I have one of those - it's a superb lens (great for portraits too as it delivers sharpness with a wonderful bokeh). Congrats !

Ha ha ha - oh dear me.

Of course it does. And that isn't going to happen if their products are more expensive that the competition's, in the circles in which Pentax mingles, is it ?

As well as having other areas they are deficient in and need to overcome (e.g. slower AF, limited Pro use, poor advertising, fewer lenses in their range (doesn't matter if they are substantially better or not but if there are gaps that hurts), inferior flash system, no cost-effective long birding lenses in their range, no FF in their range). Whether or not anyone agrees or disagrees on those as deficiencies is irrelevant as it is enough for an individual buyer to view it(them) as such and take his/her money elsewhere. Then multiple that by 500,000 or more.

If you think of those people that spend the most money on photography then it comes down to Pros, Birders (long lenses), Sports shooters (very fast FPS cameras, pro-level zooms and those long lenses again)and landscape togs (FF until they can afford a 645 !). These are the people that pay the big bucks.

This is why some people, myself included of course, want to see Pentax plug those holes ASAP so that they can then go on to exploit their competitive advantages (WR, SR, lighter, more compact, cameras and lenses, outstanding IQ, Pixie Dust etc.) with the general buying public and specifically those genres I mentioned above.

Not if you want to stay in business. Pentax cameras and lenses have often been priced below those of Canon / Nikon and it was only the price rises of last year that brought them up to the same level.

That's a ridiculous, or at best a flippant, statement John.

I think the various forums have well established what people wanted and the price they were prepared to pay.
If you wanted a mini convertible and the company said "we've made it but it will cost you 3 times the price of a normal mini" how would you react ? Pretty much like sane people on here and the other forums have reacted I'd imagine.

There are plenty here and elsewhere that would buy it at the US$2,000 - US$3,000 price-point, which is where the market is at for a f5.6 560mm (since Canon charge US$1,300 for their incredibly sharp and ultra fast focusing USM 400/5.6).

As you said though we'll have to see where the price ends up and IF this actually appears on shelves and not as a special order only.

RH is a Pentax hater and IMHO an idiot... he was also posting everywhere that the k-5 mk II rumors were fakes.. anywho... the lens LOOKS like it collapses, and it probably does... Pentax is notorious for having less than useful press releases and marketing efforts lol! time will tell.[/quote]As above. RH often posts BS including mock ups and is a known Pentax-hater.

The 560mm almost certainly does not collapse - not only did Pentax not say anything about what would be a major feature in their press release :

http://www.pentaximaging.com/about/press/287/PENTAX_Announces_Two_New_K-Mount_Le...

But you can see for yourself it would be impossible :

http://www.pentaximaging.com/img/press_images/1347052678_a_DA560f5.6_sm_large.jp...

These seem to be the most important upgrades and to ne at least Pentax seem to have got this right at least (as an upgrade to the K5) both with the K5II and K5IIs :

xThe new PENTAX K-5 II / K-5 IIs offer a compact, solid body that delivers high quality image reproduction, especially when working in low light conditions. The camera’s new, highly sensitive AF sensor enables photographers to work with a luminous flux based on F2.8 levels in addition to F5.6, which increases the AF accuracy when using fast lenses. The AF sensor also includes an upgraded AF algorithm as well as the Select-Area Expansion feature, which automatically tracks the subject when it deviates from a pre-assigned selection point, by assessing data from neighboring sensors.

“The new K-5 II and K-5 IIs deliver an extensive range of photographic possibilities for the resolution-conscious photographer in all of us. As a successor to our popular K-5 camera, these new models offer upgraded features designed to produce superb image quality, including the new AF sensor which is especially useful for photographers working in low light conditions,”

Automatic compensation of distortion and lateral chromatic aberration (available only with DA,D FA and FA Limited series lenses)

A choice of three grid patterns while in Live View mode, including “Golden Section”

include a newly developed SAFOX X AF sensor that delivers the broadest autofocusing EV range (-3 EV to +18 EV) in its class.

http://www.pentaximaging.com/about/press/286/PENTAX_Introduces_New_K-5_II_&_K-5_IIs_DSLR_Cameras

Interesting - I didn't realise that they used their own sensors quite so extensively.

This isn't a jet engine Don - it's a camera lens and simpler and slower does not equal expensive.

As for the extra stop - I explained why this is important in another thread. You can't add a x1.7 TC to the lens and retain AF once you've gone over the f8 limitation for AF in long lenses. Or at least it becomes highly unreliable if it works at all. So that means the f4/f4.5 stop becomes very important.

This BTW is what Falk Luomo (the Pentax Alpha tester) has to say about this new lens :

"At that price, weight, length, focussing distance, crop designation ......the price cannot be called reasonable. I can only assume that both companies (he's talking about Sony as well) made the lenses for the sake of reputation and special projects only where price plays no role.

A 100mm scope design like the 560/5.6, esp. as it already existed within the Pentax arsenal (albeit discontinued) and sold for much less than a typical 500mm normally does, was a big chance for Pentax to offer the first (relatively) affordable top class 500 for under $3000.

This could have pulled quite some photographers like birders etc. back into the Pentax system. So, it is an opportunity missed. "

Since I haven't sold the Q (not easy when I have no Q lenses for people to try it with !) then it may be worth giving that adapter a shot !

I don't think it's any more difficult at all than digiscoping John. But then digiscoping is also not that brilliant for birding unless the birds are nailed to the branch I wsa looking into buying a Celestron for a while, and have seen some great shots from digiscopes TBH, but everyone seems to say the same - not easy and you need excellent stability.