[Kunzite]

Who knows at which price levels and sale volumes they can make a profit? Who knows if they're profitable right now? Who knows if they dropped the price of the 150-450 because it sold well, or on the contrary, because it didn't sell? Who knows why they didn't dropped the price in Europe, too?
Too many maybes, and no answers. What we do know is that the camera market doesn't allow for huge product margins, otherwise camera makers would post record profits all the time.

[monochrome]

Who knows at which price levels and sale volumes they can make a profit? Who knows if they're profitable right now? Who knows if they dropped the price of the 150-450 because it sold well, or on the contrary, because it didn't sell? Who knows why they didn't dropped the price in Europe, too?
Too many maybes, and no answers. What we do know is that the camera market doesn't allow for huge product margins, otherwise camera makers would post record profits all the time.

My bet is every Regional Distributor pays the parent company the same price and makes it's own pricing decisions for regional market strategy reasons. Ricoh makes a profit at the factory, then in the USA we're benefitting from currency exchange plus a local business decision to build domestic market share.

As the initial wave of demand rolls off for something like the 150~450 the second batch may be priced differently at the parent level (initial investment has been recovered) and the regionals are pricing the product to attract buyers who couldn't afford it the first round. They might be making smaller batches to avoid carrying inventory, so they have more price control. Something like K-1 and 70~200 seem priced at a level they'll try to hold, while 24~70 feels differently.

I'd bet there is a per-product pricing strategy overlaid with tactical decisions.
D

[Winder]

Does anyone have an image of the Direct Current (DC) autofocus motor? How is this motor different from SDM or the Ultra Sonic Ring (USM) style motor used in 24-70 from Tamron?

[monochrome]

asahi man showed an image last year. It was a link to a supplier image (or one very similar, he said ). I can't find it but if you search his posts. . .

It is a ring motor, looks magnetic, but not piezo. It is not gear driven like SDM.

---

Last edited by monochrome; 03-12-2016 at 07:16 PM.

[rawr]

I'd bet there is a per-product pricing strategy overlaid with tactical decisions.

Lens pricing is a funny business. The new D FA's are a case in point in Oz.

Over here, the 150-450 retails for $2700 - $3600, with almost all retailers selling above the manufacturer's current recommended retail price (RRP) of $2900 (which, in turn, is above it's introductory price). Similarly, the 24-70 RRP is $1999, but the retail price never varies below RRP. But in contrast, the 70-200 RRP is $2900, but everyone sells it for less - in the range $2500-$2800. Weird.

---------- Post added 2016-03-13 at 03:10 PM ----------

asahi man showed an image last year. It was a link to a supplier image (or one very similar, he said ). .

Although I stored the image in my 150-450 folder, I think you are referring to this:

[JimmyDranox]

Since you're still going on about how the Pentax can only compete with the old Tamron i.e. the cheapest 70-200 f/2.8 you could possibly find (cheaper than Tokina's f/4, or Canikon's current f/4s), it's a pot calling kettle situation I'm not the unreasonable one here.
And for the record, I was talking about ambitious optical design which I can easily support (the old Tamron by the way has 2 SLD elements). The Tamron doesn't impress in build quality either. Or autofocus.

No, I can't tell you why they have a large discount for the 150-450 in the U.S. (but not Europe - which is where I would buy it). I can't tell you why the 24-70 has a better price on the other side of the pond either. They might be trying to buy market share in the U.S., at our expense, who knows?
But you do realize it's a different lens than the D FA*, and even so it's nowhere near to "less than 800 US$", right?

Can you tell me where in my message did I compare the price of Pentax 70-200 f/2.8 with the price of canikon 70-200 f/4? I did compare the price Pentax 70-200 only with the price of other f/2.8 lenses in this range. You are saying that you are reasonable, suggesting that I'm not. Think again who is.

And Tamron is the only 70-200 f/2.8 lens which someone can find new with K mount. So, is the only competitor for Pentax 70-200 right now.

Anyway, that's my final answer to you, because in this message you show your way again. In the past, you was on my ignore list for a while. Now, I'm convinced that that is your place. Boriscleto'd.

[monochrome]

So, is the only competitor for Pentax 70-200 right now.

Actually, if you consider the feature set, construction standards, AW sealing and absolutely superior IQ and focusing speed of the new Pentax lens, the Tamron is not competitive at all. Comparing the two is like comparing a good RHD family sedan to an Italian RHD Gran Touring car. That they both are set up for the unusual driving rules of a former Empire does not make them competitors, and should not force a price comparison to determine value.

At this time there is no K-mount 70~200 lens at this performance and construction standard available for comparison. The Tamron lens is a good value with excellent IQ, but not to the same standard as the new Pentax. It also is an older lens that has had time to mature in the market and settle to a lower street price. Using the leading Canon and Nikon lenses as the comparison standard is fair and logical.

[Barry Pearson]

Now, I wonder what is in the mind of those people who had payed 2500$ for D FA 150-450mm, to see that if they have waited a few month, they could spare 750 $ ? For sure, I don't wanna be in their shoes.

I pre-ordered the D FA 150-450mm and it arrived at the start of May 2015. Therefore, I was able to use it successfully at airshows and motor sports all last summer and autumn, and got many good photos.

I've pre-ordered the K-1 and all the other 2015/2016 "D FA" lenses, and as a result I hope to be using them all for the rest of the year after April.

I've often pre-ordered Pentax cameras and lenses in the past, and got benefits from them before I would have done had I waited for the price to decrease.

There is a "lost opportunity cost" of waiting. I'm 68 - I see things differently from many other people! I have no regrets pre-ordering, and I expect to continue to do so.

[Kunzite]

Jimmy, the current Canikon 70-200 f/4 (i.e. except for the old non-IS Canon) are more expensive than the under-$800 Tamron 70-200 f/2.8. Check the B&H prices, will you?
Your argument is that "anyone who is not an absolute fanboy" should agree with you. Your argument is that the new, high-end Pentax D FA* can be compared only to an inferior MY 2008 Tamron lens, just because it doesn't have in-lens stabilization, but ignoring any other factor (optics, build, autofocus). Does it sound reasonable to you?

Oh, wait, I'm Boriscledo'd. Whatever.

[monochrome]

There is a "lost opportunity cost" of waiting. I'm 68 - I see things differently from many other people! I have no regrets pre-ordering, and I expect to continue to do so.

I take a similar view. I equate the early-adopter premium with rent for the period I was able to use the item before the price settled.

AFA pre-ordering the K-1, my plan is to buy it in August. There are higher priority expenses coming before August. I will pay whatever the price is when I am able to buy, which I expect will be the same as people who pre-ordered paid.

I just hope there isn't a backorder condition.

[Rondec]

The Pentax 70-200 is a significantly better lens than the Tamron 70-200. It should be faster to auto focus and obviously foregoes screw drive noise. It is obviously bigger. We will see, but the expectation is that it will have better borders on full frame (the Tamron is fine on APS-C). Obviously there are reasons that it is more expensive than the Tamron.

Pentax isn't stupid and they have a target number of sales per month they will try to hit with this lens. If they aren't hitting those, they will allow the price to fall till they do. I wouldn't be surprised if the price eventually falls to 1700 or 1800 dollars, but it certainly won't fall to the Tamron level -- it's just too expensive a lens to make to sell at that price (the Tamron lens is ancient with all R and D costs recovered ages ago).

[clackers]

The real competitor of D FA* 70-200 f/2.8, is Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 non stabilized, which is less than 800 US$, and can be found in many stores.

A wonderful lens, Jimmy, appreciated by its Canikon users, I own it, but it's simply not in the class of the new D FA.

[monochrome]

@JimmyDranox At the other Forum the first images are showing up. In the #3 thread the poster said the AF is silent, fast and accurate with zero hunting. The colors and contrast are excellent and the lens is sharp across the frame at f/2.8. Even though the uploads are 3.8Mp jpeg's they seem to support those claims and it is apparent this is a superb lens. People over there are labeling it a classic already (that's a bit over the top).

The OP specifically said the Tamron is slower, noisier and hunts.

[JimmyDranox]

I have owned the Tamron and the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 and used extensively both. I even made extensive tests with both, on test chart and out side. So, I knew very well the good and the week points of Tamron. The noise (grrr), the greenish colors (nasty, compared with Sigma), and others flaws. On the other hand, everybody (on this thread) is praising the qualities of a lens they never tested personally, a lenses that has no comparison with other lenses, yet, and up today, not even some full size samples published. How can you know that is so good? Remember, it is a lens that was postponed two times.

Do I have the right to question the price of a lens? To complain that is to expensive for most Pentax users? Look how many people still use K-50, K-5, and so on. For years, Pentax was ''POOR MAN'S LEICA'' Inexpensive and good lenses, inexpensive cameras with good construction quality. Now, Pentax is in danger to loose this title, and together with it, a part of his users. I know, a (small) number of people with a lot of cameras and lenses in their hands will say that they are not scared by that new price policy of Pentax. But ask the people which has only one K-5, what are their opinion. If Ricoh has chose to make extreme quality (which remains to be proven) for very few, instead of good quality for many, I, personally, think that is the wrong choice.

K-1 is very well priced, in fact, the best price for a new FF camera. But the prices for the lenses for it, are not on par. And how many, (or how few, considering a 65,000 strong community) has express their commitment to buy K-1? Can that be caused by the price of the new FF lenses?

Of course, I can be wrong. But the fact that Ricoh has drop the price in US, from 2500 to 1800, even before the lens has reached the shelves, has a simple explanation in my mind. Far to few preorders. And there is an old saying. Big margin means small sales, small margin means big sales.

[Rondec]

I have owned the Tamron and the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 and used extensively both. I even made extensive tests with both, on test chart and out side. So, I knew very well the good and the week points of Tamron. The noise (grrr), the greenish colors (nasty, compared with Sigma), and others flaws. On the other hand, everybody (on this thread) is praising the qualities of a lens they never tested personally, a lenses that has no comparison with other lenses, yet, and up today, not even some full size samples published. How can you know that is so good? Remember, it is a lens that was postponed two times.

Do I have the right to question the price of a lens? To complain that is to expensive for most Pentax users? Look how many people still use K-50, K-5, and so on. For years, Pentax was ''POOR MAN'S LEICA'' Inexpensive and good lenses, inexpensive cameras with good construction quality. Now, Pentax is in danger to loose this title, and together with it, a part of his users. I know, a (small) number of people with a lot of cameras and lenses in their hands will say that they are not scared by that new price policy of Pentax. But ask the people which has only one K-5, what are their opinion. If Ricoh has chose to make extreme quality (which remains to be proven) for very few, instead of good quality for many, I, personally, think that is the wrong choice.

K-1 is very well priced, in fact, the best price for a new FF camera. But the prices for the lenses for it, are not on par. And how many, (or how few, considering a 65,000 strong community) has express their commitment to buy K-1? Can that be caused by the price of the new FF lenses?

Of course, I can be wrong. But the fact that Ricoh has drop the price in US, from 2500 to 1800, even before the lens has reached the shelves, has a simple explanation in my mind. Far to few preorders. And there is an old saying. Big margin means small sales, small margin means big sales.

I just think you need to be honest about what the current price for current generation 70-200 f2.8 lenses is. The newest version of the Tamron is selling for 1500 (not available in K mount), the Sigma is selling for 1150, Nikon 70-200 VR II sells for 1900, and the Canon 70-200 for 1949 (B and H prices).

The fact that Pentax settled on a release price of 1800 -- probably to drop a couple of hundred dollars down the road -- is very much in line with these prices. The old Tamron version is not really in the same league and the newer Tamron version is priced pretty close to it.

The question for me is not one of price, but function. If the 70-200 really is, as folks say, a great performer on the K-1, then the price is probably worth it. Certainly having silent, speedy and accurate auto focus tracking is something that we haven't seen consistently in the past.