[LaurenOE]

I have the Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 and IQ wise, it's not up to the DA* 50-135 - which is easily one of the best lenses I own. In APS-C the DA* 50-235 *is* a 70-200.

So if Pentax has just up-leveled the new 70-200 f/2.8 then it will be an amazing lens for both the FF and APS-C bodies.

I want this lens more than any other at the moment.

[RobA_Oz]

The D-Fa* 70-200 f2.8 is going to be a harder sell compared to the new 24-70 or the 150-450 because of the 3rd party alternatives and the niche range it occupies ( wedding photogs and wealthy enthusiast) As much as i love the Pentax built and IQ (AW, contrast, colors) I imagine many like me won't be able to justify selling their Tamron and Sigma lenses valued at 1/4 of the price of the D-Fa* 70-200. Perhaps Canonikon converts used to paying high prices wouldn't think twice of buying the new d-Fa lenses. The FF system is going to be a very expensive proposition.

Let's not forget that the "Canikon converts" also have the choice of the Tamron and the Sigma offerings. In the past, there were also cheaper Tamron and Sigma zooms available in this range which were up against the higher-priced Pentax equivalents, but enough of the latter were sold (along with the even higher-priced A*, F* and FA* lenses) to justify Pentax making them. Of course a higher price makes for a harder sell, but harder doesn't mean impossible. We all should be aware that the price-performance curve isn't a straight line, and people will pay what they can justify. I also don't think anything with the Pentax brand should be regarded as a "budget" offering (a repeat of the way the "Takumar" name was unnecessarily cheapened in the past wouldn't be helpful) at least while the brand is being rebuilt.

[Rondec]

A lot depends on what you need. I think the Tamron is a decent option, although I don't think there are any current Sigma 70-200 f2.8 lenses that are offered for K mount. The thing that is nice is that Pentax is trying to release lenses that are premium in nature (and therefore command a premium price). No skimping on anything to cut down on size and placing a really nice auto focus motor/system.

Clearly there are plenty of folks who are willing to drop 2000 dollars on a lens -- if it delivers from an image quality standpoint, but it won't be for everyone. I'm just glad that we have more options these days to choose from.

[VoiceOfReason]

I think my biggest reason that I can't justify it is that I am an amateur photographer who does it for fun. Sure, I've made a little money at it, but I am not a pro at all. I've sold a print, done a few photoshoots, and had a couple pics in a smaller, regional magazine. That's it. You can look in my profile and see that I have FF covered from 12mm to 500mm (multiply that by 1.7 for the AF adapter) and APSC from 8mm to 500mm. I have a few camera bodies, and none of my stuff was anywhere near the 2000+ price range. I simply can't justify maybe making my images 5-10% better for that cost.

Now if I were a professional, shooting at the pro level, making money from it then I would do whatever I could to get that last little bit out for a print, the squeak that tiny bit of microcontrast and sharpness out of my images, even if it meant spending 3 times the cost of the next option.

[zzeitg]

"Anyone else waiting for feedback on the 70-200 2.8?"


Yeah, I'll gladly have a look on sample photos and detailed review, but I'm not gonna buy it. I bought a used FA* 80-200 f2.8 which is more than enough for me and honestly I don't even use it that often. I put this lens in my camera bag only when I expect to have to use a telephoto lens in poor light conditions or to shoot a quick action. But usually I rely on 60-250 (advantage of -20/+50mm) and for birding I prefer DA*300 with 1.4x TC. Should I ever spend more than 2,500 USD on a single lens, then it will be DA560 or to-be-announced (not even rumoured...) DFA* 600.

[Stavri]

A lot depends on what you need. I think the Tamron is a decent option, although I don't think there are any current Sigma 70-200 f2.8 lenses that are offered for K mount. The thing that is nice is that Pentax is trying to release lenses that are premium in nature (and therefore command a premium price). No skimping on anything to cut down on size and placing a really nice auto focus motor/system.

Clearly there are plenty of folks who are willing to drop 2000 dollars on a lens -- if it delivers from an image quality standpoint, but it won't be for everyone. I'm just glad that we have more options these days to choose from.

The new lenses seem to be amazing, no doubt about that there seems to be no compromises taken designing and implementing them. People on the 300mm+ thread have thrown everything but the kitchen sink at the new D-FA 150-450( Da* 60-240, Da* 300, Bigma, Ex 500 f4.5, FA* 300/f2.8 + 1.4 tc) and the telephoto has performed in spades. I'm happy to see Pentax producing such high caliber lenses, I'll watch from the sidelines while recovering from FF sticker shock, it's going to take some time to acclimate.

[LaurenOE]

I think most people who make money with their cameras, live under f/4.
Depth of field, bokeh, unpredictable light and subject separation are what make commercial images what they are.
f/8 would be the next tier in the same vein.

Lenses being what they are, to physically make that happen, cost more to achieve quality IQ.

I don't need a lens to *start* to perform at f/4.

As I look in Lightroom, and I do my metadata sorting, the data bears out this reality for me.

[Stavri]

I think most people who make money with their cameras, live under f/4.
Depth of field, bokeh, unpredictable light and subject separation are what make commercial images what they are.
f/8 would be the next tier in the same vein.

Lenses being what they are, to physically make that happen, cost more to achieve quality IQ.

I don't need a lens to *start* to perform at f/4.

As I look in Lightroom, and I do my metadata sorting, the data bears out this reality for me.

You're a professional who makes a living with your gear, you deserve to treat yourself to some nice D-Fa offerings. In our quotidian quibbles we amateurs forget that a number of those who make a living use Pentax and need premium lenses for their work to stay competitive.

[monochrome]

It is of course a decision. There's nothing wrong with not buying the 70~200, and there's nothing wrong with buying the 70~200. It just depends on what you will do (or won't do) with the money otherwise. This is my hobby. It's the hobby I've chosen. I drive invisible Dad cars and live in a plain house in a plain suburb doing plain old midwestern stuff. I really don't spend money lavishly. I have a few lenses and camera bodies I've owned since the late 70's and early 80's and I've bought more bodies and lenses a bit at a time since roughly 1999. Sure - I went overboard on closeout Q kits, but I gave those as gifts and they're still in use.

My shutter count on the K-3 is over 20,000 in 16 months - a decent number for a hobbyist - plus maybe 300+ negatives. Based on the money ceiling I have placed on this hobby I have two choices:

1. K-3 (every other flagship APSc), 6 former flagship film cameras, the FA Limiteds and 25 or 30 manual focus lenses - because that's fun!
2. The FF, the FA Limiteds and the 24~70 and 70~200 pro lenses - because the results could be top-notch and I would print large and frame!

So I have a decision to make. Fun for the sake of fun or fun work for the sake of output. I'll wait until I see how the K-FF is received and the results from the pro zooms. For me, it is all three of them or none.

I really have no preference which of the two options I end up doing - but it sure is a lot of work to change from 1. to 2.

[frogoutofwater]

I am a Pentax newbie. I recently got the K-50 and just ordered the K-3, due in no small part to the handling and performance of the K-50. I would really like to use the K-3 for action and sports shooting, but I am not sold on the 60-250 for this mainly because of the "slow to focus" comments. I really don't mind spending the money on the FA 70-200 if the results are there for this kind of shooting. I really don't plan on going FF in the future. I know, famous last words. But, have been down that road some, and for a hobbyist, even an avid one, I really didn't see the value except at super high ISO.

Secondly, does Pentax charge the early adopter tax like everyone else? If I wait a while will the price come down? Thanks

One question I have for you, scottyinfrisco, is whether you're a DSLR newbie (or just a Pentax newbie). If you're an experienced DSLR user, have already been shooting action and sports and know that you need a faster, fixed aperture lens like a 2.8 zoom, then this debate about which fast zoom makes sense for you.

However, if you (or other DSLR relative newbies) are reading this thread, you might want to consider picking up the weather-sealed 55-300 first. And even those who know they want the faster zoom, it's worth adding the 55-300 to your initial kit while you wait for the reviews on the FA 70-200 (and maybe a price drop). For a "consumer"-level lens, it's excellent in terms of image quality. It's also very compact and lightweight (given the zoom range) and it's weather-sealed, which makes it great for outdoor shooting. It's easy to hand-hold for long periods of time and it's light/small enough to pack in your kit all the time as a "just in case" zoom. I photograph animals outside a lot and this lens is on one of my K3s about 80-90% of the time, and I've had very good feedback on its image quality, with a couple of exceptions. Of course, it's not fast - so it's not be best choice if you're shooting in low light. (But some sports and action takes place in sunlight - or so I hear.) I also find it's not the best option when I'm focusing on something very small in the distance and I'm zoomed to 300mm. But aside from those limitations, it's a very good quality and good value lens to include in your initial kit.

[scottyinfrisco]

One question I have for you, scottyinfrisco, is whether you're a DSLR newbie (or just a Pentax newbie). If you're an experienced DSLR user, have already been shooting action and sports and know that you need a faster, fixed aperture lens like a 2.8 zoom, then this debate about which fast zoom makes sense for you.

However, if you (or other DSLR relative newbies) are reading this thread, you might want to consider picking up the weather-sealed 55-300 first. And even those who know they want the faster zoom, it's worth adding the 55-300 to your initial kit while you wait for the reviews on the FA 70-200 (and maybe a price drop). For a "consumer"-level lens, it's excellent in terms of image quality. It's also very compact and lightweight (given the zoom range) and it's weather-sealed, which makes it great for outdoor shooting. It's easy to hand-hold for long periods of time and it's light/small enough to pack in your kit all the time as a "just in case" zoom. I photograph animals outside a lot and this lens is on one of my K3s about 80-90% of the time, and I've had very good feedback on its image quality, with a couple of exceptions. Of course, it's not fast - so it's not be best choice if you're shooting in low light. (But some sports and action takes place in sunlight - or so I hear.) I also find it's not the best option when I'm focusing on something very small in the distance and I'm zoomed to 300mm. But aside from those limitations, it's a very good quality and good value lens to include in your initial kit.

I actually have the 55-300mm WR on the way. I plan to keep it regardless, mainly for the reasons you mentioned. I was concerned after reading comments on it hunting some. I think by in large this lens may fill my need, but I have thought about returning it for the 60-250 or 70-200. Currently I shoot with a Sony A6000 for this type of thing. I use the 55-210mm which is f6.3 at the long end and it performs just fine outside. I have a Samsung NX1, but none of the S series lenses. The NX1 tracking is at this point al dente IMO. I also use a Nikon D200 which is ancient by camera body standards with the 70-300 which is f5.6 at the long end. Again, outside works just fine. I am planning on selling my Nikon kit since the K3 is in the mail though.