[gaweidert]

I don't think the 2x TC has been announced or even publicly scheduled - at least, I don't see it on the latest lens roadmap.

It was at one time but disappeared a few years ago. Quite disappointing.

[luftfluss]

The 2x FF TCs have been mentioned in a interview with Ricoh officials in 2018.
Pentax interview collection - Pentax interview list - PentaxForums.com

And addidional confirmation leaked by Asahi man in my thread too:
FF TC - full frame teleconverter - Page 2 - PentaxForums.com

Yes, but nothing official from Ricoh themselves. We could see a new FF TC in 2021... or 2025. I don't think it is a good idea to buy a new lens based on the assumption that the TC's are are going to be available in the near future.

[luftfluss]

It was at one time but disappeared a few years ago. Quite disappointing.

I wonder... the latest 2x TC's from Canon and Olympus are very impressive. I was floored when I saw full-size sample photos. Perhaps Ricoh is further tweaking their design(s).

[normhead]

I wonder... the latest 2x TC's from Canon and Olympus are very impressive. I was floored when I saw full-size sample photos. Perhaps Ricoh is further tweaking their design(s).

When you have a top of class lens to put it on, it makes little sense to release a less than top of class TC.

[luftfluss]

When you have a top of class lens to put it on, it makes little sense to release a less than top of class TC.

I hope... maybe we'll see a D FA* 300/2.8 released along with the 2 FF TC's

[normhead]

I hope... maybe we'll see a D FA* 300/2.8 released along with the 2 FF TC's

The Canon and Nikon 70-200s with 2x are a pretty popular combination for wildlife. I've always felt Pentax was at a disadvantage here because they didn't have one.

I shudder to think what the size and cost of a Pentax 300 2.8 would be. I'm guessing my Tamron will be the only 300 2.8 I'll ever own, and it works pretty good with the Tamron MC7 2x TC.

So, I've already supported the concept, but probably won't support the Pentax implementation.

[luftfluss]

The Canon and Nikon 70-200s with 2x are a pretty popular combination for wildlife. I've always felt Pentax was at a disadvantage here because they didn't have one.

I shudder to think what the size and cost of a Pentax 300 2.8 would be. I'm guessing my Tamron will be the only 300 2.8 I'll ever own, and it works pretty good with the Tamron MC7 2x TC.

So, I've already supported the concept, but probably won't support the Pentax implementation.

Yeah, I want Pentax to develop a 300/2.8, but I won't buy it Too pricey, and as you say it will be large. Last year I was tempted by an A* 300/2.8 for $1000, but it's a pound and a half heavier than my Tamron 300/2.8 360B, so I decided not burden myself further.

Apologies to the OP for going so far off topic...

[gatorguy]

DA*200 would be my only choice fr casual portraits. Lighter than a 70-200 by a large margin for easy use.



I also use the DA 55-300 PLM, for super light weight but the fastest aperture is ƒ6.3 in the long end.

Right there with ya Norm.

[normhead]

The user ratings at the lensrevieviews here say about the sharpness:

9.7 - D FA 70-210mm F4 ED SDM WR
9.7 - DA* 300mm F4 ED [IF] SDM
9.7 - FA* 200mm F2.8 ED [IF]
9.6 - FA* 300mm F4.5 ED [IF]
9.5 - DA* 60-250mm F4 ED [IF] SDM
8.5 - F 70-210mm F4-5.6

All DA* and WR lenses are weather sealed.

The D FA* 70-200mm f2.8 is worth every cent.
HD Pentax-D FA* 70-200mm F2.8 ED DC AW Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

Given that I'm here I may as well comment.

The F 70-210 was a last attempt to improve IQ without the expense of aspherical elements. It purple fringes worse than any of the above mentioned, to the point where it is impossible to use with a TC, as the TC will magnify the purple fringing.

I've used it as a"take along in case needed when you don' expect to use it" type lens. In the session from which this was taken, a mink spotted in a pond while going shopping, in the end I wished I brought my DA*60-250. I got some images, but purple fringing ruined many of them.



I recommend it only to folks who can't afford better. It will cost you some images. Anyone with a DA 55-300 PLM seriously doesn't need it and shouldn't consider it.

When looking for quality lenses, I usually don't look at lenses rated less than 9, preferably 9.5 or over. Above 9, it can be really hard to see any difference between images taken with any of them with constant framing and DoF.

These are amazing pictures. Did not know that exiting TC is compatible with full frame. I was wrong

Not entirely, it's a decision that has to be made lens by lens.

[Ash]

Lots of good advice and experience here. Comes down to costs (financial AND weight burden, which isn’t insignificant even for the strong and capable, especially after an hour of shooting with a DFA 70-200) vs benefits (IQ and aesthetic effect for the purpose, i.e. best effect for portraiture), and availability, which on the top of my list would be the DA* 200, then probably Tamron 70-200 (good versatility and speed), then the 135 primes (notwithstanding how hard they are to find for sale). The sweet spot for single person portraiture to me is 100-150mm with an f/2.8 or faster lens.

But if cost were no barrier, I’d consider the DFA 85/1.4, which I presume would bring the wow factor to portraiture.

Don’t forget the very decent DFA 100 macro. Very good also for portraits and a decent bokeh at the f/2.8-5.6 range.

[normhead]

Lots of good advice and experience here. Comes down to costs (financial AND weight burden, which isn’t insignificant even for the strong and capable, especially after an hour of shooting with a DFA 70-200) vs benefits (IQ and aesthetic effect for the purpose, i.e. best effect for portraiture), and availability, which on the top of my list would be the DA* 200, then probably Tamron 70-200 (good versatility and speed), then the 135 primes (notwithstanding how hard they are to find for sale). The sweet spot for single person portraiture to me is 100-150mm with an f/2.8 or faster lens.

But if cost were no barrier, I’d consider the DFA 85/1.4, which I presume would bring the wow factor to portraiture.

Don’t forget the very decent DFA 100 macro. Very good also for portraits and a decent bokeh at the f/2.8-5.6 range.

The Sigma 70 macro is also a good portrait lens, if you can find one.

[Ash]

The Sigma 70 macro is also a good portrait lens, if you can find one.

The OP already has an FA 77, which I’d think is superior for portraiture but he was looking for longer lenses to create more of that subject separation. The DFA 85 would do this given its f/1.4 capability, and so would longer lenses at f/2.8.

[normhead]

The OP already has an FA 77, which I’d think is superior for portraiture but he was looking for longer lenses to create more of that subject separation. The DFA 85 would do this given its f/1.4 capability, and so would longer lenses at f/2.8.

Good point, I'd really like to see a comparison 85 1.4 and 200 2.8 if anyone has both.

[gatorguy]

Good point, I'd really like to see a comparison 85 1.4 and 200 2.8 if anyone has both.

I have an FA85, FA77, and your DFA200. If you want to see wide open comparisons I think I'll be doing a portrait shoot this weekend and could post a few from the K1. But I don't have the HD DFA85 if that's the one you wanted to see.

[normhead]

That would be awesome gatorguy. If you get chance without too much trouble.