[Medium FormatPro]

Nikon publishes open aperture M30 MTF for the new 800 which is a flat 0.99 across the entire image field and S30 which stays above 0.95. That's stunning. Even with an 1.4x converter it beats other lenses. The new Canon's are reported for their sharpness too

But it gets worse for most any Pentax owner when compared with Nikon... Nikon is able to beat out the Pentax 560 with better optics with any of it's medium to higher end telephoto lens'.

Nikon Telephoto AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Autofocus Lens 1909

Both this lens' featured in the link and also the 200mm Nikkor are unbeatable by anything Pentax has ever offered. It also makes one wonder; what market is the 560 aimed for and how well will it ever sell

[thibs]

Both this lens' featured in the link and also the 200mm Nikkor are unbeatable by anything Pentax has ever offered. It also makes one wonder; what market is the 560 aimed for and how well will it ever sell

I suspect the 560 is nothing but a placeholder. The have a long telephoto, you buy it if you really really want it and it is DA only (IMO on purpose). They'll do a proper one for their FF offering but they had to market something: this is it.

[goubejp]

But it gets worse for most any Pentax owner when compared with Nikon... Nikon is able to beat out the Pentax 560 with better optics with any of it's medium to higher end telephoto lens'.

Nikon Telephoto AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Autofocus Lens 1909

Both this lens' featured in the link and also the 200mm Nikkor are unbeatable by anything Pentax has ever offered. It also makes one wonder; what market is the 560 aimed for and how well will it ever sell

And what about the DA300 ? The tests made by photozone shows its excellent resolution figures, and it offers image stabilisation - not the Nikon.
For the long, high end lenses, it is a different story, though. My opinion is still that the DA 560 should be a "budget" long lens priced around 4000 euros

[Kunzite]

But it gets worse for most any Pentax owner when compared with Nikon... Nikon is able to beat out the Pentax 560 with better optics with any of it's medium to higher end telephoto lens'.

Nikon Telephoto AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF Autofocus Lens 1909

Both this lens' featured in the link and also the 200mm Nikkor are unbeatable by anything Pentax has ever offered. It also makes one wonder; what market is the 560 aimed for and how well will it ever sell

All right, so far Pentax can't stand a chance against: Sigma, LensBaby and Nikon. Who's next?

thibs: placeholder... could be, but I don't expect it to be replaced soon (well, it also depends on how well it performs, how fast could they gain market share etc).
Unfortunately, I can't trust a single review (see Pentaxforums backpedaling on the FF-compatibility issue); but if it's good, it could stay for a while.

goubejp: maybe it will become one, in time. But still, 4000 is a little bit low

[goubejp]

Since the 560 was announced, I took notice of new telelens designs by Canon (500/4, 600/4) and Nikon (800/5.6).

Esp. comparing the DA 560 with Nikon 800:

Diameter: 100 vs. 140 mm (x2 surface)
Weight: 3kg vs. 4.5kg
Length: 520 vs. 460 mm
Lenses: 6 vs. 20
Fluorite: 0? vs. 2

This new generation of lenses are more lightweight (the Canon 500/4 is 3.2kg) than even the "scope design"-like Pentax. But what does really worry me is the published MTF figures for the new lens designs featuring fluorite glass.

Nikon publishes open aperture M30 MTF for the new 800 which is a flat 0.99 across the entire image field and S30 which stays above 0.95. That's stunning. Even with an 1.4x converter it beats other lenses. The new Canon's are reported for their sharpness too.

No question these new super tele lenses cost a fortune (between 10k and 18k$!). But I am really eager to see where Pentax does stand technically against Canikon in 2013. If in-depth testing reveals the DA 560 is an optical gem then it may well be worth its price. But I doubt it. It only has the diameter of a 400/4 and only 1/3 of lenses.

At the time of the FA 600/4, Pentax optical quality was top notch, on par with Canikon and a tad more affordable.

If the DA 560 today cannot beat the optical quality of the FA 600/4 (and it will have a hard time to do), then the DA 560 would not be attractive and very overprized.

So, time to see some real MTF tests and real world photos with the K-5IIs. Better yet, some full frame corner crops taken with the VG900 and adapter. Until this information emerges, I fear nobody would have enough information to buy the lens.

Hi Falk,
if I remember well you have published an empiric formula to predict the price of a lens vs its length and front element diameter ? Can you remind us the predicted price of the DA560 ?
Being the happy owner of a FA600f4, I can confirm the the new 560 will have a hard time to beat FA600 resolution which is excellent stopped down between f5.6 and F8. Most of the time I'm not concerned about corner resolution, using the lens for birding the subject is always centered (de-centered in PP though). For me the DA560 should be a "budget" long lens at more or less half the price of a professional lens made by Canon or Nikon, even if it should sacrify some sharpness and one fstop (f5.6 vs F4 for pro lenses).

[thibs]

But this empirical formula from Falk will take into account (and rightly so) the financial side which is: we sell only a couple so we will ask triple the price.
Sony works that way. IMO Ricoh-Pentax works that way right now. It doesn't help market share but it helps recover the cost more quickly.

[eurostar]

Comparing lenses which are double the price of the DA560, or discontinued by a long time, seems... meaningless. I believe a person which is able to buy a Nikkor 800mm can buy a D4 to complement it. The DA 560 is built to estabilish a price that, while important, is proportionated to the price of the K-5 II. And still I don0't see many running to order this lens.

Maybe for the 645D we could expect a new 600mm on par with the offering of Canon and Nikon, but still, is that needed? I

[miles]

They'll do a proper one for their FF offering [...]

Ehhm... should i ask when?
If this isn't the one for me, i think i'll be getting a Sigma 500 towards the end of the year. Unless of course that hypothetical FF sucks up all my photo budget!

[thibs]

@miles: if there was an aswer to that question there'd be no DA560 IMO

[Ron Boggs]

Supertele shooters of all brands commonly shoot APS-C or the APS-C crop on their full frame bodies to obtain the benefits of the crop to fill the frame with birds and other critters. Even bird guru Arthur Morris uses the cropped APS-C approach with supertele's as self reported in a recent Outdoor Photographer article.

If a FF body actually does happen--I still have doubts--I will buy one for landscapes, but will likely use a quality APS-C body (K-5 currently) for critter work with the FA*600/4 and macro with the FA*200/4 macro. I like the crop factor very much for those high magnification situations.

[baro-nite]

Supertele shooters of all brands commonly shoot APS-C or the APS-C crop on their full frame bodies to obtain the benefits of the crop to fill the frame with birds and other critters.

Unless that crop-sensor camera has a higher pixel pitch there is no increase in resolution. A 36MP full frame sensor (as on the D800) has about the same pixel pitch as the K-5. This is why so many of us are using the Q/DA*300 combination -- the Q has much a higher pixel pitch than any DSLR, and the DA*300 is sharp enough to stand up to it.

[goubejp]

Comparing lenses which are double the price of the DA560, or discontinued by a long time, seems... meaningless. I believe a person which is able to buy a Nikkor 800mm can buy a D4 to complement it. The DA 560 is built to estabilish a price that, while important, is proportionated to the price of the K-5 II. And still I don0't see many running to order this lens.

Maybe for the 645D we could expect a new 600mm on par with the offering of Canon and Nikon, but still, is that needed? I

FA600 is only discontinued for 2 years; it would be a pity that its assumed successor be a worse performer.

[gazonk]

Both this lens' featured in the link and also the 200mm Nikkor are unbeatable by anything Pentax has ever offered. It also makes one wonder; what market is the 560 aimed for and how well will it ever sell

In which way is it "unbeatable"? It can't be center sharpness since (as already commented) the DA*300 is sharp enough for the Q, i.e. sharp enough for a 160mp APS-C camera...

[thibs]

Unless that crop-sensor camera has a higher pixel pitch there is no increase in resolution. A 36MP full frame sensor (as on the D800) has about the same pixel pitch as the K-5. This is why so many of us are using the Q/DA*300 combination -- the Q has much a higher pixel pitch than any DSLR, and the DA*300 is sharp enough to stand up to it.

The problem is not resolution IMO.
It is clear to me (but obviously can be wrong) that it is easier to shoot with a cropped body with Tele than an FF with the same Tele and crop IF you care about center of the image (which IMO is the case for e.g. birds). Frankly this a lot easier to frame (and may be easier to AF as well). This is an advantage of the crop bodies, but this is purely practical. In theory the FF at least provides the possibility not to crop and to crop differently.
In practice, the crop body is easier IMO.

[StigVidar]

In which way is it "unbeatable"? It can't be center sharpness since (as already commented) the DA*300 is sharp enough for the Q, i.e. sharp enough for a 160mp APS-C camera...

A lot of people here don't know what they are talking about. But when they start complaining about DA*300/4 it gets funny