[guillermovilas]

This looks like a pretty amazing lens , i've tried to compare it to other lenses through the famous et reliable "photozone.de" site
Resolution looks phenomenal :ugh:
Slightly beats Canon's famous 70-200mm f/4 IS not forgetting that the Pentax starts at 60mm and goes to 250mm
What i found strange is that it crashes the Pentax 200mm f/2.8 which should be better considering it's a prime
I therefore don't understand who wants to buy a 200mm f/2.8 and stay stuck at 200mm for a lens that costs allready quite a lot of money ( in holland : 200mm = €850 , 60-250 = €1200 ) .
Another thing : This 60-250mm beats easy the Pentax 50-135mm f/2.8 at focal 135mm , incredible

My question is why don't i see more impressive comments on this lens ? , doesn't seem to be that popular , i bet very few people have it , why ?
Anyway impossible to find it 2nd hand , is it because there are almost none around and is it such a good lens that the few who have it just realise that it would be very difficult to change for anything as good or better ?
If you look at Canon , everybody talks highly over the 70-200mm f/2.8 and f/4 series , at Nikon the same happens with the 70-200mm f/2.8.

The thing is i would like to test it , make a few shots before purchase , just to see what it's really all about , again the problem is i don't know anyone who has it and no store have it in stock , you have to order in advance
So even the shops don't have it , why ?? too difficult to sell ?, no demand ?

I'd like to have more opinions on this issue

[axl]

I believe this lens is not so popular because it's neither dog nor cat...
@250 it's not quite long enough for many wildlife shooters, @f4 it's not quite fast enough for many portrait shooters. It's not small, neither light... it's stuck somewhere in between 50-135 which is f2.8 and smaller/lighter, doesn't zoom out and is considered fantastic portrait lens, and 300/4 which is roughly the same size as 60-250 at it's shortest, I assume lighter, and 50mm longer at the same speed....

my 2p

[guillermovilas]

I believe this lens is not so popular because it's neither dog nor cat...
@250 it's not quite long enough for many wildlife shooters, @f4 it's not quite fast enough for many portrait shooters. It's not small, neither light... it's stuck somewhere in between 50-135 which is f2.8 and smaller/lighter, doesn't zoom out and is considered fantastic portrait lens, and 300/4 which is roughly the same size as 60-250 at it's shortest, I assume lighter, and 50mm longer at the same speed....

my 2p

You do have a point , makes me think of the Sigma 100-300mm f/4 for the same reasons.
What you mean is that your much better off with a 50-135mm f/2.8 + 300mm f/4 then this 60-250mm f/4 ? but that's gonna cost a lot more too

[Barbarosa]

I think that most of users 50-135 use at f4 for best results, 60-240 is great from f4 and above so only thing is that 50-135 can do more light sometimes as only advantage.

[RonHendriks1966]

Well I'm looking into that option allsoo as a replacement of my 50-135mm. But I'm not getting to the point of selling my 50-135 because it's just a great and small lens.

[borno]

I think a good number of people got tired of waiting for it and got the sigma 100-300mm f4 (I did) not knowing how good the new lens might be. The screw-drive sigma can also use a TC for more reach and AF reliably. I wonder if they had that 1.4x sdm TC they promised maybe they would sell more of them.

[luck1]

I dont get the price difference between canon 70-200 f4 and the pentax 60-250 f4. The canon costs 609 € and the pentax 1176 € (prices in slovakia EU)

[Jyrkira]

I dont get the price difference between canon 70-200 f4 and the pentax 60-250 f4. The canon costs 609 € and the pentax 1176 € (prices in slovakia EU)

I think the comparable lens from Canon is 70-200 f4 IS, which costs bit more than DA 60-250 at least in Finland. And Pentax has weather sealing and is both wider and longer.

[luck1]

I dont agree that i have to compare the canon IS lens, because the manufacture costs of the non IS lens should be similar to pentax which is also non IS lens. I could understand the pentax lens would be more expensive for beeing weather seald, but not that much. The extra focal legth is a + but for the almost double price i could live without that and would rather appreciate a really good TC something like the last nikon TCs. I am sure it would sell more, therefor are many people buing sigma and tamron and pentax has got less money for development

[guillermovilas]

I dont get the price difference between canon 70-200 f4 and the pentax 60-250 f4. The canon costs 609 € and the pentax 1176 € (prices in slovakia EU)

You got the wrong Canon my friend :

70-200mm f/4 USM = €519
70-200mm f/4 IS USM = €1011 ( this is the one i'm talking about because it's stabilized just like the 60-250mm will be with a Pentax body )

The pentax 60-250mm f/4 costs €1200 in Belgium.

[guillermovilas]

I dont agree that i have to compare the canon IS lens, because the manufacture costs of the non IS lens should be similar to pentax which is also non IS lens. I could understand the pentax lens would be more expensive for beeing weather seald, but not that much. The extra focal legth is a + but for the almost double price i could live without that and would rather appreciate a really good TC something like the last nikon TCs. I am sure it would sell more, therefor are many people buing sigma and tamron and pentax has got less money for development

Well in a way you are right but i just wanted to compare both systems with IS.
Anyway the IS from the Canon lens will be far superior to the Pentax body Anti Shake system ( 4 stop adv instead of 2 stop adv )

I've also compared the IS version because according to "photozone" it is far better in resolution then the non IS. The non IS is very far behind the Pentax but like you said what a difference in price

[Wheatfield]

The 60-250 is not far enough from 70-200 in most peoples minds to make all that much of a difference, and there are legions of those lenses available used. This is a much more attractive option to the people who were attracted to Pentax in the first place because it was considered to be the cheap alternative.

I suspect the 60-250 is as expensive as it is because Hoya has decided that they are going to turn a profit off of it.
They could drop the price of it to break even levels and it would still be an expensive enough lens to put off the average Pentax user to the point of looking for a cheap alternative, and Pentax will never have the economy of scale to do what Canon does with their lens pricing.
People who compare Pentax lens pricing to Canons and say the Pentax lenses are too expensive are conveniently forgetting that Canon will sell a thousand or more lenses for every lens that Pentax sells.
If Pentax was making a lens in the 105mm range and one in the 135-150mm range, I would have bought them along with the 200 (I already have an F300) and given the 60-250 a pass, but they don't, so I bought a 60-250.
It's kinda big, kinda heavy for what it is, and I've already had an sdm failure, but the glass is excellent, among the best I've seen, and so I forgive it what it cost, and it's size and AF reliability problem because it is a very good optic.

To the OP: I don't suppose you would change your avatar to something that is less juvenile and offensive could you?

[guillermovilas]

Now there are other solution like both Sigma & Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 which both sell for €650 in belgium , that's half the price of the Pentax

Again according to photozone the Sigma is quite far behind the Pentax , unfortunately they still don't have the Tamron on test but there are places like here : Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0 L IS USM Lens ISO 12233 Resolution Chart Results where they speak very highly of it

[guillermovilas]

The 60-250 is not far enough from 70-200 in most peoples minds to make all that much of a difference, and there are legions of those lenses available used. This is a much more attractive option to the people who were attracted to Pentax in the first place because it was considered to be the cheap alternative.

I suspect the 60-250 is as expensive as it is because Hoya has decided that they are going to turn a profit off of it.
They could drop the price of it to break even levels and it would still be an expensive enough lens to put off the average Pentax user to the point of looking for a cheap alternative, and Pentax will never have the economy of scale to do what Canon does with their lens pricing.
People who compare Pentax lens pricing to Canons and say the Pentax lenses are too expensive are conveniently forgetting that Canon will sell a thousand or more lenses for every lens that Pentax sells.
If Pentax was making a lens in the 105mm range and one in the 135-150mm range, I would have bought them along with the 200 (I already have an F300) and given the 60-250 a pass, but they don't, so I bought a 60-250.
It's kinda big, kinda heavy for what it is, and I've already had an sdm failure, but the glass is excellent, among the best I've seen, and so I forgive it what it cost, and it's size and AF reliability problem because it is a very good optic.

To the OP: I don't suppose you would change your avatar to something that is less juvenile and offensive could you?

Why would you think my avatar is offensive ?

[guillermovilas]

Carefull it's dangerous to look at it too long so now that i have had my very first complaint about my avatar , i've decided to change it .

Hope this one will let everyone sleep safely at night