[jeffkrol]

If it's near/as good as the Canon 70-200/4 and drops down below it's intro price...I'd consider it. "Consider" meaning "must be competitive in both IQ, build quality, and price."

It just seems like Pentax is kinda spinning its wheels at the moment. I'm no doomsday person. At the same time, this lens is supposed to compete directly with the f/4L while being priced "lots" above it Although...the Pentax lens is both wider and longer.

The lens isn't without some faults....
The Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L is a very harmonic package combining exceptional build quality with an excellent and very even optical performance throughout the range. Adding an EF 1.4x II only results is a slight loss of quality which is remarkable for such a slow speed zoom. And even better the price tag of this lens is amazingly low for what it offers ... or to be precise: what it can offer. Unfortunately the quality of the two tested samples varied quite a bit which is a little disappointing especially regarding the L designation. So if you can get a good one the EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L can be highly recommended!

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L - Test Report / Review
Now be sure to remember this when the first Pentax dog lens appears.......

[thibs]

All I can say is there 2 years too late and 500$ over priced. They should have scraped the lens last year and released a DA 135-400 f4.

Saying this without knowing its capabilities is either shortsighted or stupid.

Pentax doesn't "launch" lens. I will believe it when I see at least one sample on all three Pentax forums I hang out on.

A bit like Apollo 13, loads of drama and then a somewhat anti-climactic landing.

[m8o]

A bit like Apollo 13, loads of drama and then a somewhat anti-climactic landing.

Actually, the Academy Awards would beg to differ.

[dadipentak]

Radu's right:

the final proof will be in the glass itself.

[jgredline]

All I can say is there 2 years too late and 500$ over priced. They should have scraped the lens last year and released a DA 135-400 f4.

Agreed!!!!!

[lol101]

The lens isn't without some faults....
The Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L is a very harmonic package combining exceptional build quality with an excellent and very even optical performance throughout the range. Adding an EF 1.4x II only results is a slight loss of quality which is remarkable for such a slow speed zoom. And even better the price tag of this lens is amazingly low for what it offers ... or to be precise: what it can offer. Unfortunately the quality of the two tested samples varied quite a bit which is a little disappointing especially regarding the L designation. So if you can get a good one the EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L can be highly recommended!

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L - Test Report / Review
Now be sure to remember this when the first Pentax dog lens appears.......

This is for the "cheap" 1999 non-IS lens. Price wise, the Pentax is positioning itself in a higher class, closer to the later incarnation of the lens which is truly a great performer:

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4 USM L IS - Test Report / Review

If the Pentax is even remotely on par, it will be a great asset to the Pentax lineup.

[Tom S.]

All I can say is there 2 years too late and 500$ over priced. They should have scraped the lens last year and released a DA 135-400 f4.

If you think the 60-250 is overpriced, how do you think a 135-400 would be?

[eurostar]

how do you think a 135-400 would be?

I think a 135/400 fixed aperture F/4 would be around at least 3,500€

I would gladly buy a high quality, variable aperture 135-400/4-5,6 at half the price.

[k100d]

the FF Nikon 200-400 f4 is $5000
the FF Sony 80-400 variable aperture costs 1500+

both supposed to be excellent

[dnaseigel]

These are from last summer, so I admit it's a preproduction model. The images are resized to 1600 pixels wide and they were captured on my Samsung GX-10. So add as many grains of salt as you like to these images, but don't forget this important one, I am a camera salesman and not inclined to call myself a photographer. The greatest shortcomings of these photos is the user.

The top image is 30" exposure and the bottom photo is from a nerve-wrackingly close distance.

Kind regards
DS

[whatever7]

The bottom pic doesn't look very sharp to me. I don't see any exif data.

[thibs]

The bottom pic doesn't look very sharp to me. I don't see any exif data.

Well those who handled pre production models said it was soft so there's nothing new here.

[Samsungian]

I used the Pentax rep's K20D and his 60-250 SDM and it hunted in Dec 2008. The images I took blown up on his viewscreen looked soft too. But as they say, just another preproduction lens sample experience.

I remember a couple years ago a different pentax rep had preproduction 16-50mm SDM and he said it had no autofocus function. But when I attached it to my Samsung GX-1S it autofocused just fine. He was amazed and wrote a note concerning this. None of his pentax dslrs would drive it, so he assumed it was missing it's internal autofocus parts.

Well those who handled pre production models said it was soft so there's nothing new here.

[thibs]

I used the Pentax rep's K20D and his 60-250 SDM and it hunted in Dec 2008. The images I took blown up on his viewscreen looked soft too. But as they say, just another preproduction lens sample experience.

I remember a couple years ago a different pentax rep had preproduction 16-50mm SDM and he said it had no autofocus function. But when I attached it to my Samsung GX-1S it autofocused just fine. He was amazed and wrote a note concerning this. None of his pentax dslrs would drive it, so he assumed it was missing it's internal autofocus parts.

And Pohotkina's K10D has write to mem card disabled but Samsung GX10 did write DNGs very happily to my mem card.