Originally posted by superdave The 300/4 is just a little longer than 60-250/4 and about the same price, even cheaper. Can't understand the such large price difference between 150-450/5.6 and 560/5.6. Why a 500/5.6 prime for less than $2500 is not in any maker lineup? Even if not optically perfect, just a little better than 150-450.
Divide 450 by 5.6 and you will get a 80 mm minimum front diameter of the lens. Divide 560 by 5.6 and you need 100 mm front lens diameter. 80 and 100 play in different leagues. A 5.6/500 will not sell having a 150-450/5.6 zoom in the lineup for similar price. Spent your developer time on different glass to be much more effecitve.
Either go with what is available or ask for something serious. There is only a single 100mm front glass lens available these days and it was neither designed for FF nor for compact dimensions. Pentax probably needs to sell a couple more before even thinking about an update. DO/PF lenses would be wonderful alternatives, but only after a FF wide angle was presented, ...
Currently anything above 2000€/$... is not the prime hunting ground for Pentax. Establish the DFA* series at this price point and we may see something series in the future.
---------- Post added 10-07-20 at 03:23 PM ----------
Originally posted by Pål Jensen Compact, lightweight super teles do not exist.....
An oxymoron...
A Nikon PF 300 or 500 is as close as it can get. Not the brightest glass, but decent and widely affordable , lightweight, compact.
The new Canon f/11 glass are far away. Diffraction will limit the quality, speed is sloooooooow, but they used the retractable design that was abandoned for the Pentax 5.6/560.