[Pål Jensen]

I'm now wondering how many of these lenses they made, total, because 400 and that's it sounds either wrong or sad.

I think 400 seems really impressive for such an expensive item. Not to mention 400/month!
Most of the Pentax super telephotos were made in very small numbers. Most of them were made on order.

[clackers]

IMHO, it's more likely they discontinue it and don't come out with a successor. That's if Pentax wants to stay alive financially.

Sadly for us, in today's camera market, you have to have return on investment quickly. You can't make 400 more of these things and have them sitting in warehouses for years, that's money that's wasted, that the company could've invested elsewhere much more easily at 5% annual return for bonds, 10% in the share market.

This is also the point of the activist investor who wants Sony to stop making cameras.

[KiloHotelphoto]

It does need to be replaced because it's not very good, but I don't see them replacing it with a fast full frame model, they don't have a full frame camera for that type of lens and they don't have the buyers for something in that price range.

They should make something like the Nikon 500PF that is very small and less expensive for APSC.

[clackers]

It does need to be replaced because it's not very good, but I don't see them replacing it with a fast full frame model, they don't have a full frame camera for that type of lens and they don't have the buyers for something in that price range.

They should make something like the Nikon 500PF that is very small and less expensive for APSC.

The economics of that may be better, maybe not. The executives have all the market data and spreadsheets to know what developing any product would cost and how long it would take to get back.

Two recent releases from Pentax were reissues of the FA 35 f2 and the DA 10-17 FE, because they were so easy to get money back on ... their development and tooling had already been repaid long ago.

Canon will basically screw over their DSLR owners (I know you're one of them). They'll orphan that EF mount. All their new lenses won't work on your camera. There'll just be a trickle from what's already in the pipeline, like Olympus over the next couple of years.

Recently we've seen Metz flashes and Cactus triggers go bankrupt, photography really is a way for business owners to lose money. That Nikon PF for instance has done nothing for the corporation, its financial losses are staggering.

[MarkJerling]

The economics of that may be better, maybe not. The executives have all the market data and spreadsheets to know what developing any product would cost and how long it would take to get back.

Two recent releases from Pentax were reissues of the FA 35 f2 and the DA 10-17 FE, because they were so easy to get money back on ... their development and tooling had already been repaid long ago.

Canon will basically screw over their DSLR owners (I know you're one of them). They'll orphan that EF mount. All their new lenses won't work on your camera. There'll just be a trickle from what's already in the pipeline, like Olympus over the next couple of years.

Recently we've seen Metz flashes and Cactus triggers go bankrupt, photography really is a way for business owners to lose money. That Nikon PF for instance has done nothing for the corporation, its financial losses are staggering.

Is Cactus no more? I was not aware of that.

[KiloHotelphoto]

Canon will basically screw over their DSLR owners (I know you're one of them). They'll orphan that EF mount. All their new lenses won't work on your camera. There'll just be a trickle from what's already in the pipeline, like Olympus over the next couple of years.

My 600 F4 IS II and 100-400 4.5-5.6 IS II both work on my R5 and R6 fine, Canon made three different adapters so EF glass isn't orphaned. In fact they work a little better because I don't have to do micro adjustments on them, not that I had do to them on many combos just one lens and body.

Could Richo take a old design and update it sure, but how big of a market do they have for big expensive glass? Look how people complain here about the size of the 15-30 2.8 or the new 50 and 85 1.4's size and cost. A new long lens will be much heavier and cost more than those. They have a smaller budget and need to invest in products that will have a broader appeal to their customers, I don't think wasting money on a long lens is in their best interest.

[pres589]

Did you buy one?

No, I've no personal interest in such a lens.

[Lowell Goudge]

For me, now that I have my DA 560 perhaps I should take an I Don’t care attitude, and I know canon, like Sony (who abandoned Minolta shooters as soon as they got market share) will survive by going to the mirrorless body and abandon their users AGAIN (to my count this will be the third time)

But... it is a shame that Pentax cannot collaborate with either sigma or tamron or develop at least one or two lenses with this range of reach.

As to the comment that the 560 is not very good, fine it is not perfect, but as far as I can tell, the only issue really is the one stop vignetting center to corner, that can be fixed in post. Size, ok it could be smaller but having used it now for 6 months, most of which is 5km plus hikes, and 1-2 hour duration I have made thousands of shots, mostly of birds and the lens never fails to impress. The fact that I have never, after working out properly how to attach it to a tripod, have I ever mounted it again on a tripod is a statement to it’s use ability . The sharpness, especially on distant objects is excellent and focus is spot on.

To prove that point I managed to do a few hand held shots of the moons of jupiter. It should warrant at least a replacement

[luftfluss]

If the K-3 III comes near the Nikon D500 in terms of AF performance, it would be a shame for Pentax to not have a long tele prime that takes advantage of it.

[clackers]

My 600 F4 IS II and 100-400 4.5-5.6 IS II both work on my R5 and R6 fine, Canon made three different adapters so EF glass isn't orphaned.

No other way round, KHP, anyone who bought an EF *body* - the most common DSLR of the last decades - has been orphaned.

The new RF lenses do *not* work on them.

Could Richo take a old design and update it sure, but how big of a market do they have for big expensive glass? Look how people complain here about the size of the 15-30 2.8 or the new 50 and 85 1.4's size and cost. A new long lens will be much heavier and cost more than those. They have a smaller budget and need to invest in products that will have a broader appeal to their customers, I don't think wasting money on a long lens is in their best interest.

Yes, I agree. People give their opinions on what companies should do, but don't want to pay the price. And the only thing that makes sense in this declining camera market (for any company) is prosumer. Low end products are commercial suicide.

[clackers]

Is Cactus no more? I was not aware of that.

Yes, Mark, there's a thread around here ... they made an official statement of some kind.

[clackers]

For me, now that I have my DA 560 perhaps I should take an I Don’t care attitude, and I know canon, like Sony (who abandoned Minolta shooters as soon as they got market share) will survive by going to the mirrorless body and abandon their users AGAIN (to my count this will be the third time)

But... it is a shame that Pentax cannot collaborate with either sigma or tamron or develop at least one or two lenses with this range of reach.

As to the comment that the 560 is not very good, fine it is not perfect, but as far as I can tell, the only issue really is the one stop vignetting center to corner, that can be fixed in post. Size, ok it could be smaller but having used it now for 6 months, most of which is 5km plus hikes, and 1-2 hour duration I have made thousands of shots, mostly of birds and the lens never fails to impress. The fact that I have never, after working out properly how to attach it to a tripod, have I ever mounted it again on a tripod is a statement to it’s use ability . The sharpness, especially on distant objects is excellent and focus is spot on.

To prove that point I managed to do a few hand held shots of the moons of jupiter. It should warrant at least a replacement

Points well made, and the pictures I've seen taken with it are fantastic, but the issue is that there aren't enough Lowell Goudges in the world. Let's be honest, you may be one of less than 400 individuals who've been wealthy enough to afford one.

[automorphism]

No other way round, KHP, anyone who bought an EF *body* - the most common DSLR of the last decades - has been orphaned.

The new RF lenses do *not* work on them.

To be fair though it is probably not a big problem for the owners of these EF bodies because there is plenty of excellent EF glass that will almost certainly outlast any body.

[Pentaxians]

Prime 500mm f4.0 would be nice. Really hope that Pentax don't give up on telephoto lens

[boblivious]

I would love to have a DA 560 or a revamped 560 or a resurrected F* or FA* 600 f/4, or even A* 400 f/2.8! Please. Pretty please?