Ivan Glisin
Leading Member
That's good, but that "golden" ring looks cheap!
Please Pentax, make them both red or something other than that green/gold combo. It just doesn't look right to me. Or it is just me?
-= Ivan =-
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
New lenses announced - a bit disappointed...
- Thread starter speedie
- Start date
Please Pentax, make them both red or something other than that green/gold combo. It just doesn't look right to me. Or it is just me?
-= Ivan =-
speedie
Leading Member
Well the spec. says 60-250/4, which makes it a 90-375mm equivalent. A bit closer to 100-400mm but I guess it's not really a big difference. It must be the optical specifications that brings us these curious focal lengths. Lets just hope the quality is stunning
sh
--
Sorry, yes, my bad.Well the spec. says 60-250/4, which makes it a 90-375mm equivalent.
A bit closer to 100-400mm but I guess it's not really a big
difference. It must be the optical specifications that brings us
these curious focal lengths. Lets just hope the quality is stunning
--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b
GMT +10hours
I think it may be reach versus speed - for some people having a fast tele is the important thing, for others, speed is less of an issue but they want longer reach. And doing either/or instead of combining them keeps down the cost and size of the lenses, compared to try to do a 50-250/2.8.
--
Japan: http://www.lucs.lu.se/people/jan.moren/log/current.html
Images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jannem/
--
Japan: http://www.lucs.lu.se/people/jan.moren/log/current.html
Images: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jannem/
OceanGreen
Active member
Anyone care to estimate a best-case-scenario price list on these DA* lenses for europe??
Would be useful for budgeting purposes... or, just as usefully, maybe as a reality check on my wishful thinking ;-)
Cheers
--
oceangreen ~ typically based on emerald green with a slightly dramatic tone of deep black and a misty accent of barley
Would be useful for budgeting purposes... or, just as usefully, maybe as a reality check on my wishful thinking ;-)
Cheers
--
oceangreen ~ typically based on emerald green with a slightly dramatic tone of deep black and a misty accent of barley
Jeff Thielen
Forum Enthusiast
After buying 5 new Pentax lenses in the last 12 months I thought I could coast a bit this year and "simply" buy a K10D. I have to somehow convince my wife that it is a good idea. She thinks my D is a new camera. These lenses however are going to be a real problem. I will most likely get the 16-50 as soon as possible. I use the 16-45 for more than half of my total shots so that is a natural. I was really hoping for a prime tele in the 300mm or 400mm area. I'm not sure how big a market prime tele's would be for Pentax.
The big question is do I sell my 16-45? Do you think I'll get a good return or should I keep it since I will have 2 bodies?
Jeff Thielen
http://www.jeffandterry.com
The big question is do I sell my 16-45? Do you think I'll get a good return or should I keep it since I will have 2 bodies?
Jeff Thielen
http://www.jeffandterry.com
KL Matt
Veteran Member
Hi Ivan,
All this gold reminds me of my brother-in-law's mom's special edition Cadilac with gold spoked wheels and gold trim everywhere...
Matt
Yeah, it's a bit over-the-top. For me, the coolest thing would be to make the thicker ring green and the thin one near the mount gold.
All this gold reminds me of my brother-in-law's mom's special edition Cadilac with gold spoked wheels and gold trim everywhere...
Matt
Pete226109
Forum Enthusiast
This is fabulous. * lenses! 2.8 ED IF! Ultrasonic motors! This is great. Count me in. That 50 - 135 is in my future, bank account willing.
We stay in the game.
Between this news and the K10D, I can see I will be doing some upgrading...
Pete
We stay in the game.
Between this news and the K10D, I can see I will be doing some upgrading...
Pete
speedie
Leading Member
I believe they have used the 645-lenses as model for the new DA* series. Just look at the similarities in this shot:
sh
--
Joseph Tainter
Forum Pro
I have been puzzled by it all along. Pentax first announced this as a "high performance telezoom." But high quality zooms usually have a range of 3x or less. This one is more than 4x.
Joe
structuresguy
Senior Member
I want tripod collars on both the 50-135 and the 60-250. I can't imagine using my current 70-200/2.8 without the collar, so why would I used the 50-135 this way? And the 60-250 is just ridiculous to not have a collar.
I may have to reconsider my plans with these two lenses. I thought the 50-135 was a sure thing. Now I am not too sure.
I may have to reconsider my plans with these two lenses. I thought the 50-135 was a sure thing. Now I am not too sure.
frank100557
Veteran Member
That'll be my next and probably only purchase for a while. Don't really need any tele lens for now, and I'm all ready for this new big baby 
Thanks for the great news btw.
Cheers,
--
Frank
GMT+8hours
Thanks for the great news btw.
Cheers,
--
Frank
GMT+8hours
Joseph Tainter
Forum Pro
They are DA lenses--smaller image circle. Yes, they can be used. What we don't know (Pentax refuses to tell us) is whether they will autofocus with existing bodies.
Joe
frank100557
Veteran Member
I thought they'd put tripod collars on the two tele zoom lenses, but don't seem to be there from that photo...
--
Frank
GMT+8hours
--
Frank
GMT+8hours
....that I was going to be getting a part-time job to beef up my income and get a new lens, it's gone.
That 16-50 just bumped the 16-45mm off the radar and I suddenly find myself thinking the 50-135 would round out the stable for a good hiking kit.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrewfaires/
That 16-50 just bumped the 16-45mm off the radar and I suddenly find myself thinking the 50-135 would round out the stable for a good hiking kit.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrewfaires/
structuresguy
Senior Member
It's the weight of the lens when used on a tripod cantilevering out from the lens mount that worries me. I never liked the idea of the FA300 without a collar. I simply would not hang that much weight without a collar. I think I will forget about any plans to buy the 60-250, and maybe even the 50-135 if they have no collars. Dumb. Really dumb. And I was only planning on buying the 50-135 (didn't think the 60-250 was real). I like the DA16-45 well enough to keep it. Now I am a bit dissallutioned by Pentax's weird lens decisions.
if they want to keep costs down, they can sell the collar as an optional accessory. But they should make provisions for one to be used. For any kind of action shooting, mounting that long lens on camera, then camera on tripod (or monopod) will make it all very unbalanced. NOT GOOD!
Bah! I was so happy to see the pictures, then became sad so quickly. Why do they do this to us? They need to have an outsider in their R&D team to keep them from becoming to much like Pentax. (whatever that means??) First, no AA support, then no onboard wireless, now no tripod collars on premium lenses.
Andrew
if they want to keep costs down, they can sell the collar as an optional accessory. But they should make provisions for one to be used. For any kind of action shooting, mounting that long lens on camera, then camera on tripod (or monopod) will make it all very unbalanced. NOT GOOD!
Bah! I was so happy to see the pictures, then became sad so quickly. Why do they do this to us? They need to have an outsider in their R&D team to keep them from becoming to much like Pentax. (whatever that means??) First, no AA support, then no onboard wireless, now no tripod collars on premium lenses.
Andrew
brendan PK
Senior Member
NO Tripod Mount, not even on the bigest of them. The Tokina 50-135 has one, Pentax could shorten the zoom ring or something and put one in there. It is a MAJOR disapointment that the bigger-range zooms do not have this. BIG problem, MAJOR shortfall/overlook!!!
This same problem was the Number 1 Complaint of the 300mm F4.5 FA*
Comeon pentax, you come out with these HIGH Quality lenses without all the features they should have.
(For thoes who do not like tripod-mounts on lens, they could make it removable for all worlds to be satisfied, I know I dont always like having it on there, and thats a disadvantages of the FA* 80-200mm F2.8)
--
I Want my, I want my , I want my K10D
(oh and of course Get MY money for nothin and chicks for free
This same problem was the Number 1 Complaint of the 300mm F4.5 FA*
Comeon pentax, you come out with these HIGH Quality lenses without all the features they should have.
(For thoes who do not like tripod-mounts on lens, they could make it removable for all worlds to be satisfied, I know I dont always like having it on there, and thats a disadvantages of the FA* 80-200mm F2.8)
--
I Want my, I want my , I want my K10D
(oh and of course Get MY money for nothin and chicks for free
kimg
Well-known member
Oh my LBA goodness! The 16-50 and 50-135 are just what I was hoping for most of all! Fits in nicely with my plans to have certain primes but cover the low end with the 16-50, all 2.8 or faster (for the primes).
That big ole zoom though, might wait to see what Pentax has in store on the 300mm prime end of things, or a 200mm macro would suite me just fine and slap on the 1.4 tele converter if I need to catch an occasional bird far away...
Exciting news!
That big ole zoom though, might wait to see what Pentax has in store on the 300mm prime end of things, or a 200mm macro would suite me just fine and slap on the 1.4 tele converter if I need to catch an occasional bird far away...
Exciting news!
On the 60-250, I agree. The 50-135 might be small enough to get by without one though.....at least, that's what I'm banking on.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrewfaires/
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andrewfaires/
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum