[gazonk]

The DA560 price will go down when 'proper' long lenses will appear but, and I agree with that, Ricoh probably feels that, on the verge of launching FF camera and with so many mounts they are dedicated to, such lens was a lot more easy and not too much money-losing than producing proper long lenses when FF standard zooms, FF HQ zooms, FF kit zooms need to be planned and produced.

Summary, essentially a free launch. No risk deal, what's not to like (in Ricoh's mind of course).

I agree. But the weight, size and price of the DA560 looks kind of silly now that you can get a "DA420/5.6" with the DA*300 and the 1.4x combination - for about 1/4 the price at just a little more than 1/3 the weight

[thibs]

I agree. But the weight, size and price of the DA560 looks kind of silly now that you can get a "DA420/5.6" with the DA*300 and the 1.4x combination - for about 1/4 the price at just a little more than 1/3 the weight

Yeah, know that but it takes a line less in your inventory brochure if you scrap the 560.
Also, it'd mean they do not offer real long lens. It's stupid, really.
But if Ricoh did it, they (IMHO) at least don't lose a thing, maybe get a thing (being money or brand/range image).

[gazonk]

Yeah, know that but it takes a line less in your inventory brochure if you scrap the 560.
Also, it'd mean they do not offer real long lens. It's stupid, really.

Yes it makes sense if only to make the lens brochure more complete! I've talked to enough people who think that it's nonsense to buy anything else than CaNikon because of the length of the list of available lenses. It doesn't help if I tell them that Pentax already has a wider range of lenses than I could wish for, including some pretty unique ones. But it does help a little if I argue that I can always go shopping for a used 600mm/f4 if I ever become obsessed with birding (And - if Pentax ever gets high a high enough market share to warrant it, I guess they could always start building the FA*600/4 again? In a HD version?)

[ElJamoquio]

Yes it makes sense if only to make the lens brochure more complete! I've talked to enough people who think that it's nonsense to buy anything else than CaNikon because of the length of the list of available lenses. It doesn't help if I tell them that Pentax already has a wider range of lenses than I could wish for, including some pretty unique ones. But it does help a little if I argue that I can always go shopping for a used 600mm/f4 if I ever become obsessed with birding (And - if Pentax ever gets high a high enough market share to warrant it, I guess they could always start building the FA*600/4 again? In a HD version?)

The FA 600 used sometimes goes for more than the Nikon 600mm F/4 new. Sometimes more than the Nikon new with a camera.

If you're actually into birding the different lens costs among different brands makes a dual-system much more palatable.

[gazonk]

If you're actually into birding the different lens costs among different brands makes a dual-system much more palatable.

Indeed. The Canon 600mm/4 is so expensive that a 6D to go with it doesn't really add that much to the price...

[IchabodCrane]

Yeah, know that but it takes a line less in your inventory brochure if you scrap the 560.
Also, it'd mean they do not offer real long lens. It's stupid, really.
But if Ricoh did it, they (IMHO) at least don't lose a thing, maybe get a thing (being money or brand/range image).

Unless this lens is make-to-order, the inventory costs are quite real and must be justified by sufficient sales volume.

[JimmyDranox]

Pentax F 600mm f4 was launched in 1988, and Pentax FA 600mm f4 in 1991. Even if in our Pentaxian world are considered good (very) lenses, are very old lenses. designed with old types of glass, and old type of optical simulator programs. For example, in astronomy, after 2000, was a real revolution, generated by new types of low difraction glass, much cheaper that the old flourite glass.. Also, new and better programs for lens design came to the market.

So, I consider that we can expect, or better say, demand, better lenses, at smaller prices. And those new lenses from Sigma, like 18-35mm f1.8, and 35mm f1.4, are very good examples in that direction. Only if the manufacturers don't want very high profit margin from those lenses.

[Quicksand]

Indeed. The Canon 600mm/4 is so expensive that a 6D to go with it doesn't really add that much to the price...

Why would you throw away 3/8 of your "reach" by pairing it with a 6D?

[ElJamoquio]

Why would you throw away 3/8 of your "reach" by pairing it with a 6D?

I'd much rather throw away 0% of my reach with a 6D (or D800, rather).

[y0chang]

Why would you throw away 3/8 of your "reach" by pairing it with a 6D?

The more question is why you would spending 13k on a lens and use it with a $1300 dslr with one cross point. Either get a 7d for the crop factor or a 5dmk3...

[thibs]

Unless this lens is make-to-order, the inventory costs are quite real and must be justified by sufficient sales volume.

Yop, and/or high price

---------- Post added 12-02-14 at 07:18 ----------

Yes it makes sense if only to make the lens brochure more complete! I've talked to enough people who think that it's nonsense to buy anything else than CaNikon because of the length of the list of available lenses. It doesn't help if I tell them that Pentax already has a wider range of lenses than I could wish for, including some pretty unique ones. But it does help a little if I argue that I can always go shopping for a used 600mm/f4 if I ever become obsessed with birding (And - if Pentax ever gets high a high enough market share to warrant it, I guess they could always start building the FA*600/4 again? In a HD version?)

Not surprised at all.

Ricoh may end with a HD DFA600 (or whatever) but clearly they have other things to do, IMO.
If they do at a point, it would make a clear statement though

[gazonk]

Why would you throw away 3/8 of your "reach" by pairing it with a 6D?

Whatever... I'm not interested anyway I just agreed to the idea that such lenses are so expensive that a dual system can make sense.

[repaap]

For me this conversation of DA 560/5.6 vs. 600/4 prize is quite absurd. how often you can really use these things W/O. as mentioned before, it gives to you narrow dof(even more so with FF camera). At Least there is an option of buying long modern lens for pentax as AW sealed. or you can buy Sigma 500/4.5 with less cost(as you can do for Nikon and Canon) and now there is DA*300 + TC. Sure price is quite big for DA560 but it is also for nikon and canon. You cannot simply measure all by cm/€?! They all cost a lot .
(I'd love to see also a 400 mm/5.6 or 4, modern lens from pentax. I like my A 400/5.6)

Let's see what will happen with new zooms. I bet longer will be AW 135-380/f 4-5.8 HD lens priced around 1700 €

[ElJamoquio]

Hey, if you don't need the extra AF speed of a wider lens and the extra sharpness usually obtained by stopping down I won't argue with you.

All told I'd rather have a smaller-lighter-cheaper F/5.6. Pentax sells a larger-heavier-expensive F/5.6.

[RonHendriks1966]

For me this conversation of DA 560/5.6 vs. 600/4 prize is quite absurd. how often you can really use these things W/O. as mentioned before, it gives to you narrow dof(even more so with FF camera). At Least there is an option of buying long modern lens for pentax as AW sealed. or you can buy Sigma 500/4.5 with less cost(as you can do for Nikon and Canon) and now there is DA*300 + TC. Sure price is quite big for DA560 but it is also for nikon and canon. You cannot simply measure all by cm/€?! They all cost a lot .
(I'd love to see also a 400 mm/5.6 or 4, modern lens from pentax. I like my A 400/5.6)

Let's see what will happen with new zooms. I bet longer will be AW 135-380/f 4-5.8 HD lens priced around 1700 €

The difference between those two lenses is about $ 5000.