Wildlife Photographers: DFA or DA 400mm 5.6

Imp · 07-18-2017, 06:41 PM

The DFA 150-450 is a great lens. Great build, unquestionable quality, etc. It's also very heavy and large.

I understand a 400 5.6 lens is perhaps not marketable or profitable, and maybe Pentax should be rightly focusing their efforts in other areas that need immediate attention, but... I would like to say that I would love a metal build, weather sealed, DC, 400mm 5.6 lens with great image quality.

The reason is that a 400mm 5.6 lens can be smaller and lighter than a 150-450 zoom while providing the same quality. I think this could appeal to birders and wildlife photographers who are dissuaded from purchasing the 150-450 because of the weight and the need for a monopod or tripod - if they are confident that they do not need the zoom.

I myself own a Tokina 400mm 5.6 ATX AF for this very reason - I need more reach than my HD DA 55-300 offers, yet even if I COULD afford the 150-450, it is an impractical lens for my uses.

I also understand that the DA* 300 f/4 with the HD DA 1.4x TC is equivalent to a 420mm 5.6, but it is not the same as a single lens, it doesn't inspire the same confidence. Maybe those who have used the combo might differ in that opinion. But it doesn't work with FF (?) so perhaps, potentially, somewhere down the line, Ricoh:

Keep a DFA 400mm 5.6 AW DC lens in the back of your mind! Maybe even DFA*? The goal is to support the many Pentaxians who strive for smaller and lighter lenses, and who are feeling perhaps a bit uncertain about the longer lens choice of the DFA 150-450 or the DA 560...

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

Last edited by Imp; 07-18-2017 at 06:46 PM.

Ole · 07-19-2017, 09:22 AM

The flexibility of a zoom is hard to match with a prime, so it comes down to what you use the lens for. I own the FA* 400/5.6 which is nicely compact for its range, but quite limiting in practice being a fixed focal length lens.

I have used a loaner D FA* 140-450 and it has excellent image quality and spot on AF. but, yeah, it IS heavy!

**boriscleto** · 07-19-2017, 09:25 AM

I think we are much more likely to see more giant zooms. Like a D FA* 250-600/5.6...

**jpzk** · 07-19-2017, 09:35 AM

Originally posted by Imp

I myself own a Tokina 400mm 5.6 ATX AF for this very reason - I need more reach than my HD DA 55-300 offers, yet even if I COULD afford the 150-450, it is an impractical lens for my uses.

Do you have any sample shots which you've taken with this lens?
I'm curious to see the IQ with this lens.

**boriscleto** · 07-19-2017, 09:39 AM

Originally posted by jpzk

Do you have any sample shots which you've taken with this lens?
I'm curious to see the IQ with this lens.

Have you ever looked at the ones in the sample archive?

Tokina 400mm ATX AF samples - PentaxForums.com

**jpzk** · 07-19-2017, 09:48 AM

Originally posted by boriscleto

Have you ever looked at the ones in the sample archive?

Tokina 400mm ATX AF samples - PentaxForums.com

Well thanks !

I've just browsed a bit of this archive (couple of pages ... will return to it later): pleasantly surprised with the results.
Since I am always looking for something longer than my DA*300/4 but with good IQ (I have the HD 1.4X TC and tried it with my DA*300 ... not good at all), this Tokina seems like a good deal.
No way I can afford the D FA 150-450 (the local/home manager would likely have me in isolation for a month !)

Thank for the link!

Gedeon · 07-19-2017, 11:58 AM

Like the Old, but very good canon 400mm f5.6
Just a dream, but Ricoh prefer to launch a damn big brick 50mm f1.4

**Pål Jensen** · 07-19-2017, 01:18 PM

The 150-450 is not heavy for a 450mm lens....

Imp · 07-19-2017, 06:20 PM - **1 Like**

Two of my images with the Tokina 400mm 5.6

Originally posted by Ole

The flexibility of a zoom is hard to match with a prime, so it comes down to what you use the lens for.

Certainly, especially with a telephoto. But sometimes the size/weight savings are worth it. On a recent trip to Canada, where I knew I would be doing frequent day hikes, I took a Tamron 17-50 2.8 and a Tokina 400 5.6 - it was rare I needed less reach. So you are right, it depends on your uses.

Garry Conway · 07-20-2017, 05:05 AM

I use the fa* 400 5.6 lens a lot and it is still an excellent lens. For me having it as a zoom wouldn't help very much. I find once you get onto the 400 + range the issue is that what ever you have as a lens, it just isn't long enough.

It's worth noting that the lens on my old K5 wasn't great when it came to finding focus. However, when I got my K1 it was a significant improvement. It seems the K1 focussing motor runs a lot faster and it finds the focal point faster and more often than my earlier Pentax cameras and because it is faster the noise of a screw driven lens doesn't seem as loud.

**aslyfox** · 07-20-2017, 05:36 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

The 150-450 is not heavy for a 450mm lens....

when I first read the O P comments in this thread, I decided to go to this thread:

Post your HD PENTAX-D FA 150-450mm F4.5-5.6 ED DC AW pictures! - PentaxForums.com

and find out if I was an "outlier" in mostly using the 150 - 400 mm without a tripod or monopod

the replies indicate that I am not.

I would recommend that people go to that thread for some great examples of what can be done with that lens with or without support

if you are really curious about the weight and how YOU might use one, consider renting one if you live in the US or other locale which has rental camera/lens companies

some rental companies even will sell you the lens and deduct the cost of the rental from the sales price

Imp · 07-20-2017, 09:07 AM

Originally posted by Aslyfox

and find out if I was an "outlier" in mostly using the 150 - 400 mm without a tripod or monopod

My issue would be carrying it on a hike. It would be twice the weight (?) as my prime, without much more reach (although the quality is certainly better)

amitpatel · 07-20-2017, 09:08 AM - **1 Like**

Wish I would have become part of this forum earlier. The amount of information is amazing

Thank you all !!!

**aslyfox** · 07-20-2017, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by Imp

My issue would be carrying it on a hike. It would be twice the weight (?) as my prime, without much more reach (although the quality is certainly better)

yes it is heavy

I have it on an Joby Ultrafit Hand Strap and Ultra Plate and an Optech USA Utility Strap hanging off of my right side. I can alter the weight by using the hand strap, using just the utility strap or cradling it with the other hand across my body

difficult on a big hike, most likely but if you are in shape and used to it I would think you could manage.

is a long prime really that much lighter ??? heavy is heavy

I have no idea

**boriscleto** · 07-20-2017, 09:37 AM

Originally posted by Aslyfox

is a long prime really that much lighter ??? heavy is heavy

It depends on the prime. The Sigma 500/4.5 is more than a kilogram heavier...the A 400/5.6 is almost 800g lighter. The FA* 400/5.6 is even lighter, because it is mostly plastic...The FA* is about $500 cheaper than a 150-450 too...but not WR, screwdrive AF, and older coatings...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax - Thoughts on making a DA*/DFA 400mm F4?	UserAccessDenied	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	73	01-10-2022 04:30 AM
Diglloyd reviews DA 35, DFA 50 and DFA 100 Macro lenses on the K-1	Matchete	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	06-09-2016 09:18 AM
Questions for bird and wildlife photographers	GarethC7	Pentax Medium Format	17	12-04-2014 03:51 PM
Wildlife photographers, would you buy a Q sensor...	barondla	Pentax Q	5	05-01-2012 02:07 PM
Who are those wildlife photographers?	RonHendriks1966	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	49	07-01-2011 12:56 AM

07-19-2017, 09:22 AM	#2
Ole Administrator Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Copenhagen, Denmark Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,408	The flexibility of a zoom is hard to match with a prime, so it comes down to what you use the lens for. I own the FA* 400/5.6 which is nicely compact for its range, but quite limiting in practice being a fixed focal length lens. I have used a loaner D FA* 140-450 and it has excellent image quality and spot on AF. but, yeah, it IS heavy!

07-19-2017, 09:25 AM	#3
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	I think we are much more likely to see more giant zooms. Like a D FA* 250-600/5.6...

07-19-2017, 09:35 AM	#4
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251	Originally posted by Imp I myself own a Tokina 400mm 5.6 ATX AF for this very reason - I need more reach than my HD DA 55-300 offers, yet even if I COULD afford the 150-450, it is an impractical lens for my uses. Do you have any sample shots which you've taken with this lens? I'm curious to see the IQ with this lens.

07-19-2017, 09:39 AM	#5
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by jpzk Do you have any sample shots which you've taken with this lens? I'm curious to see the IQ with this lens. Have you ever looked at the ones in the sample archive? Tokina 400mm ATX AF samples - PentaxForums.com

07-19-2017, 09:48 AM	#6
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251	Originally posted by boriscleto Have you ever looked at the ones in the sample archive? Tokina 400mm ATX AF samples - PentaxForums.com Well thanks ! I've just browsed a bit of this archive (couple of pages ... will return to it later): pleasantly surprised with the results. Since I am always looking for something longer than my DA300/4 but with good IQ (I have the HD 1.4X TC and tried it with my DA300 ... not good at all), this Tokina seems like a good deal. No way I can afford the D FA 150-450 (the local/home manager would likely have me in isolation for a month !) Thank for the link!

07-19-2017, 11:58 AM	#7
Gedeon Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2016 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 246	Like the Old, but very good canon 400mm f5.6 Just a dream, but Ricoh prefer to launch a damn big brick 50mm f1.4

07-19-2017, 01:18 PM	#8
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	The 150-450 is not heavy for a 450mm lens....

07-19-2017, 06:20 PM - 1 Like	#9
Imp Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Washington, DC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,749 Original Poster	Two of my images with the Tokina 400mm 5.6 Originally posted by Ole The flexibility of a zoom is hard to match with a prime, so it comes down to what you use the lens for. Certainly, especially with a telephoto. But sometimes the size/weight savings are worth it. On a recent trip to Canada, where I knew I would be doing frequent day hikes, I took a Tamron 17-50 2.8 and a Tokina 400 5.6 - it was rare I needed less reach. So you are right, it depends on your uses.

07-20-2017, 05:05 AM	#10
Garry Conway Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2016 Location: Port Williams, Nova Scotia, Canada Posts: 48	I use the fa* 400 5.6 lens a lot and it is still an excellent lens. For me having it as a zoom wouldn't help very much. I find once you get onto the 400 + range the issue is that what ever you have as a lens, it just isn't long enough. It's worth noting that the lens on my old K5 wasn't great when it came to finding focus. However, when I got my K1 it was a significant improvement. It seems the K1 focussing motor runs a lot faster and it finds the focal point faster and more often than my earlier Pentax cameras and because it is faster the noise of a screw driven lens doesn't seem as loud.

07-20-2017, 05:36 AM - 1 Like	#11
aslyfox Seeker of Knowledge Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: Topeka, Kansas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 24,581	Originally posted by Pål Jensen The 150-450 is not heavy for a 450mm lens.... when I first read the O P comments in this thread, I decided to go to this thread: Post your HD PENTAX-D FA 150-450mm F4.5-5.6 ED DC AW pictures! - PentaxForums.com and find out if I was an "outlier" in mostly using the 150 - 400 mm without a tripod or monopod the replies indicate that I am not. I would recommend that people go to that thread for some great examples of what can be done with that lens with or without support if you are really curious about the weight and how YOU might use one, consider renting one if you live in the US or other locale which has rental camera/lens companies some rental companies even will sell you the lens and deduct the cost of the rental from the sales price

07-20-2017, 09:07 AM	#12
Imp Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Washington, DC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,749 Original Poster	Originally posted by Aslyfox and find out if I was an "outlier" in mostly using the 150 - 400 mm without a tripod or monopod My issue would be carrying it on a hike. It would be twice the weight (?) as my prime, without much more reach (although the quality is certainly better)

07-20-2017, 09:08 AM - 1 Like	#13
amitpatel New Member Join Date: Jul 2017 Posts: 7	Wish I would have become part of this forum earlier. The amount of information is amazing Thank you all !!!

07-20-2017, 09:30 AM	#14
aslyfox Seeker of Knowledge Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: Topeka, Kansas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 24,581	Originally posted by Imp My issue would be carrying it on a hike. It would be twice the weight (?) as my prime, without much more reach (although the quality is certainly better) yes it is heavy I have it on an Joby Ultrafit Hand Strap and Ultra Plate and an Optech USA Utility Strap hanging off of my right side. I can alter the weight by using the hand strap, using just the utility strap or cradling it with the other hand across my body difficult on a big hike, most likely but if you are in shape and used to it I would think you could manage. is a long prime really that much lighter ??? heavy is heavy I have no idea

07-20-2017, 09:37 AM	#15
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by Aslyfox is a long prime really that much lighter ??? heavy is heavy It depends on the prime. The Sigma 500/4.5 is more than a kilogram heavier...the A 400/5.6 is almost 800g lighter. The FA* 400/5.6 is even lighter, because it is mostly plastic...The FA* is about $500 cheaper than a 150-450 too...but not WR, screwdrive AF, and older coatings...