[aurele]

Or how about the Nikkor 500mm f4.0 VRII?



*Facepalm*

you are quoting only what arrange you, don't you ?

why don't you take in consideration the 3kg of glass that represente at least $3,000 just in raw materials ?

[LamyTax]

One stop more actually means a lot in terms of money and usability, but don't forget, those lenses also have IS and a lot more glass elements.

SR isn't as good, you don't get so see a stabilized picture through your viewfinder and you can't hold times as short as with in-lens IS.


While I like all the other releases a lot, this lens irritates me. A lens at 3500$ would have sold like crazy. This one will sell, but it won't be a hit.

It actually shows how good Nikon is positioned with it's 500/4.

you are quoting only what arrange you, don't you ?

why don't you take in consideration the 3kg of glass that represente at least $3,000 just in raw materials ?

Haha, no, that's not 3kg of glass in there .

[aurele]

Haha, no, that's not 3kg of glass in there .

probably around 2 kg but don't forget that optical glass is always as thick as a hockey disk, that need to be cut and polish, and thus, the difference between raw and finish glass can be quite important

[LamyTax]

probably around 2 kg but don't forget that optical glass is always as thick as a hockey disk, that need to be cut and polish, and thus, the difference between raw and finish glass can be quite important

That may be true, but look at it from two directions:

The DA* 300/4 has 8 elements, 1kg total weight, ~75mm lens diameter. 1400$

The Nikon 500/4 VR 12 elements, VR, ~3.9kg total weight, 125mm lens diameter. 8400$

The Pentax 560 has 6 elements, 3kg, 112mm lens diameter and is at 7000$.


To me it looks like they never actually planned on selling much of it. The Nikon clearly is a much better deal.

---

Last edited by LamyTax; 09-11-2012 at 03:13 AM.

[gazonk]

To me it looks like they never actually planned on selling much of it. The Nikon clearly is a much better deal.

Let's wait and see how it performs....

[french_mike]

Still, it's not WR ! can only go under a light rain for few minuts ... what kind of wildlife equipment is that, especially at that price !

[LamyTax]

Let's wait and see how it performs....

How much better will it have to perform than the Nikon? I wonder...

[Asahiflex]

Still, it's not WR ! can only go under a light rain for few minuts ... what kind of wildlife equipment is that, especially at that price !

You do know that WR is on a lower level than the DA560's AW?

[TOUGEFC]

Still, it's not WR ! can only go under a light rain for few minuts ... what kind of wildlife equipment is that, especially at that price !

FWIW the Nikkor 500mm is weather sealed,all the pro glass is

[aurele]

FWIW the Nikkor 500mm is weather sealed,all the pro glass is

at those price they better be !

[ElJamoquio]

"When mounted on a PENTAX K-mount digital camera body, this super-telephoto lens offers a focal length of approximately 859mm (equivalent 35mm format)"

Would you like to put a beer on it? My guess is it's full frame, whether there's a full frame camera on the horizon or not.

[MMVIII]

Those Nikon and Canon lenses are 1) a stop faster and 2) FF lenses. That's worth a lot isn't it? 1 stop at these focal lengths means big dollars doesn't it?

And the new 560 is $1400 less expensive than the Nikkor 500mm/4, and $3500 less expensive than the Canon 500mm/4!

That's a crucial point. I'm not so much in the long range photography, but why would it be any better to use a 35mm sensor if it's about range and resolution?

The FOV of a 560 at APS-C equals 859 in 35mm, the light gathering equals 5,6, the DOF will not play a role at this distances and focal range.
It's about the whole system, and so you can go with a Nikon D800E and a Nikkor 500mm/4 for $3.300 and $8.400 - sum $11.700 - and crop it to APS-C FOV with approx. the same amount of resolution and (assumed) IQ as you get with the Pentax K5IIs for (new now) $1.300 and the Pentax 560mm/5,6 for $7.000 in sum $8.300.

Edit: or you add a TC for additional 400$ and end up with a 700mm/5.6, with 36Mp, but you still have to crop to be at 859mm.../Edit

YMMV, but doesn't seem thaaaat bad to me... if I was in search for long tele.

[ElJamoquio]

you are quoting only what arrange you, don't you ?

why don't you take in consideration the 3kg of glass that represente at least $3,000 just in raw materials ?

All else being the same (same number of elements, etc), the Nikon lens uses twice the glass.

Of course the Nikon lens has twice as many elements, too.

[Tuoppi]

Would you like to put a beer on it? My guess is it's full frame, whether there's a full frame camera on the horizon or not.

Pentax announces 18-270mm F3.5-6.3 ED SDM and HD 560mm F5.6 ED AW: Digital Photography Review It is full frame lens...

[froeschle]

For comparison:

Price
Telyt?