SMC DA* 200mm f/2.8 ending ?

[James O'Neill]

Checking something else I notice the FF compatible but crop-branded 200mm is no longer listed on https://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/lens/index_list.html or on the road map. My local dealer says they have it in stock, but it sounds like there are no more once those have sold.

I have a theory that the SMC lenses still available are from production runs years ago and anything made in the last few years has been HD coated. As well as a warehouse of unsold lenses going back upto 20 years, this suggests that the few remaining SMC lenses are slow sellers and there's little rush re-work them as HD versions. The new 100Macro as the only prime lens between 85 and 300 seems odd, and it does pose a question about the 300 when that sells out.

The roadmap does seem to suggest a successor for the DA 60-250. and a DFA lens in that range would interest people; but there's nothing on any long prime. So who wants to speculate on the arrival of a new 200 (and possibly 300) with a DFA* designation and HD coatings - possibly as a KAF4 mount with electronic aperture and with newer motors... ?

 

[Stig Vidar Hovland]

I don't think there will be any new 200mm. The DFA*70-200/2.8 is a lot better optically than DA*200/2.8 and I can fully understand that it sells slowly.

 

[DougOB]

I don't think there will be any new 200mm. The DFA*70-200/2.8 is a lot better optically than DA*200/2.8 and I can fully understand that it sells slowly.

Except that not everyone wants a lens that is twice the weight and twice the cost, particularly if you shoot APSC.

Doug

 

[MaKeR]

The lens is listed in Discontinued Lens list for Digital single-lens reflex camera .

 

[Mistral75]

Ricoh Imaging recently discontinued four lenses:

• smc Pentax-DA 14mm f/2.8 ED [IF]
• smc Pentax-DA★ 60-250mm f/4 ED [IF] SDM
• smc Pentax-D FA Macro 100mm f/2.8 WR (replaced by the HD Pentax‐D FA Macro 100mm f/2.8 ED AW)
• smc Pentax-DA★ 200mm f/2.8 ED [IF] SDM

 

[ozdean]

It puzzles me that they dropped the 60-250 - it is a great lens.

 

[James O'Neill]

It puzzles me that they dropped the 60-250 - it is a great lens.

If my theory was right, being an SMC they made a batch years ago and eventually they sold out. There is a lens of the same range on the road map.

 

[Stig Vidar Hovland]

I don't think there will be any new 200mm. The DFA*70-200/2.8 is a lot better optically than DA*200/2.8 and I can fully understand that it sells slowly.

Except that not everyone wants a lens that is twice the weight and twice the cost, particularly if you shoot APSC.

Doug

Yes, you are right. Not everyone like it, but that does not change what I wrote.

A question: What does aps-c have to do with this? A 200/2.8 lens will be large whatever the camera it is used on.

 

[James O'Neill]

I don't think there will be any new 200mm. The DFA*70-200/2.8 is a lot better optically than DA*200/2.8 and I can fully understand that it sells slowly.

Except that not everyone wants a lens that is twice the weight and twice the cost, particularly if you shoot APSC.

Doug

Yes, you are right. Not everyone like it, but that does not change what I wrote.

A question: What does aps-c have to do with this? A 200/2.8 lens will be large whatever the camera it is used on.

I was going to ask a similar question - the main drivers of lens size are focal length and aperture, a larger image circle does not automatically have very much effect, but a simpler lens might perform OK for a crop image and be too poor in the corners of larger one.

 

[DougOB]

I don't think there will be any new 200mm. The DFA*70-200/2.8 is a lot better optically than DA*200/2.8 and I can fully understand that it sells slowly.

Except that not everyone wants a lens that is twice the weight and twice the cost, particularly if you shoot APSC.

Doug

Yes, you are right. Not everyone like it, but that does not change what I wrote.

We will see if it is gone forever or simply until an updated version is available.

A question: What does aps-c have to do with this? A 200/2.8 lens will be large whatever the camera it is used on.

Well, what I said was that the 200/2.8 is half the weight & costs of the 70-200/2.8. Certainly not a "compact" lens but more so than the fast zoom option.

One reason I shoot APSC is I prefer the smaller size weight & size, as a result I am less interested in the large and heavy DFA* lenses.

Doug

 

[James O'Neill]

A question: What does aps-c have to do with this? A 200/2.8 lens will be large whatever the camera it is used on.

Well, what I said was that the 200/2.8 is half the weight & costs of the 70-200/2.8. Certainly not a "compact" lens but more so than the fast zoom option.

One reason I shoot APSC is I prefer the smaller size weight & size, as a result I am less interested in the large and heavy DFA* lenses.

Are you saying you prefer a crop sensor body, because the K1 is bigger and heavier, and if you want to stay light the DFA* lenses are all super heavyweights ? That's true, but the "F" part of the designation has a lot less to do with it than the "*"
AIUI The DA* 200 is really the film FA* 200 repackaged, but if you compare the FA*85 and the DFA* 85, it's gained significant weight and bulk. I don't think I've seen a constant f/2.8 70-200 which wasn't a brute. Mating even a designed for APS-C one with a K3 is still going to be bulky compared with a fixed 200.

 

[DougOB]

A question: What does aps-c have to do with this? A 200/2.8 lens will be large whatever the camera it is used on.

Well, what I said was that the 200/2.8 is half the weight & costs of the 70-200/2.8. Certainly not a "compact" lens but more so than the fast zoom option.

One reason I shoot APSC is I prefer the smaller size weight & size, as a result I am less interested in the large and heavy DFA* lenses.

Are you saying you prefer a crop sensor body, because the K1 is bigger and heavier, and if you want to stay light the DFA* lenses are all super heavyweights ?

Yes, that is one reason. Also I am satisfied with the IQ that I get from my KP & K-3iii.

That's true, but the "F" part of the designation has a lot less to do with it than the "*"
AIUI The DA* 200 is really the film FA* 200 repackaged, but if you compare the FA*85 and the DFA* 85, it's gained significant weight and bulk. I don't think I've seen a constant f/2.8 70-200 which wasn't a brute. Mating even a designed for APS-C one with a K3 is still going to be bulky compared with a fixed 200.

Sure... but this is getting convoluted. I simply said two things:

1. Some, including me, would prefer the DA*200/2.8 over the DFA*70-200/2.8 because it is half the weight and cost.

2. (Current) DFA* lenses (50, 85, 70-200) are large and heavy.

I am aware of the differences wrt prime vs zoom, fast/constant vs slow, etc., but the "why" does not change the point.

Doug

 

[James O'Neill]

We may be reading too much into the the "if you shoot APS-C" bit

 

[PentUp]

It puzzles me that they dropped the 60-250 - it is a great lens.

If my theory was right, being an SMC they made a batch years ago and eventually they sold out. There is a lens of the same range on the road map.

Trouble is that that lens has been on the road map since before the Romans invented roads… if this mystery lens in red in the road map is a 65-300 f/4, then I can understand the 60-250 f/4 being discontinued as there would be a viable replacement, but as we have no idea what, or when, that mystery lens is, or will be… discontinuing the 60-250 f/4, now is perturbing.

 

[Stig Vidar Hovland]

1. Some, including me, would prefer the DA*200/2.8 over the DFA*70-200/2.8 because it is half the weight and cost.

Doug

I was also very happy with mine, but I found out that when I used it, I also had the DA*50-135/2.8 with me. And those two have the same weight as the DFA*70-200. So I sold my DA*200, but I have not sold my DA*50-135. I get next to nothing for it on the used market and it is still a very good lens I use now and then.

The DFA*70-200 is large and heavy, no doubt about that. But it has a tripod foot which I missed on the DA*200. It is also sharper at f/2.8, but the difference is almost zero when stopped down. And a zoom is always more flexible than a prime.

I travelled to US, Africa, China and most of Europe with my DA*200. I am not sure I would do that with the DFA*70-200.

 

[Mistral75]

(...) if this mystery lens in red in the road map is a 65-300 f/4, then I can understand the 60-250 f/4 being discontinued as there would be a viable replacement, but as we have no idea what, or when, that mystery lens is, or will be… (...)

Considering that Ricoh Imaging filed four patent applications between November 2018 and February 2021, which include 20 examples of 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 lenses with in-lens stabilisation, I would say that we have a good idea of what this "mystery lens", roadmapped as Telephoto Zoom Lens, is, will be, or could have been.

 

[DougOB]

1. Some, including me, would prefer the DA*200/2.8 over the DFA*70-200/2.8 because it is half the weight and cost.

Doug

I was also very happy with mine, but I found out that when I used it, I also had the DA*50-135/2.8 with me. And those two have the same weight as the DFA*70-200. So I sold my DA*200, but I have not sold my DA*50-135. I get next to nothing for it on the used market and it is still a very good lens I use now and then.

The HD 1.4x TC plays well with the DA*50-135 if you want/need to stretch out to 200mm (yes, not f2.8 at that point).

The DFA*70-200 is large and heavy, no doubt about that. But it has a tripod foot which I missed on the DA*200. It is also sharper at f/2.8, but the difference is almost zero when stopped down. And a zoom is always more flexible than a prime.
I travelled to US, Africa, China and most of Europe with my DA*200. I am not sure I would do that with the DFA*70-200.

Which is back to my point that you don't always want the DFA*70-200, which is not a criticism of the lens.

Doug

 

[Jon Donahue]

Strange. You'd think that a sort-of-light 200mm f/2.8 would be perfect for starting out sports and action photographers, not famous enough yet to get to use the really expensive Canikon gear at big league events. Strange!

 

[PentUp]

(...) if this mystery lens in red in the road map is a 65-300 f/4, then I can understand the 60-250 f/4 being discontinued as there would be a viable replacement, but as we have no idea what, or when, that mystery lens is, or will be… (...)

Considering that Ricoh Imaging filed four patent applications between November 2018 and February 2021, which include 20 examples of 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 lenses with in-lens stabilisation, I would say that we have a good idea of what this "mystery lens", roadmapped as Telephoto Zoom Lens, is, will be, or could have been.

A consumer DFA 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 hardly warrants the long, long, time that this lens has been teased on the roadmap. It is not like a 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 is reinventing the wheel... and would not warrant discontinuing the DA* 60-250 f/4

 

[James O'Neill]

(...) if this mystery lens in red in the road map is a 65-300 f/4, then I can understand the 60-250 f/4 being discontinued as there would be a viable replacement, but as we have no idea what, or when, that mystery lens is, or will be… (...)

Considering that Ricoh Imaging filed four patent applications between November 2018 and February 2021, which include 20 examples of 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 lenses with in-lens stabilisation, I would say that we have a good idea of what this "mystery lens", roadmapped as Telephoto Zoom Lens, is, will be, or could have been.

It's unlikely they would release a lens with stabilization for K mount - but some other work may have led to licensable intellectual property.