Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

Timothy · 09-10-2012, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

I don't know of any first party 560mm (or comparable) lenses that are cheaper.

I don't know of any first party lenses 560mm (or comparable) that are that slow.

Originally posted by Kunzite

I told you it won't be cheap!

Touché.

**Pål Jensen** · 09-10-2012, 04:36 PM

Originally posted by twitch

I think for $7k they also throw in a sherpa to carry the lens for you.

At 3kg? The FA* 600/4 weights almost 7kg!

Fl_Gulfer · 09-10-2012, 07:35 PM

The new HD PENTAX DA 560mm F5.6 ED AW will be available at retail outlets nationwide and online in December 2012 with a suggested retail price of $6,999.95.

That's alot of money

**Clinton** · 09-10-2012, 08:55 PM

Originally posted by Vylen

Stupid.. maybe or not really.. just checked B&H Photo... the cheapest non-mirror non-T-mount 500mm+ lens is the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 for $4,999... cheaper than the Pentax 560mm, but definitely not weather sealed.

Next up from the competitors is a Nikkor 500mm f/4 for $7,999... Canon's offering is $10,499.... Sony's is $12,998...

So, the Pentax wins out in terms of relative affordability doesn't it?

By more than a little.

ElJamoquio · 09-10-2012, 09:08 PM

Not in my opinion. The Nikon 500mm f/4 is a better value.

twitch · 09-10-2012, 09:09 PM

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?

ElJamoquio · 09-10-2012, 09:11 PM

Originally posted by twitch

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?

1 stop does indeed mean very big dollars. However I'm fairly sure this Pentax lens is a FF lens... of course with the center-resolution-only optical design I don't know that the sides are worth having.

..and no one has mentioned the long MFD (lately).

twitch · 09-10-2012, 09:14 PM

Example here:

Canon 400mm f/5.6: $1,300
Canon 400mm f/4.0: $6,000
Canon 400mm f/2.8: $11,500

ElJamoquio · 09-10-2012, 09:16 PM

Originally posted by twitch

I disagree, going off this example at least, prices taken form B&H:

Canon 400mm f/5.6: $1,300
Canon 400mm f/4.0: $6,000
Canon 400mm f/2.8: $11,500

Those numbers mean you agree with me.

twitch · 09-10-2012, 09:17 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

Those numbers mean you agree with me.

Sorry, I misread you, I changed my post since but you were too fast for me

Blue · 09-10-2012, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by twitch

Example here:

Canon 400mm f/5.6: $1,300
Canon 400mm f/4.0: $6,000
Canon 400mm f/2.8: $11,500

There is a substantial jump in price from 5.6 to 4 and 4 to 2.8.

twitch · 09-10-2012, 09:20 PM

Originally posted by Blue

There is a substantial jump in price from 5.6 to 4 and 4 to 2.8.

Yes there is, I'm wondering how Pentax can justify $7k when the Nikon 500/4 is $8,400.

cali92rs · 09-10-2012, 10:08 PM

Originally posted by twitch

Yes there is, I'm wondering how Pentax can justify $7k when the Nikon 500/4 is $8,400.

You can say that about most Pentax lenses since MAP.

Tuoppi · 09-11-2012, 12:22 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

1 stop does indeed mean very big dollars. However I'm fairly sure this Pentax lens is a FF lens... of course with the center-resolution-only optical design I don't know that the sides are worth having.

..and no one has mentioned the long MFD (lately).

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

gazonk · 09-11-2012, 02:06 AM

Originally posted by thibs

Not enough time to dig more but as an example: Tele | Objectieven | Foto Konijnenberg

The Canon 800/5.6 is same price as 600/4.
Let's extrapolate based on this 'not representative but interesting' sample:
500/4 and 600/5.6 should be about the same price. Well the Pentax is not a 600 though but a 560. Alright.
But the Sigma is a 3rd party lens and hence, cheaper.

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

09-10-2012, 09:17 PM	#130
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Originally posted by ElJamoquio Those numbers mean you agree with me. Sorry, I misread you, I changed my post since but you were too fast for me Last edited by twitch; 09-10-2012 at 10:11 PM.

09-11-2012, 12:22 AM	#134
Tuoppi New Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Photos: Albums Posts: 10	Super Tele Originally posted by ElJamoquio 1 stop does indeed mean very big dollars. However I'm fairly sure this Pentax lens is a FF lens... of course with the center-resolution-only optical design I don't know that the sides are worth having. ..and no one has mentioned the long MFD (lately). "When mounted on a PENTAX K-mount digital camera body, this super-telephoto lens offers a focal length of approximately 859mm (equivalent 35mm format)"

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The Pentax DA 560/5.6 will indeed be collapsible...I think...	Pål Jensen	Pentax News and Rumors	28	09-06-2012 11:48 AM
Pentax K-5 + YN 560 II X-Sync	striker_	Flashes, Lighting, and Studio	2	08-03-2012 11:47 AM
Pentax 540 and Yongnuo 560 - if they flash together?	pich	Flashes, Lighting, and Studio	3	10-29-2011 04:49 AM
yn-560 flash +pentax k-5	Purusam	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	2	03-12-2011 05:02 PM
Pentax Expected at Las Vegas CES January 6-9 2011	bobell69	Pentax News and Rumors	26	01-12-2011 02:19 PM

09-10-2012, 04:17 PM	#121
Timothy Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Central Canada Posts: 43	Originally posted by Pål Jensen I don't know of any first party 560mm (or comparable) lenses that are cheaper. I don't know of any first party lenses 560mm (or comparable) that are that slow. Originally posted by Kunzite I told you it won't be cheap! Touché.

09-10-2012, 04:36 PM	#122
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by twitch I think for $7k they also throw in a sherpa to carry the lens for you. At 3kg? The FA* 600/4 weights almost 7kg!

09-10-2012, 07:35 PM	#123
Fl_Gulfer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Gulfer Photos: Albums Posts: 3,054	The new HD PENTAX DA 560mm F5.6 ED AW will be available at retail outlets nationwide and online in December 2012 with a suggested retail price of $6,999.95. That's alot of money

09-10-2012, 08:55 PM	#124
Clinton Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,915	Originally posted by Vylen Stupid.. maybe or not really.. just checked B&H Photo... the cheapest non-mirror non-T-mount 500mm+ lens is the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 for $4,999... cheaper than the Pentax 560mm, but definitely not weather sealed. Next up from the competitors is a Nikkor 500mm f/4 for $7,999... Canon's offering is $10,499.... Sony's is $12,998... So, the Pentax wins out in terms of relative affordability doesn't it? By more than a little.

09-10-2012, 09:08 PM	#125
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Not in my opinion. The Nikon 500mm f/4 is a better value.

09-10-2012, 09:09 PM	#126
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	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?

09-10-2012, 09:11 PM	#127
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by twitch 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? 1 stop does indeed mean very big dollars. However I'm fairly sure this Pentax lens is a FF lens... of course with the center-resolution-only optical design I don't know that the sides are worth having. ..and no one has mentioned the long MFD (lately).

09-10-2012, 09:14 PM	#128
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Example here: Canon 400mm f/5.6: $1,300 Canon 400mm f/4.0: $6,000 Canon 400mm f/2.8: $11,500

09-10-2012, 09:16 PM	#129
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by twitch I disagree, going off this example at least, prices taken form B&H: Canon 400mm f/5.6: $1,300 Canon 400mm f/4.0: $6,000 Canon 400mm f/2.8: $11,500 Those numbers mean you agree with me.

09-10-2012, 09:18 PM	#131
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by twitch Example here: Canon 400mm f/5.6: $1,300 Canon 400mm f/4.0: $6,000 Canon 400mm f/2.8: $11,500 There is a substantial jump in price from 5.6 to 4 and 4 to 2.8.

09-10-2012, 09:20 PM	#132
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Originally posted by Blue There is a substantial jump in price from 5.6 to 4 and 4 to 2.8. Yes there is, I'm wondering how Pentax can justify $7k when the Nikon 500/4 is $8,400.

09-10-2012, 10:08 PM	#133
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by twitch Yes there is, I'm wondering how Pentax can justify $7k when the Nikon 500/4 is $8,400. You can say that about most Pentax lenses since MAP.

09-11-2012, 02:06 AM	#135
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by thibs Not enough time to dig more but as an example: Tele \| Objectieven \| Foto Konijnenberg The Canon 800/5.6 is same price as 600/4. Let's extrapolate based on this 'not representative but interesting' sample: 500/4 and 600/5.6 should be about the same price. Well the Pentax is not a 600 though but a 560. Alright. But the Sigma is a 3rd party lens and hence, cheaper. And the new 560 is $1400 less expensive than the Nikkor 500mm/4, and $3500 less expensive than the Canon 500mm/4!

Pentax DA 560/5.6 expected at Photokina

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!