Originally posted by normhead Well, all said and done, even if Pentax produces a great 70-200 2.8, it's not going to be significantly better than the Tamron, neither the Nikon nor Canon offerings are, so why would you expect the Pentax to be... and most of the people on the site who are interested in that FL are going to buy the Tamron... but, for those with the big bucks, the Pentax 70-200 will be an option. And there are lots of users on the site who will buy one. I bought my DA* 60-250 for about $1500. If the Pentax 70-200 comes in around that price I'll give it a look. At $2400, not so much. We all have our price point. And as the price of the product goes higher and higher, the number of people willing to pay becomes less and less. If it comes with a fast focusing AF lens, and water sealing of course that changes everything. A K-3 is capable of handling a faster focusing lens than SDM can provide so i they can offer this lens as a good fast sports/wildlife lens they can go for the Big Bucks. But I'm not paying Canon/Nikon prices for Pentax SDM and tracking performance. That would be stupid. SO there are a lot of angles here. Charging Canon/Nikon prices to me means achieving Canon/Nikon performance. If they can't do that, I want it cheaper. I'm waiting, but I'm not holding my breath.
But the Tamron is the leader in 70-200 Pentax land now that Sigma has dropped out of the race.. and it's doubtful that's going to change, unless the lens comes in at DA* prices, and given the extra glass needed to cover an FF circle, that's not likely to happen.
I think the WR + better SDM/DC on the new FA* are a given, they'll have to incorporate those features to make such a lens attractive to buyers. Priced at $2400 is probably as high as we're going to see it (low 2000 is my estimation) As you know the len's AF performance relies more on the camera body. If pentax fixes the design flaws of the DA* lenses (SDM and such) and improves the AF algorithms they should perform decently (The Da 18-135 DC motor performs marvelously). Perhaps I'm a sucker for SMC glass, and although I like the Tamron's rendering (out of all the third party manufacturers) Pentax' is superior in my eyes (people might disagree or have reservations) Zeiss user love their T* glass, all they talk about is micro-contrast, poping images, 3d-ness, character etc (a Vario-Sonnar MF 100-300 f4 still sells for a grand on ebay) I equate SMC with T* technically and aesthetically, (it's one of the reasons I own a Pentax) and I'm willing to pay extra for it.
Originally posted by D1N0 Who said anything about video. Video is a hassle. I have lot's of ff glas I want to use for it's intended format. I don't need to buy any ff lenses, I just need a body.
{sarcastically}....I'm just trying to sell your a 27" NEC Myltisync Monitor....you want one?