[redpit]

I agree with the latest posts about the exotic 600/4 lenses. Even Nicolas06 now expressed rationally and not offensively and I agree with his replies.

The think is that after the next batch of common focal length primes that Pentax has announced for the years to come and maybe a 28-300 common everyday zoom plus maybe another longer macro lens (for which I really doubt if I follow your rational and more importantly if Ricoh-Pentax follows it) the common focal lengths that most pro and enthusiasts use will be covered...

So after that (I think about 5 years from today) Pentax will stop developing and releasing new FF lenses as there won't be any popular lenses missing. I'll wait and see what happens next! When Pentax released the DA*560 it was a surprise and it would be my lens if it was a little brighter and quite shorter like the Sigma 500/4.5 which is the only serious super tele prime available new for the K-1 great sensor...

Everyone in here and every photographer in general knows very well the next steps he has to take to improve his photography. There is a stage-level from which up every tiny or small improvement costs a lot as we are talking for serious and expensive equipment. It's up to them to decide how they will go on and cover their needs, or if it worths it at all. So for example me and @Aussie that seem to want a fast super tele, or an architect who needs a tilt shift lens will make his decisions. I know what my next steps will be and I have put my timeplans for them. I just really wish (and maybe that is what I'm saying) that my tele prime will bear the Pentax logo and be mounted in front of my K-1. There is a reason why I still haven't gone with the superb new Sigma 500/4 on another mount and it's not just the fact that I have heavily invested in Pentax equipment. It's the same reason why I shoot with Pentax in the first place after all.

Anyway,Ii said enough already, I'll just watch how this thread evolves...

[pres589]

Why would Ricoh direct the Pentax wizards into building a full frame compatible 28-300 when they have the 18-135 and 18-270 already on crop? Full frame isn't supposed to be the everyman's camera system in today's world... who is clamoring to clamp a 28-300 onto a K-1? "Yeah I spent about $1800 USD on this bad boy. You know what this need? A superzoom that provides nearly 11x zoom range while being low cost!"

28-200, maybe, but a 28-300 sounds like a great way to negate the reason for K-1 ownership. A K-70 and an 18-2xx makes so much more sense to me. And with the 28-105 already here, I just don't see the priority over other fish that could be fried.

My probably unpopular two cents.

[CarlJF]

Maybe I'm missing something, but what exactly is so wrong with the Pentax 560mm that it could not be considered a viable alternative to a 600/f4 ? Okay, I understand it's one stop slower, but it's not such a big drawback on a camera such as the K-1. Raise the ISO one stop, and you're still as good if not better than the f4 on a Canon body. As for FL, the 40mm difference doesn't make much difference in practice. So, what more can be achieved with a 600/f4 that cannot be done with the 560mm 5.6 to the point of making it unusable for that purpose, making a 600/f4 the only way to go ? I'm asking, because I really can't see... Why wait for an hypothetical 600/f4 when a 560/5.6 is available right now ? If the reach of a 600mm is really needed, why not just get the 560 ?

[beholder3]

Why would Ricoh direct the Pentax wizards into building a full frame compatible 28-300 when they have the 18-135 and 18-270 already on crop? Full frame isn't supposed to be the everyman's camera system in today's world...

Because of convenience, lazyness and comfort.

The exact same reason why you have autofocus. Autofocus is nothing but support for lazyness and a crutch to allow incompetent people take images which previously required skilled photographers.

Hell, the tabloids even write posts on why morons "need" computerized tracking when they are too incompetent to coordinate eyes and arms holding the camera.

That all is the same thing that absolutely requires a K-1 to have a green Auto mode and lots of options for JPG.

Simple people want the camera to replace all skill requirements.

That is was people want and what sells.

And it's irrelevant if the sensor has a little larger or smaller crop factor. We still talk about consumer electronics for the masses. It all definitely is everyman's camera system unless you want to go bankrupt.

Is any of this needed for any great images? No. Not at all. Only where the user is too much a fail skillwise for a certain requirement. But it it sells. Very well.

[Kunzite]

It's not like Ricoh Imaging would bother with such a lens themselves; they would ask Tamron for the 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 Di VC PZD. Many such Pentax superzooms in the past were rebadges.
OTOH I'm not sure it would be a good match for the K-1...

[Aussie]

Maybe I'm missing something, but what exactly is so wrong with the Pentax 560mm that it could not be considered a viable alternative to a 600/f4 ? Okay, I understand it's one stop slower, but it's not such a big drawback on a camera such as the K-1. Raise the ISO one stop, and you're still as good if not better than the f4 on a Canon body. As for FL, the 40mm difference doesn't make much difference in practice. So, what more can be achieved with a 600/f4 that cannot be done with the 560mm 5.6 to the point of making it unusable for that purpose, making a 600/f4 the only way to go ? I'm asking, because I really can't see... Why wait for an hypothetical 600/f4 when a 560/5.6 is available right now ? If the reach of a 600mm is really needed, why not just get the 560 ?

I have not tested the lens myself but from reading other reviews:

• The lens is way too long with poor centre of gravity and fixed tripod mount (faces the wrong way) is almost impossible to balance on gimbal heads without a ridiculously long bracket.
• f/5.6 is not wide enough if you want to add a TC
• Allegedly has vignetting on FF
• Suffers from excessive CA

[redpit]

Maybe I'm missing something, but what exactly is so wrong with the Pentax 560mm that it could not be considered a viable alternative to a 600/f4 ? Okay, I understand it's one stop slower, but it's not such a big drawback on a camera such as the K-1. Raise the ISO one stop, and you're still as good if not better than the f4 on a Canon body. As for FL, the 40mm difference doesn't make much difference in practice. So, what more can be achieved with a 600/f4 that cannot be done with the 560mm 5.6 to the point of making it unusable for that purpose, making a 600/f4 the only way to go ? I'm asking, because I really can't see... Why wait for an hypothetical 600/f4 when a 560/5.6 is available right now ? If the reach of a 600mm is really needed, why not just get the 560 ?

You're quite right wondering that! I can't explain you all my rational and my needs as I have recognize them, but let's say that while the DA* 560 I'm sure is a great lens, I still want a lens with less physical length and fast enough to be able to handle both a 1.4X and 2.0X TCs. So long story short that leaves me with 400/2.8, 500/4, 600/4 as my choices. The Sigma 500/4.5 is on the verge being f9 at 1000mm but the lack of a HSM and a focus limiter makes me wait a bit more before I decide my next step...

[MatKus]

When would a wedding photographer need a 500/4? Or a corporate events photographer? Or a real estate photographer? Or a food/product/fashion photographer?

I'd bet the vast majority of "pros" have never used and never needed such long, bright glass even if there are a few pros (e.g., sports photographers) that depend on them.

How often do you see wedding/corp. event/etc photographer in TV/press?
And how often do you see sport photographer or nature photographer in TV?

Sure, those super long bright lenses will not sell in big quantity. On itself Ricoh will probably not earn much (if anything at all) but think about it as about advertisement in long term.

But also i know, that super special lens itself will not sell, if there will be no body for sport/nature photography (and still AFC in pentax is not realy great) or pentax will not make something else, that will be different enough to interrest people (like m4/3 with smaller lenses or Sony's mirrorless, that can use CanoNic lenses if you realy want to)

[Reed]

First of all its only my personal opinion
We don't see them in tv at all, maybe in some interviews you get that people on screen as a person. We do see their work on tv. Nobody cares about any individual photographer and what gear he or she uses in wilderness or at the games. Maybe a little more on wedding tv shows etc. And even if someone cares, there are rare cases.

How often do you see a family man in camera shop, who just want to take pretty shots of his growing up kids, or a teenager who want to take pictures of his friends, pets, or anything and don't care about RAW postproces and stuff? That is ~95% of buyers. This is the client base for every camera company.
What they ask? Quick and intuitive camera. With kit lens or two kit lenses. Then some of them come back and ask for reasonably fast and silent auto focus, affordable prime lens. Mostly 50/1.8 or something in that type. And that is their last visit and purchase for years. Maybe some will get a flashgun later on.
If they want to get prints on their own-they may also buy some cheap photo printer like canon selphy for their own use, or Instax Camera.
I do see a reason for doing high grade lenses, and specialized lenses(and I will definitely get new 50), but they are not the trade horses for companies to build their rank on.

Pentax current lineup lacks a thing that everybody in the market had long time ago, and typical buyers want to have it- silent af driven lenses. Ricoh will not get money from legacy lenses or more cash from screw drive old designs. They have to sell new, modern stuff.

Canon and Nikon got mostly into "big PRO's" hands in 80's, why? Because they ware giving them good deals individually, or for their companies(AP, Reuters etc) on their own marketing plan. Not because all of the pros just ran for new Canon and Nikon stuff and got them right of shelves. And when that happened, Pentax who had at that time way over half of the share in the market, just missed that opportunity and did nothing to lure them.

[clackers]

Pentax current lineup lacks a thing that everybody in the market had long time ago, and typical buyers want to have it- silent af driven lenses. Ricoh will not get money from legacy lenses or more cash from screw drive old designs. They have to sell new, modern stuff.

?

All the releases (including the four D FA zooms and the consumer 18-50, 16-85, 18-135 and 55-300) have been silent AF driven.

How many years ago has it been since they launched a screw drive lens?

[Reed]

Of course, but I wrote that on bigger perspective. Few posts back I wrote on that also "What Pentax need to do, and I believe they are pretty aware of that its to lure new customers into their system, and this is the reason they did 55-300 PLM, new silent drive 18-50WR, now its time to make also updated affordable primes. And of course high grade primes that will sell in numbers higher than 10 pieces a year or two."

Still some lenses in the lineup,most desired from "Average Joe" point of view are screw drive lenses. DA35/50, DA17-70/4(people got scarred of SDM), DA50-200WR kit lens, I think that are the lenses Ricoh will focus next beside of new FF primes.

[clackers]

Still some lenses in the lineup,most desired from "Average Joe" point of view are screw drive lenses. DA35/50, DA17-70/4(people got scarred of SDM), DA50-200WR kit lens, I think that are the lenses Ricoh will focus next beside of new FF primes.

Yes, I think you're right, as is your bigger point about no matter how loud individuals here may insist Pentax need this 20mm f1.8 or 600mm f4, the actual demand will be tiny. As you point out, the average buyer makes do with variable aperture zooms and can't be convinced to buy a lens that costs more than their whole camera did.

[beholder3]

Still some lenses in the lineup,most desired from "Average Joe" point of view are screw drive lenses. DA35/50, DA17-70/4(people got scarred of SDM), DA50-200WR kit lens, I think that are the lenses Ricoh will focus next beside of new FF primes.

1. Nobody relevant is "scared of SDM". A handful children on forums is nothing.
2. No demand for a 50-200 if you can buy a 55-300 already. 50-200 were a temporary stop gap cheap thing.
3. the DA 35/50 are so cheap that it is actually very clever to keep them screw drive the next ten years. They only appeal to the cheapo type buyers but also send the message that you have to pay normal money for normal lenses.
   I personally would even see business sense in stopping sales of those lenses if the entry level market is dead. Pentax has nothing to gain from cheapo lens buyers and non-buyers sticking to obsolete manual lenses. Ignore those groups and let other makers have their fun with them.

[D1N0]

Pentax has nothing to gain from cheapo lens buyers and non-buyers sticking to obsolete manual lenses. Ignore those groups and let other makers have their fun with them.

This is nonsense. Pentax is not Leica. If you want a broad user base you have to have a reasonable entry point. They don't have a Pentax/ricoh Family club in Japan to sell only D FA* lenses, but to bring people into contact with photography at a young age. You have to sow if you want to reap.

[Reed]

1) I do consider people who sent their lenses for repair or returned it to get their cash back very relevant. And I can put myself in their shoes. SDM is a dead way, and most people can read and will do it before getting to buy something. Same as Nikon D600, even if only some ware affected bad reputation stays forever. Those people will go for sigma 17-70C(very popular lens)- no money for Ricoh here at all.

2) Da50-200 is second largest production volume lens in current lineup beside the 18-55, there is no "kit bundle" with 55-300 plm. People tend to buy two zoom kits, or body only kits. Same goes for every camera company. Any brand best selling lens products are bundled kit zoom and 50/1.8. And those are dirt cheap to produce in large batches.

3) If someone goes to compare camera handling in shop, or watch some movies on YT, they choose silent drive lenses, they seem faster focusing, even if they aren't any faster in that case. Your point of view was also a Canon official point of view with 50/1.8II for twenty years, when they got this updated to STM version-it has blown away anything else in sales numbers. And still is best selling prime on market, for around a year now.