Hi Kermet!
Price have often nothing to do with the actual cost. But the thing is
it's psychologically difficult to accept a price when the initial
price has been set much lower. Nobody seems to complain about the
Canikon 70-200/2.8 at around 1600$ although Sigma and Tamron are able
to produce similar lenses for half the price.
Similarly I always wondered why primes cost as much if not more than
zooms when they are built with much less material. Compare for
example the 77/1.8 or 31/1.8 and the 50-135/2.8.
Manu, you bring up a good post. Sometimes manufacturers will
subsidise sales at the retail level with internal Co-op programs
through distribution & retail. We do see camera equipment on sale
once in a while as promotions. My company does this for brand market
share.
Pentax I have noticed passed on deals to retailers as some of the
discounts would be too high for a retailer to absorb. The 100%
increase in some lenses due to exceptional quality and Pentax having
this as a loss leader I believe is incorrect.
Outright gouging when the lens jumps what 100%? Pentax retarded
marketing has moved operations to Canada and think we Cannuks will
pay anything. Unfortunately, they are about ot find out that sales
on the expensive lenses will not increase as I do not see them as
good value with a price increase.