unique selling point.

I think the patent hunters here on PF have uncovered the next DA and it will be a zoom, not a longish telephoto lens. That would still be pretty large and it would be cheaper to buy a DA* 60-250 as other than slow focusing, it is a lovely lens.
There are plenty of lenses on the roadmap and what will get made in a company as small as Ricoh's Pentax arm seems to be pretty well decided.

[lesmore49]

Pentax has a long history of producing exemplary 35mm lenses (especially f/3.5 lenses), going back to the tiny Auto-Takumar 35/3.5. They have a DFA*50/1.4 and FA50/1.4 in the catalog* so I see no reason the existing FA35/2 should preclude a fast FF 35mm * lans.


* not considering the APSc lenses

I have a copy of the Carl Zeiss SLR lenses catalogue from a few years back. I value it.

One of the lenses they feature is the Distagon T* F 1.4, 35mm lens, as per full frame, if I have interpreted the specs properly Alas no K mount for this lens, even back then.

Zeiss calls it "The Modern Light Artist". They advertise it as capable of excellent bokeh and excellent for a wide range of use...reportage, portrait or landscape photography.

To me, a fast 35mm @ F 1.4 would be a wonderful 'everyday' lens for a camera like my K1, but probably with the battery grip and spare battery removed...to cut away weight/size...to complement everyday carry.

Not too wide angle, but enough...also close enough to a 'normal' for me. And fast @ F 1.4 for low available light, which is one of my passions.

Now a 35mm F 1.4 from Pentax would be a dream lens for me.

[Wheatfield]

Folks bought the DFA 150-350 at $3K, and a few bought the 560 at a lot more. I would buy something like a long Focal length modernized copy of the FA* series Teles. Just to go with my 150-450, and for a bit more speed.

Exactly.

My A15/3.5 was custom built for me, for example, and expensive. A few days after I placed the order I got a call from my pusher explaining that there would be a delay of “up to several weeks” while it was built and shipped, and was I ok with that or did I want to cancel.
Who could turn down a lens being custom built just for themselves?.
Not me.

Anyway, they’ve shown that they can sell expensive, low volume, stuff Into a small market even if they don’t generate big numbers in the mass market. . I hope for what I am paying they are making a bit of profit from me.
The question always asked is “how many will they sell at that price?”
The answer appears to be “enough”.
While we’ve been beefing about not having enough lenses, they’ve released fourteen over the past five years, nine full frame if I can count that high.
I think this stuff we are seeing now is the Pentax version of the upgrade path that people said was missing.

---------- Post added Jun 27th, 2020 at 08:16 PM ----------

I have a copy of the Carl Zeiss SLR lenses catalogue from a few years back. I value it.

One of the lenses they feature is the Distagon T* F 1.4, 35mm lens, as per full frame, if I have interpreted the specs properly Alas no K mount for this lens, even back then.

Zeiss calls it "The Modern Light Artist". They advertise it as capable of excellent bokeh and excellent for a wide range of use...reportage, portrait or landscape photography.

To me, a fast 35mm @ F 1.4 would be a wonderful 'everyday' lens for a camera like my K1, but probably with the battery grip and spare battery removed...to cut away weight/size...to complement everyday carry.

Not too wide angle, but enough...also close enough to a 'normal' for me. And fast @ F 1.4 for low available light, which is one of my passions.

Now a 35mm F 1.4 from Pentax would be a dream lens for me.

I quite like my 35/2 lenses. They are my go to wides. I like the 31 a lot, but it is wide enough to be more of a special use lens for me. It’s my go to for car shows, and is a fantastic standard lens on APS-C
For me, 28m is both too wide and not wide enough.
I would like to see a 35/1.4, I expect I would buy one.
I don’t know why I just thought of this, and it’s way OT, but when I was starting out at this, I always wanted a 35, 50 and 85 mm lenses. Some years ago I put together a Nikon F2s kit withe those three lenses to spoil my inner 16 year old camera nerd, and I added a 105 as well.
We have the 50, and 85, doing a D FA* 35/1.4 after the 21LTD, which I expect is next, would be grand.

[lesmore49]

Exactly.

My A15/3.5 was custom built for me, for example, and expensive. A few days after I placed the order I got a call from my pusher explaining that there would be a delay of “up to several weeks” while it was built and shipped, and was I ok with that or did I want to cancel.
Who could turn down a lens being custom built just for themselves?.
Not me.

Anyway, they’ve shown that they can sell expensive, low volume, stuff Into a small market even if they don’t generate big numbers in the mass market. . I hope for what I am paying they are making a bit of profit from me.
The question always asked is “how many will they sell at that price?”
The answer appears to be “enough”.
While we’ve been beefing about not having enough lenses, they’ve released fourteen over the past five years, nine full frame if I can count that high.
I think this stuff we are seeing now is the Pentax version of the upgrade path that people said was missing.

---------- Post added Jun 27th, 2020 at 08:16 PM ----------



I quite like my 35/2 lenses. They are my go to wides. I like the 31 a lot, but it is wide enough to be more of a special use lens for me. It’s my go to for car shows, and is a fantastic standard lens on APS-C
For me, 28m is both too wide and not wide enough.
I would like to see a 35/1.4, I expect I would buy one.
I don’t know why I just thought of this, and it’s way OT, but when I was starting out at this, I always wanted a 35, 50 and 85 mm lenses. Some years ago I put together a Nikon F2s kit withe those three lenses to spoil my inner 16 year old camera nerd, and I added a 105 as well.
We have the 50, and 85, doing a D FA* 35/1.4 after the 21LTD, which I expect is next, would be grand.

I'm a fan of vintage vehicle shows...the outdoor ones. I've been going to them for years...out here, down in Dakota Territory, northern Minnesota, Alberta, Saskatchewan...including some prairie Super runs.

For years I used my K10D, K5 , mostly with my Pentax 12-24, 21, 50 Macro and 16-45 earlier. When I got my K1...mostly at first the 28-105....then my 100 D FA F 2.8 WR Macro lens...which became one of my favourite lenses...mostly because I was able to close in on particular design aspects of vintage vehicles, rather than a full view. Also I got tired of continuing to contend with people, orange traffic cones and light standards in photos.

I recently bought a 24-70 F 2.8, but with Covid have not had much opportunity to use ...no car shows.

Regarding your Nikon body/lenses. Sometimes I've thought if my Pentax equipment was stolen...what would I do ?

Would I remain with Pentax...50+ years now....or would I strike out in another direction and if I did, it would probably be Nikon. A FF DSLR body, a 105 Macro or Micro...whatever Nikon calls it, a fast 28 or 35 , a 70-200 and maybe a Sigma/Tamron 150-600.

My Pentax 12-24 is fine, but I've drifted away from super wide angle shots @ 12mm or so.

But I have been thinking as I get on in age....for my digital equipment I may look at a minimalist approach.

A K1...less grip and spare battery, a Pentax 35mm F 1.4 if offered, my 100 Macro F 2.8 and my 24-70 F 2.8. And my Ricoh GR ll, which is light, robust and I really like.

[luftfluss]

Folks bought the DFA 150-350 at $3K, and a few bought the 560 at a lot more. I would buy something like a long Focal length modernized copy of the FA* series Teles. Just to go with my 150-450, and for a bit more speed.

Would you buy a DFA* 300/2.8 or a 400/4 that is at least 2.5 kg and cost around $7k?

[RobA_Oz]

I'd not priced a 300mm f2.8 before. Using one of the big NY stores as reference, and obviously other mounts since this doesn't exist for k-mount, $5k to $6k seems likely. That surprised me. I don't think the Pentax user base, by and large, could stomach anything like that.


A new, shockingly good full-frame TC probably makes more sense from a development & ecosystem needs standpoint. And some extension tubes...

I’ve no idea what “by and large” means, but there’s a fair few of that user base here, who have forked out for some of the new lenses (me included), including the new D FA*85 (which I’ve currently baulked at, but you never know). There was a shock when the Hoya fire sale of inventory ran out and prices rose, but we’ve had to come to terms with the new pricing regime for lenses in the period since then. Nonetheless, there are still reasonably-priced Pentax lenses for many situations, just not (yet) for the longer focal lengths, not even at higher prices, as you’ve rightly identified.

I agree, though, that a new tele-converter would be very useful, but that’s not going to be cheap, either. Extension tubes that transmit lens information to the body would be good, too.

[SSGGeezer]

Would you buy a DFA* 300/2.8 or a 400/4 that is at least 2.5 kg and cost around $7k?

I would, especially if the 400 f/4 had a matching TC, I certainly would. I would have to save for quite a while, but yes I would find a way to buy it. The 300 f/2.8 is nice but since I own the 150-450 and the DA*300 f/4 it doesn't seem like an urgent need.

[zzeitg]

Agreed if there would be several 70-300 prosumer zooms made for FF. But there aren’t. For crop, yes. I’m for one looking forward to get this zoom to replace my 55-300 WR. I can imagine that there are several others too.

Not saying that updated FA*300/2.8 would not be a good thing with 1,4&2.0 TC to match or even that 400/4 even if there would be just few buying those things. I know for my self that I’m not one of them, still it would be cool to have DFA* long primes available.Perhaps after they have seen how these new DFA* trio will sell after release?

That's right, of course. But then again (at least that's the opinion that I have) it's better to use APS-C when it comes to long telephoto lenses (except some special situations).
However - and that's the main point - there's a clear and obvious difference in image quality between 300 f/2.8 and 300 f/4 or 560 f/5.6 and 600 f/4 and I take the plunge to say that I can differentiate them usually at first sight. Thinking about it a little longer, 300 f/2.8 (plus the TCs you mentioned) might be the most desirable one. IMHO the best compromise, considering portability, focal length, lens speed and noise handling on KP or the future K3 III.

[Serkevan]

better to use APS-C when it comes to long telephoto lenses

That is true, but I'd say that a lot of people with K-1s (myself included) carry *a* tele lens for general-purpose outdoors photography, so something with good-enough IQ in a relatively light and small package is just very practical. I guess the 55-300 fits the bill so far but if they can make it a bit more FF-friendly and slightly faster it would be great

[repaap]

That's right, of course. But then again (at least that's the opinion that I have) it's better to use APS-C when it comes to long telephoto lenses (except some special situations).
However - and that's the main point - there's a clear and obvious difference in image quality between 300 f/2.8 and 300 f/4 or 560 f/5.6 and 600 f/4 and I take the plunge to say that I can differentiate them usually at first sight. Thinking about it a little longer, 300 f/2.8 (plus the TCs you mentioned) might be the most desirable one. IMHO the best compromise, considering portability, focal length, lens speed and noise handling on KP or the future K3 III.

I completelly agree.


And for me 70-300 is just going to companie my 28-105 + selected prime set when I go abroad and can't take my 70-200/2.8 with me. And walkabouts, ect.

higher needs Tele is missing from modern lineup. But who knows, perhaps they are dusting off some very fine tele lenses, like FA*300/2.8 as we speak. Make AW sealing, modern high torg DC motor...

[SSGGeezer]

I completelly agree.


And for me 70-300 is just going to companie my 28-105 + selected prime set when I go abroad and can't take my 70-200/2.8 with me. And walkabouts, ect.

higher needs Tele is missing from modern lineup. But who knows, perhaps they are dusting off some very fine tele lenses, like FA*300/2.8 as we speak. Make AW sealing, modern high torg DC motor...

I would be ok with that as a Limited with WR and not a * lens. Just new motor, coatings, and KAF 4 on the old design. then maybe it won't cost $6K USD.