560mm now available.

RonHendriks1966 · 03-09-2013, 01:55 PM

Originally posted by Jake21209

So we now have a ~$7,000.00 super telephoto available. At the current price , how many of them are they really going to sell?

Jake

I guess not many, but this lens needs a new topmodel camera to go with it.

ElJamoquio · 03-09-2013, 02:05 PM

I wonder if the lack of response to this lens will be interpreted as a disinterest in the Pentax community towards high-end gear in general.

Greyser · 03-09-2013, 02:07 PM

Originally posted by Jake21209

So we now have a ~$7,000.00 super telephoto available. I would be more interested in either a `150 mm or 200 mm macro lens in the $1,100 - $1,400 range. At the current price , how many of them are they really going to sell?

Jake

The Sigma 180/3.5 Macro still pops up on second hand market occasionally. I snitched mine from KEH (EX+ condition) three months ago for unbelievable $599.

**Pål Jensen** · 03-09-2013, 02:10 PM

Originally posted by Jake21209

So we now have a ~$7,000.00 super telephoto available. I would be more interested in either a `150 mm or 200 mm macro lens in the $1,100 - $1,400 range. At the current price , how many of them are they really going to sell?

Jake

400 units initially....

goubejp · 03-09-2013, 02:43 PM

First discount here :
Pentax HD PENTAX DA 560mm F5.6 ED AW Super-Telephoto Lens FREE S&H 22180. Pentax DSLR Camera Lenses.
33 % off
I'm really conviced that the price of this lens will be strongly adjusted... just like some other Pentax products (Q camera...) that were released at a unrealistic price point

Jake21209 · 03-09-2013, 02:49 PM

All well and good, but you don't need a $7,000 super telephoto as an excuse to produce a full frame camera. Price it between $2,000 - $3,500 and you are right in the area of both Canon and Nikon. They have a tremendous base of users with a substantial base of glass. How many of them are going to give all that up for the new Pentax full frame? And as for the glass, where is the 70 - 200mm f2.8 telephoto or the similar f2.8 prime lenses?

As to dealers, on the east coast, we have basically two dealers that handle the full line of Pentax cameras and both are located in NYC. There are many of us who prefer to have a "hands on" feel before buying and going to Best Buy, Target or Walmart just doesn't do it.

I live in Maryland, and there is only one full service dealer in the Baltimore area - Service Photo and they are primarily a Nikon and Canon dealer. When B&H had a special sale last spring on the K-5 with a $500 instant rebate, I made the jump. I still have my SpotMatic and while I had not done much in the last few years, it was a quick way get into digital with a really good camera. I didn't have a ton of high end legacy glass that I would have sell at a loss so it was a no brainer. My biggest problem was leaning how to use the K-5. My SpotMatic came with a 29 page user manual. The K-5 375 page! Need I say more.

Bring the full frame body to market, and more of the f2.8 primes and/or telephotos before you worry about a segment of the market that is not really going to move on from their current base. Would I upgrade? Most likely as long as they make the body as rugged as the current K-5 or K-5 II / IIS. Late last summer I had an accident a fell into the Little Gunpowder River and had an intimate meeting with a boulder. Me, strained ligaments on one arm and both hands, a banged up knee and a very bloody lip. The K-5? A scratch on the bottom of the body and lens barrel. All said and done, I doubt that either a Canon or Nikon model in the same price range as the K-5 would have survived and would most likely have to be trashed.

ElJamoquio · 03-09-2013, 04:50 PM

Originally posted by Jake21209

All well and good, but you don't need a $7,000 super telephoto as an excuse to produce a full frame camera.

In fact you could use the 560 as an excuse NOT to produce a telephoto, as the lens doesn't cover FF. Which is actually rather surprising, as there's no real difference in cost, weight, etc between FF and APS-C at that long of a focal length.

Kunzite · 03-09-2013, 04:54 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

In fact you could use the 560 as an excuse NOT to produce a telephoto, as the lens doesn't cover FF. Which is actually rather surprising, as there's no real difference in cost, weight, etc between FF and APS-C at that long of a focal length.

Is that a fact? Do you have a test, something, anything to show us?

JinDesu · 03-09-2013, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Is that a fact? Do you have a test, something, anything to show us?

Adam posted some example shots, it vignettes about -1EV on FF film. The Camera Store TV group tested theirs on the Sony FF camcorder, and it didn't really show any vignetting.

On the other hand, corner resolution was still quite sharp, so it's semi-FF in my opinion.

Also, 33% off is quite good. $5600 is a much more reasonable price.

ElJamoquio · 03-09-2013, 04:59 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Is that a fact? Do you have a test, something, anything to show us?

It was in one of the first tests from the 560mm on this site. I apologize but I spent a few minutes looking for it and didn't find it. If I recall correctly it was something like 1.3 or 1.7 EV of falloff in the corner, so that may or may not fit your expectation of acceptable vignetting.

derekkite · 03-09-2013, 05:10 PM

Originally posted by goubejp

First discount here :
Pentax HD PENTAX DA 560mm F5.6 ED AW Super-Telephoto Lens FREE S&H 22180. Pentax DSLR Camera Lenses.
33 % off
I'm really conviced that the price of this lens will be strongly adjusted... just like some other Pentax products (Q camera...) that were released at a unrealistic price point

That gets it into the interesting range.

derekkite · 03-09-2013, 05:15 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

I wonder if the lack of response to this lens will be interpreted as a disinterest in the Pentax community towards high-end gear in general.

Oddly over the last while it seems the Pentax people haven't shown outrageous enthusiasm for this lens either. They show it with a Q? Where are the reviews? The Kowa long lens that came out last year had a wildlife photographer showing off the lens.

Kunzite · 03-09-2013, 05:19 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

It was in one of the first tests from the 560mm on this site. I apologize but I spent a few minutes looking for it and didn't find it. If I recall correctly it was something like 1.3 or 1.7 EV of falloff in the corner, so that may or may not fit your expectation of acceptable vignetting.

Indeed, this site found a vignetting level similar with that of the Canon 600mm f/4 IS II; and they thought that means it's not a full frame lens. Now they're measuring resolution and other stuff, and I really hope they'll follow Falk's advice; otherwise... well, I don't want to think about that.
Is that all?

RockvilleBob · 03-09-2013, 05:37 PM

Originally posted by Jake21209

All well and good, but you don't need a $7,000 super telephoto as an excuse to produce a full frame camera. Price it between $2,000 - $3,500 and you are right in the area of both Canon and Nikon. They have a tremendous base of users with a substantial base of glass. How many of them are going to give all that up for the new Pentax full frame? And as for the glass, where is the 70 - 200mm f2.8 telephoto or the similar f2.8 prime lenses?

As to dealers, on the east coast, we have basically two dealers that handle the full line of Pentax cameras and both are located in NYC. There are many of us who prefer to have a "hands on" feel before buying and going to Best Buy, Target or Walmart just doesn't do it.

I live in Maryland, and there is only one full service dealer in the Baltimore area - Service Photo and they are primarily a Nikon and Canon dealer. When B&H had a special sale last spring on the K-5 with a $500 instant rebate, I made the jump. I still have my SpotMatic and while I had not done much in the last few years, it was a quick way get into digital with a really good camera. I didn't have a ton of high end legacy glass that I would have sell at a loss so it was a no brainer. My biggest problem was leaning how to use the K-5. My SpotMatic came with a 29 page user manual. The K-5 375 page! Need I say more.

Bring the full frame body to market, and more of the f2.8 primes and/or telephotos before you worry about a segment of the market that is not really going to move on from their current base. Would I upgrade? Most likely as long as they make the body as rugged as the current K-5 or K-5 II / IIS. Late last summer I had an accident a fell into the Little Gunpowder River and had an intimate meeting with a boulder. Me, strained ligaments on one arm and both hands, a banged up knee and a very bloody lip. The K-5? A scratch on the bottom of the body and lens barrel. All said and done, I doubt that either a Canon or Nikon model in the same price range as the K-5 would have survived and would most likely have to be trashed.

I concur and feel Pentax should offer a rental plan for the 560 lens. I bought the K-5 two years ago with the DA*16-50. I've added the Sigma 70-200 2.8 and the Sigma 150-500 plus some legacy glass and a Panagor Macro. My next purchase is a long prime and second body. At $7,000, or even $3,000, I would need to try the lens out. I live in Rockville MD so that probably means a train ride to NYC - add another couple hundred to the cost.

Pentax should offer a rental of the 560! If they have confidence in the lens they should feel comfortable renting it for a week to Pentax users.

ElJamoquio · 03-09-2013, 08:46 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Indeed, this site found a vignetting level similar with that of the Canon 600mm f/4 IS II; and they thought that means it's not a full frame lens. Now they're measuring resolution and other stuff, and I really hope they'll follow Falk's advice; otherwise... well, I don't want to think about that.
Is that all?

Well, yes, other than the fact that it's called out as an APS-C (which I don't really trust either). But yup, 'that's all'.

When that 1.3 or whatever number came out I looked at other lenses, because I thought 1.3 wasn't that bad... and the worst I found was ~0.6 or 0.7. Don't know where you're getting a Canon 600mm showing 1.3 EV of vignetting... but even still, I'm sure the Canon's doing super-awesome at f/5.6.

Having to stop down to f/8 on a $7k lens sounds a bit ridiculous to me, but everything about this lens seems ridiculous to me.

03-09-2013, 05:37 PM	#269
RockvilleBob Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Lewes DE USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,780	560 Rental Plan Originally posted by Jake21209 All well and good, but you don't need a $7,000 super telephoto as an excuse to produce a full frame camera. Price it between $2,000 - $3,500 and you are right in the area of both Canon and Nikon. They have a tremendous base of users with a substantial base of glass. How many of them are going to give all that up for the new Pentax full frame? And as for the glass, where is the 70 - 200mm f2.8 telephoto or the similar f2.8 prime lenses? As to dealers, on the east coast, we have basically two dealers that handle the full line of Pentax cameras and both are located in NYC. There are many of us who prefer to have a "hands on" feel before buying and going to Best Buy, Target or Walmart just doesn't do it. I live in Maryland, and there is only one full service dealer in the Baltimore area - Service Photo and they are primarily a Nikon and Canon dealer. When B&H had a special sale last spring on the K-5 with a $500 instant rebate, I made the jump. I still have my SpotMatic and while I had not done much in the last few years, it was a quick way get into digital with a really good camera. I didn't have a ton of high end legacy glass that I would have sell at a loss so it was a no brainer. My biggest problem was leaning how to use the K-5. My SpotMatic came with a 29 page user manual. The K-5 375 page! Need I say more. Bring the full frame body to market, and more of the f2.8 primes and/or telephotos before you worry about a segment of the market that is not really going to move on from their current base. Would I upgrade? Most likely as long as they make the body as rugged as the current K-5 or K-5 II / IIS. Late last summer I had an accident a fell into the Little Gunpowder River and had an intimate meeting with a boulder. Me, strained ligaments on one arm and both hands, a banged up knee and a very bloody lip. The K-5? A scratch on the bottom of the body and lens barrel. All said and done, I doubt that either a Canon or Nikon model in the same price range as the K-5 would have survived and would most likely have to be trashed. I concur and feel Pentax should offer a rental plan for the 560 lens. I bought the K-5 two years ago with the DA*16-50. I've added the Sigma 70-200 2.8 and the Sigma 150-500 plus some legacy glass and a Panagor Macro. My next purchase is a long prime and second body. At $7,000, or even $3,000, I would need to try the lens out. I live in Rockville MD so that probably means a train ride to NYC - add another couple hundred to the cost. Pentax should offer a rental of the 560! If they have confidence in the lens they should feel comfortable renting it for a week to Pentax users.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-30 Manual Available now	baka654	Pentax K-30 & K-50	28	01-12-2013 05:25 AM
News World Pentax Day Book Now Available!	Adam	Site Suggestions and Help	7	07-04-2012 07:39 AM
Nikon D800 images now available	einstrigger	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	33	02-07-2012 12:52 AM
The new Topaz Lens Effects now available.	Joyen	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	12	12-16-2011 07:37 PM
Samyang 35mm f1.4 now Available	Damian	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	228	12-09-2011 03:04 AM

03-09-2013, 01:55 PM	#256
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by Jake21209 So we now have a ~$7,000.00 super telephoto available. At the current price , how many of them are they really going to sell? Jake I guess not many, but this lens needs a new topmodel camera to go with it.

03-09-2013, 02:05 PM	#257
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	I wonder if the lack of response to this lens will be interpreted as a disinterest in the Pentax community towards high-end gear in general.

03-09-2013, 02:07 PM	#258
Greyser Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Los Angeles, California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,150	Originally posted by Jake21209 So we now have a ~$7,000.00 super telephoto available. I would be more interested in either a `150 mm or 200 mm macro lens in the $1,100 - $1,400 range. At the current price , how many of them are they really going to sell? Jake The Sigma 180/3.5 Macro still pops up on second hand market occasionally. I snitched mine from KEH (EX+ condition) three months ago for unbelievable $599.

03-09-2013, 02:10 PM	#259
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by Jake21209 So we now have a ~$7,000.00 super telephoto available. I would be more interested in either a `150 mm or 200 mm macro lens in the $1,100 - $1,400 range. At the current price , how many of them are they really going to sell? Jake 400 units initially....

03-09-2013, 02:43 PM	#260
goubejp Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: France Photos: Albums Posts: 804	First discount here : Pentax HD PENTAX DA 560mm F5.6 ED AW Super-Telephoto Lens FREE S&H 22180. Pentax DSLR Camera Lenses. 33 % off I'm really conviced that the price of this lens will be strongly adjusted... just like some other Pentax products (Q camera...) that were released at a unrealistic price point

03-09-2013, 02:49 PM	#261
Jake21209 Forum Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Maryland Posts: 81	All well and good, but you don't need a $7,000 super telephoto as an excuse to produce a full frame camera. Price it between $2,000 - $3,500 and you are right in the area of both Canon and Nikon. They have a tremendous base of users with a substantial base of glass. How many of them are going to give all that up for the new Pentax full frame? And as for the glass, where is the 70 - 200mm f2.8 telephoto or the similar f2.8 prime lenses? As to dealers, on the east coast, we have basically two dealers that handle the full line of Pentax cameras and both are located in NYC. There are many of us who prefer to have a "hands on" feel before buying and going to Best Buy, Target or Walmart just doesn't do it. I live in Maryland, and there is only one full service dealer in the Baltimore area - Service Photo and they are primarily a Nikon and Canon dealer. When B&H had a special sale last spring on the K-5 with a $500 instant rebate, I made the jump. I still have my SpotMatic and while I had not done much in the last few years, it was a quick way get into digital with a really good camera. I didn't have a ton of high end legacy glass that I would have sell at a loss so it was a no brainer. My biggest problem was leaning how to use the K-5. My SpotMatic came with a 29 page user manual. The K-5 375 page! Need I say more. Bring the full frame body to market, and more of the f2.8 primes and/or telephotos before you worry about a segment of the market that is not really going to move on from their current base. Would I upgrade? Most likely as long as they make the body as rugged as the current K-5 or K-5 II / IIS. Late last summer I had an accident a fell into the Little Gunpowder River and had an intimate meeting with a boulder. Me, strained ligaments on one arm and both hands, a banged up knee and a very bloody lip. The K-5? A scratch on the bottom of the body and lens barrel. All said and done, I doubt that either a Canon or Nikon model in the same price range as the K-5 would have survived and would most likely have to be trashed.

03-09-2013, 04:50 PM	#262
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Jake21209 All well and good, but you don't need a $7,000 super telephoto as an excuse to produce a full frame camera. In fact you could use the 560 as an excuse NOT to produce a telephoto, as the lens doesn't cover FF. Which is actually rather surprising, as there's no real difference in cost, weight, etc between FF and APS-C at that long of a focal length.

03-09-2013, 04:54 PM	#263
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by ElJamoquio In fact you could use the 560 as an excuse NOT to produce a telephoto, as the lens doesn't cover FF. Which is actually rather surprising, as there's no real difference in cost, weight, etc between FF and APS-C at that long of a focal length. Is that a fact? Do you have a test, something, anything to show us?

03-09-2013, 04:56 PM	#264
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	Originally posted by Kunzite Is that a fact? Do you have a test, something, anything to show us? Adam posted some example shots, it vignettes about -1EV on FF film. The Camera Store TV group tested theirs on the Sony FF camcorder, and it didn't really show any vignetting. On the other hand, corner resolution was still quite sharp, so it's semi-FF in my opinion. Also, 33% off is quite good. $5600 is a much more reasonable price.

03-09-2013, 04:59 PM	#265
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Kunzite Is that a fact? Do you have a test, something, anything to show us? It was in one of the first tests from the 560mm on this site. I apologize but I spent a few minutes looking for it and didn't find it. If I recall correctly it was something like 1.3 or 1.7 EV of falloff in the corner, so that may or may not fit your expectation of acceptable vignetting.

03-09-2013, 05:10 PM	#266
derekkite Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Nelson B.C. Posts: 3,782	Originally posted by goubejp First discount here : Pentax HD PENTAX DA 560mm F5.6 ED AW Super-Telephoto Lens FREE S&H 22180. Pentax DSLR Camera Lenses. 33 % off I'm really conviced that the price of this lens will be strongly adjusted... just like some other Pentax products (Q camera...) that were released at a unrealistic price point That gets it into the interesting range.

03-09-2013, 05:15 PM	#267
derekkite Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Nelson B.C. Posts: 3,782	Originally posted by ElJamoquio I wonder if the lack of response to this lens will be interpreted as a disinterest in the Pentax community towards high-end gear in general. Oddly over the last while it seems the Pentax people haven't shown outrageous enthusiasm for this lens either. They show it with a Q? Where are the reviews? The Kowa long lens that came out last year had a wildlife photographer showing off the lens.

03-09-2013, 05:19 PM	#268
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by ElJamoquio It was in one of the first tests from the 560mm on this site. I apologize but I spent a few minutes looking for it and didn't find it. If I recall correctly it was something like 1.3 or 1.7 EV of falloff in the corner, so that may or may not fit your expectation of acceptable vignetting. Indeed, this site found a vignetting level similar with that of the Canon 600mm f/4 IS II; and they thought that means it's not a full frame lens. Now they're measuring resolution and other stuff, and I really hope they'll follow Falk's advice; otherwise... well, I don't want to think about that. Is that all?

03-09-2013, 08:46 PM	#270
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Kunzite Indeed, this site found a vignetting level similar with that of the Canon 600mm f/4 IS II; and they thought that means it's not a full frame lens. Now they're measuring resolution and other stuff, and I really hope they'll follow Falk's advice; otherwise... well, I don't want to think about that. Is that all? Well, yes, other than the fact that it's called out as an APS-C (which I don't really trust either). But yup, 'that's all'. When that 1.3 or whatever number came out I looked at other lenses, because I thought 1.3 wasn't that bad... and the worst I found was ~0.6 or 0.7. Don't know where you're getting a Canon 600mm showing 1.3 EV of vignetting... but even still, I'm sure the Canon's doing super-awesome at f/5.6. Having to stop down to f/8 on a $7k lens sounds a bit ridiculous to me, but everything about this lens seems ridiculous to me.