[goubejp]

I understand your point but currently, if you don't look at third party lenses, the Nikon 500f4 is sold at 7500 euros in europe; it is one stop faster than the pentax - even if a bit shorter - and includes VR - that has a cost. More than that, it features a 125 mm front element - vs 100 mm front element for the Pentax and 110 mm for the Sigma - and this should be the driver of the price.
We will see in a couple of years what the price of this lens will be...

[thibs]

I understand your point but currently, if you don't look at third party lenses, the Nikon 500f4 is sold at 7500 euros in europe; it is one stop faster than the pentax - even if a bit shorter - and includes VR - that has a cost. More than that, it features a 125 mm front element - vs 100 mm front element for the Pentax and 110 mm for the Sigma - and this should be the driver of the price.
We will see in a couple of years what the price of this lens will be...

This is all things to consider when you buy, you're right.
But it isn't reasonable either to expect Pentax to do what Zapp would like them to do.
I'd like too, believe me.

[Kunzite]

I don't think the difference between 110 and 100mm could be interpreted as "the Pentax must have a 2000 euro/usd less MSRP than the Sigma"
By the way, the Canon is much more expensive and it vignettes, too, in the corners

Let's not forget Pentax is at a huge disadvantage: their tiny little market share, with most customers excessively price-conscious (as a side effect of trying to compete by price, some years ago). This affects everything, including raw materials costs.
My guess is they had to go with this simpler design not to have a price advantage (or large profits), but to make it possible. Anyway, I doubt it's a compromised product - other than the length and the MFD.

Indeed, a less than 4000 euro price could put it within my reach (now it isn't). But I don't think that's possible, not now at least. Sorry, Pentax cannot offer the best "bang for the buck" in the long lens arena.

[Gray]

The 560 is ASP-C only, is only 5.6 and comes with a short one-year warranty in most countries, image quality not head and shoulders above Sigma 500/4.5. Definitely not worth $7,000 - maybe $2,500, a price where its weather sealing would make up for its shortcomings.

---

Last edited by Gray; 02-24-2013 at 03:51 AM.

[ogl]

I don't understand who is the buyer of DA560....

[Kunzite]

The 560 is ASP-C only, is only 5.6 and comes with a short one-year warranty in most countries, image quality not head and shoulders above Sigma 500/4.5.

Says who?

[goubejp]

If I remember well when the 560 was announced, the long lens design - as opposite to a tele design which is shorter - was justified to reduce the number of optical elements and keep the price low.

[Kunzite]

Not by Pentax AFAIK; they claimed that "it assures sharp, well-defined images, particularly with distant subjects".
It was the Pentaxian community who immediately assumed it must cost about $2500 and have a so-so optical quality.

[ogl]

There are nobody who understand to where DA560 aim at (on our Pentax club).
Everybody think that the outside price should be not above USD3000. At least - USD5000. It's a limit.

FA*600/4 was USD 10 000 by order. By the way.

DA560 is the same situation as we saw with Sigma SD1's announcement price. Total fail.

Only one man is here who protect EVERY Pentax work till it bleeds.... He is the advocate of Pentax - Kunzite

[RonHendriks1966]

I don't understand who is the buyer of DA560....

This is a very good question.

There are nobody who understand to where DA560 aim at (on our Pentax club).
Everybody think that the outside price should be not above USD3000. At least - USD5000. It's a limit.

FA*600/4 was USD 10 000 by order. By the way.

DA560 is the same situation as we saw with Sigma SD1's announcement price. Total fail.

Only one man is here who protect EVERY Pentax work till it bleeds.... He is the advocate of Pentax - Kunzite

Well the price off a lens is allways part of many things. Productioncosts is just only one off those. I have no idea wheater it is possible to make this lens in topquality in large amounts. So if there is a production limitation then putting the price up is one way to temper interest. I also don't see this lens in many hands off photographers, since it is a specialized lens in my opinion.

I do wonder how good it is and would like to try test this lens.

When it isn't a real full frame design, then maybe Pentax should make an APS-H camera to match it.

[infoomatic]

On the one hand I am glad that they constructed the lens because being able to offer all a photographer needs is important to attract customers to the brand (Pentax is still in the process of doing so and the lens selection is not complete as we all know). However, the price politics is just silly imho.

And btw, I don't like the bokeh, at least in this picture it seems not pleasing to me...

[RockvilleBob]

I am looking forward to the Forum's test of the Sigma 500 and the Pentax 560. It would be nice to see how the 560 also stacks up versus Nikon f4 on a body close to the K-5 performance. I am keeping my fingers crossed that the 560 is head and shoulders above the Sigma. What Pentax could do to promote this lens is offer a few on a rental plan. I do not mean a give away plan but a rental plan that lets potential buyers like me rent the lens (including a mandatory damage waiver policy) for to test it out. I don't see many lens rental companies jumping to stock this lens. AN alternative approach is to work with a couple of lens rental plans to offer the 560 on rental. Canon and Nikon big glass can be rented. I've rented the DA*300 and liked it very much and was prepared to buy it when the revised pricing raised the price of that lens about 25% and for my use made a mint condition Sigma 150-500 at $800 a preferable solution - very usable to 400mm.
Bottom line - I'd like a reason to seriously consider the 560 but it needs to be a standout performer and available for rental so I can try it out.

[ogl]

I try to understand the strong sides of DA560...

FF - no, compact - no, very sharp - maybe, at F8 only, good price - no, good bokeh - no....

who can explain?

[Kunzite]

Me against all those Russians... so scary!

$3000 it's insane, and Pentax is better off without such "customers" - ready to bash Pentax for daring to make a product outside their price range.

It's easy to understand where they aim with this product if you can look further than your wallet. There are people who buys long, expensive Canikonigmony (Canon/Nikon/Sigma/Sony) lenses; why not for Pentax, too? There were people who bought the FA 600mm f/4, there are people who would grab one if they see it on e-bay. FFS, there are long lens owners on this very forum; and we have 9 reviews for the FA 600mm f/4.
If you don't have anything to offer to them, maybe not in the ideal shape and price from the beginning, you'll simply lose them. Or you could scare away other potential $$$-spending customers.
The trick, however, is that Pentax is a company and every company should strive to make a profit. Understand this, understand how much harder is for Pentax to do it with such low volumes, and you won't be disappointed when they will "fail" again to launch a lens for half of what a 3rd-party would ask.

But, you know what they say (the Vorlons, I mean) - understanding is a three edged sword: your side, their side and the truth.

And I'll ask again: who said it isn't FF-compatible?

[ogl]

Me against all those Russians... so scary!

You are against 99% of Pentaxforums users too.