Pentax 560mm ?

JinDesu · 02-10-2012, 05:04 AM

Originally posted by Tonto

If this lens is sub $2000 US I WILL buy this for our trip to South Africa which will be sometime in the next couple of years.
I was going to get a Bigma for this trip but this will be heaps sharper I'm guessing.

Well, in consideration, the Bigma probably will be easier to use than this thing!

"Honey, look, a rabbit 15 feet from us!"
"crud................."

Frogfish · 02-10-2012, 05:08 AM

Originally posted by JinDesu

Well, in consideration, the Bigma probably will be easier to use than this thing!

"Honey, look, a rabbit 15 feet from us!"
"crud................."

... or

Honey look a rabbit behind us ........ smack !!

**Rude** · 02-10-2012, 06:23 AM

Silly question. This lens reminds me of those really cheap 500 or 1000mm "telescope" design lenses that you see all the time on ebay, etc. Is it possible that Pentax took the basics of one of those designs, then gave it fairly good glass, coatings and higher manufacturing standards? If that is the case, could we see a fairly inexpensive ($799) price tag for a lens that delivers so so optical performance?

Aimed at moon snappers, parents shooting a soccer game, dudes with "equipment" envy? Is this one of those, "we owned the design patents from our telescope group, so we're slapping them together with a k-mount because we can?" Not sure if I'm crazy, perhapsI'm trapped in an eternal stream of pessimism.

Asahiflex · 02-10-2012, 06:36 AM

One thing is for sure: optically it must be better than a Bigma, otherwise no-one is going to buy the 560mm lens from Pentax. They're not stupid!

falconeye · 02-10-2012, 06:42 AM

Originally posted by Tonto

a Bigma for this trip but this will be heaps sharper I'm guessing.

to be seen

eddie1960 · 02-10-2012, 07:19 AM

Originally posted by Frogfish

... or

Honey look a rabbit behind us ........ smack !!

and TA-DA dinner is taken care of

Kunzite · 02-10-2012, 07:36 AM

Originally posted by Tonto

I was going to get a Bigma for this trip but this will be heaps sharper I'm guessing.

The Pentax is a prime, and the Bigma doesn't seems so sharp over 200mm.

Of course, until we'll see some tests people would gladly speculate how it should be the worst telephoto ever. I'm willing to bet how the first samples will be rejected as fakes, for being way too sharp.

ElJamoquio · 02-10-2012, 07:47 AM

It's definitely not a 'definite' yet that this is better than the Bigma...

But remember that the Bigma isn't really at it's best until f/8 or even f/11, and is probably a bit optimistic when calling itself a '500mm' lens.

SteveM · 02-10-2012, 07:53 AM

Originally posted by Rude

Silly question. This lens reminds me of those really cheap 500 or 1000mm "telescope" design lenses that you see all the time on ebay, etc. Is it possible that Pentax took the basics of one of those designs, then gave it fairly good glass, coatings and higher manufacturing standards? If that is the case, could we see a fairly inexpensive ($799) price tag for a lens that delivers so so optical performance?

Aimed at moon snappers, parents shooting a soccer game, dudes with "equipment" envy? Is this one of those, "we owned the design patents from our telescope group, so we're slapping them together with a k-mount because we can?" Not sure if I'm crazy, perhapsI'm trapped in an eternal stream of pessimism.

Do you have $10,000 or $15,000 to spend on a ~600mm telephoto? I don't and you can bet that most Pentaxians don't either.

Canon and Nikon have a large base of existing customers to draw from, so even if they only sell an expensive telephoto to a tiny percentage of customers, they can still sell a number of them. Pentax used to be included in this group when it was selling millions of cameras, which is exactly when we saw their legendary telephotos on the market. That is not the case today and they know it.

The only other reason to produced an extremely expensive telephoto is to give your product line credibility. Sony is rumoured to be releasing a $15,000 telephoto, but Sony is also wanting to be seen as a photographic company and (for right or wrong) not just an electronics company. Some could argue that Pentax is in the same boat, but either they don't feel that way due to their history, or (more likely) Hoya had no interest in creating a loss leader when they were trying to create a condition to sell the company.

If your interest in a new Pentax telephoto stops at reading about how it stacks up against the best from other brands for bragging rights, then you probably won't like this lens. If you would like to be able to add Pentax as a possibility if you are in the market for a ~600mm telephoto, then this should be viewed as good news.

ElJamoquio · 02-10-2012, 08:00 AM

To me, that Sony lens is almost a joke. 500mm at f/4 is ridiculously thin DOF. The only reason IMO to have f/4 it is to be able to add a TC. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have 1000mm f/8 in the arsenal, but for $17k I'd probably buy myself and Mrs. ElJamoquio a pair of new-to-us cars.

eddie1960 · 02-10-2012, 08:08 AM

Originally posted by SteveM

Do you have $10,000 or $15,000 to spend on a ~600mm telephoto? I don't and you can bet that most Pentaxians don't either.

Canon and Nikon have a large base of existing customers to draw from, so even if they only sell an expensive telephoto to a tiny percentage of customers, they can still sell a number of them. Pentax used to be included in this group when it was selling millions of cameras, which is exactly when we saw their legendary telephotos on the market. That is not the case today and they know it.

The only other reason to produced an extremely expensive telephoto is to give your product line credibility. Sony is rumoured to be releasing a $15,000 telephoto, but Sony is also wanting to be seen as a photographic company and (for right or wrong) not just an electronics company. Some could argue that Pentax is in the same boat, but either they don't feel that way due to their history, or (more likely) Hoya had no interest in creating a loss leader when they were trying to create a condition to sell the company.

If your interest in a new Pentax telephoto stops at reading about how it stacks up against the best from other brands for bragging rights, then you probably won't like this lens. If you would like to be able to add Pentax as a possibility if you are in the market for a ~600mm telephoto, then this should be viewed as good news.

the Sony is in fact wildly overpriced for what it is at double the canon and nikon price and is built to order only. It may well be the best 500mm ever built but it won't matter because it won't sell more than a handful

The 560 5.6 is a good start point for Pentax IMHO and as the base expands they can release higher end faster super telephotos but you need the affordable solution first a sub $2000 big lens wil sell in volume even with the current smaller user base and also draw users who may have discounted the brand because there wasn't an option. In the interim while the base grows there will still be the Sigma option for faster for the few who decide they need it, and at some point the big fast glass will reappear (or sensor tech will make it irrelevant as long as the slower glass is sharp enough)

deadwolfbones · 02-10-2012, 08:30 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

To me, that Sony lens is almost a joke. 500mm at f/4 is ridiculously thin DOF. The only reason IMO to have f/4 it is to be able to add a TC. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have 1000mm f/8 in the arsenal, but for $17k I'd probably buy myself and Mrs. ElJamoquio a pair of new-to-us cars.

When you have world-class AF, 500/4 isn't that ridiculous. Not sure how Sony's AF is, but I know Nikon sports pros can shoot wide open with the 500/4 without fear.

ElJamoquio · 02-10-2012, 08:37 AM

Originally posted by deadwolfbones

When you have world-class AF, 500/4 isn't that ridiculous. Not sure how Sony's AF is, but I know Nikon sports pros can shoot wide open with the 500/4 without fear.

At 100 feet you're talking a foot or so DOF. You're right, if you're further away and nail AF you could be OK.

**Rude** · 02-10-2012, 09:15 AM

Today it seems I'm incapable of forming coherent sentences. Let me rephrase my question for Pentax pundits:

Am I nuts for thinking this could be a sub-$1,000 consumer grade lens?

Just seems like most people think this is going to be an expensive piece of equipment to compete with Sigma EX lenses, etc.

BTW, I agree with you SteveM, and if I was taking pictures of lions on the Serengeti, I'd be shooting with a Canon or Nikon. Maybe pro caliber long glass will someday come to Pentax ("beyond" the current roadmap) if Pentax/Ricoh makes a run for a third camera maker for Pros. But I guess my point is, this isn't going to be it.

Frogfish · 02-10-2012, 09:21 AM

Originally posted by Rude

Today it seems I'm incapable of forming coherent sentences. Let me rephrase my question for Pentax pundits:

Am I nuts for thinking this could be a sub-$1,000 consumer grade lens?

Just seems like most people think this is going to be an expensive piece of equipment to compete with Sigma EX lenses, etc.

I don't think so Rude .. but the 120-380 (or whatever it is going to be) could well be ?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DA 50mm, DA 560mm, D-FA 645 90mm to be revealed at CP+	Adam	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	56	02-10-2012 08:56 AM
Leitz 560mm f/6.8 Telyt-R - first shots and impression	Piotr	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	1	05-11-2009 02:42 AM

02-10-2012, 05:04 AM	#211
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	Originally posted by Tonto If this lens is sub $2000 US I WILL buy this for our trip to South Africa which will be sometime in the next couple of years. I was going to get a Bigma for this trip but this will be heaps sharper I'm guessing. Well, in consideration, the Bigma probably will be easier to use than this thing! "Honey, look, a rabbit 15 feet from us!" "crud................."

02-10-2012, 05:08 AM	#212
Frogfish Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Shanghai Posts: 4,490	Originally posted by JinDesu Well, in consideration, the Bigma probably will be easier to use than this thing! "Honey, look, a rabbit 15 feet from us!" "crud................." ... or Honey look a rabbit behind us ........ smack !!

02-10-2012, 06:23 AM	#213
Rude Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Central New Jersey Posts: 100	Silly question. This lens reminds me of those really cheap 500 or 1000mm "telescope" design lenses that you see all the time on ebay, etc. Is it possible that Pentax took the basics of one of those designs, then gave it fairly good glass, coatings and higher manufacturing standards? If that is the case, could we see a fairly inexpensive ($799) price tag for a lens that delivers so so optical performance? Aimed at moon snappers, parents shooting a soccer game, dudes with "equipment" envy? Is this one of those, "we owned the design patents from our telescope group, so we're slapping them together with a k-mount because we can?" Not sure if I'm crazy, perhapsI'm trapped in an eternal stream of pessimism.

02-10-2012, 06:36 AM	#214
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	One thing is for sure: optically it must be better than a Bigma, otherwise no-one is going to buy the 560mm lens from Pentax. They're not stupid!

02-10-2012, 06:42 AM	#215
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by Tonto a Bigma for this trip but this will be heaps sharper I'm guessing. to be seen

02-10-2012, 07:19 AM	#216
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	Originally posted by Frogfish ... or Honey look a rabbit behind us ........ smack !! and TA-DA dinner is taken care of

02-10-2012, 07:36 AM	#217
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Tonto I was going to get a Bigma for this trip but this will be heaps sharper I'm guessing. The Pentax is a prime, and the Bigma doesn't seems so sharp over 200mm. Of course, until we'll see some tests people would gladly speculate how it should be the worst telephoto ever. I'm willing to bet how the first samples will be rejected as fakes, for being way too sharp.

02-10-2012, 07:47 AM	#218
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873 Original Poster	It's definitely not a 'definite' yet that this is better than the Bigma... But remember that the Bigma isn't really at it's best until f/8 or even f/11, and is probably a bit optimistic when calling itself a '500mm' lens.

02-10-2012, 07:53 AM	#219
SteveM Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,294	Originally posted by Rude Silly question. This lens reminds me of those really cheap 500 or 1000mm "telescope" design lenses that you see all the time on ebay, etc. Is it possible that Pentax took the basics of one of those designs, then gave it fairly good glass, coatings and higher manufacturing standards? If that is the case, could we see a fairly inexpensive ($799) price tag for a lens that delivers so so optical performance? Aimed at moon snappers, parents shooting a soccer game, dudes with "equipment" envy? Is this one of those, "we owned the design patents from our telescope group, so we're slapping them together with a k-mount because we can?" Not sure if I'm crazy, perhapsI'm trapped in an eternal stream of pessimism. Do you have $10,000 or $15,000 to spend on a ~600mm telephoto? I don't and you can bet that most Pentaxians don't either. Canon and Nikon have a large base of existing customers to draw from, so even if they only sell an expensive telephoto to a tiny percentage of customers, they can still sell a number of them. Pentax used to be included in this group when it was selling millions of cameras, which is exactly when we saw their legendary telephotos on the market. That is not the case today and they know it. The only other reason to produced an extremely expensive telephoto is to give your product line credibility. Sony is rumoured to be releasing a $15,000 telephoto, but Sony is also wanting to be seen as a photographic company and (for right or wrong) not just an electronics company. Some could argue that Pentax is in the same boat, but either they don't feel that way due to their history, or (more likely) Hoya had no interest in creating a loss leader when they were trying to create a condition to sell the company. If your interest in a new Pentax telephoto stops at reading about how it stacks up against the best from other brands for bragging rights, then you probably won't like this lens. If you would like to be able to add Pentax as a possibility if you are in the market for a ~600mm telephoto, then this should be viewed as good news.

02-10-2012, 08:00 AM	#220
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873 Original Poster	To me, that Sony lens is almost a joke. 500mm at f/4 is ridiculously thin DOF. The only reason IMO to have f/4 it is to be able to add a TC. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have 1000mm f/8 in the arsenal, but for $17k I'd probably buy myself and Mrs. ElJamoquio a pair of new-to-us cars.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-10-2012, 08:08 AM	#221
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	Originally posted by SteveM Do you have $10,000 or $15,000 to spend on a ~600mm telephoto? I don't and you can bet that most Pentaxians don't either. Canon and Nikon have a large base of existing customers to draw from, so even if they only sell an expensive telephoto to a tiny percentage of customers, they can still sell a number of them. Pentax used to be included in this group when it was selling millions of cameras, which is exactly when we saw their legendary telephotos on the market. That is not the case today and they know it. The only other reason to produced an extremely expensive telephoto is to give your product line credibility. Sony is rumoured to be releasing a $15,000 telephoto, but Sony is also wanting to be seen as a photographic company and (for right or wrong) not just an electronics company. Some could argue that Pentax is in the same boat, but either they don't feel that way due to their history, or (more likely) Hoya had no interest in creating a loss leader when they were trying to create a condition to sell the company. If your interest in a new Pentax telephoto stops at reading about how it stacks up against the best from other brands for bragging rights, then you probably won't like this lens. If you would like to be able to add Pentax as a possibility if you are in the market for a ~600mm telephoto, then this should be viewed as good news. the Sony is in fact wildly overpriced for what it is at double the canon and nikon price and is built to order only. It may well be the best 500mm ever built but it won't matter because it won't sell more than a handful The 560 5.6 is a good start point for Pentax IMHO and as the base expands they can release higher end faster super telephotos but you need the affordable solution first a sub $2000 big lens wil sell in volume even with the current smaller user base and also draw users who may have discounted the brand because there wasn't an option. In the interim while the base grows there will still be the Sigma option for faster for the few who decide they need it, and at some point the big fast glass will reappear (or sensor tech will make it irrelevant as long as the slower glass is sharp enough)

02-10-2012, 08:30 AM	#222
deadwolfbones Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: La Crescenta, CA Posts: 7,450	Originally posted by ElJamoquio To me, that Sony lens is almost a joke. 500mm at f/4 is ridiculously thin DOF. The only reason IMO to have f/4 it is to be able to add a TC. Don't get me wrong, I'd like to have 1000mm f/8 in the arsenal, but for $17k I'd probably buy myself and Mrs. ElJamoquio a pair of new-to-us cars. When you have world-class AF, 500/4 isn't that ridiculous. Not sure how Sony's AF is, but I know Nikon sports pros can shoot wide open with the 500/4 without fear.

02-10-2012, 08:37 AM	#223
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873 Original Poster	Originally posted by deadwolfbones When you have world-class AF, 500/4 isn't that ridiculous. Not sure how Sony's AF is, but I know Nikon sports pros can shoot wide open with the 500/4 without fear. At 100 feet you're talking a foot or so DOF. You're right, if you're further away and nail AF you could be OK.

02-10-2012, 09:15 AM	#224
Rude Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Central New Jersey Posts: 100	Today it seems I'm incapable of forming coherent sentences. Let me rephrase my question for Pentax pundits: Am I nuts for thinking this could be a sub-$1,000 consumer grade lens? Just seems like most people think this is going to be an expensive piece of equipment to compete with Sigma EX lenses, etc. BTW, I agree with you SteveM, and if I was taking pictures of lions on the Serengeti, I'd be shooting with a Canon or Nikon. Maybe pro caliber long glass will someday come to Pentax ("beyond" the current roadmap) if Pentax/Ricoh makes a run for a third camera maker for Pros. But I guess my point is, this isn't going to be it.

02-10-2012, 09:21 AM	#225
Frogfish Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Shanghai Posts: 4,490	Originally posted by Rude Today it seems I'm incapable of forming coherent sentences. Let me rephrase my question for Pentax pundits: Am I nuts for thinking this could be a sub-$1,000 consumer grade lens? Just seems like most people think this is going to be an expensive piece of equipment to compete with Sigma EX lenses, etc. I don't think so Rude .. but the 120-380 (or whatever it is going to be) could well be ?