Tamron 15-30 keeps up with Nikkor 14-24

**MJSfoto1956** · 10-06-2015, 02:04 PM - **1 Like**

DxO just release a comparison of the Tamron 15-30mm vs Nikkor 14-24mm on a Nikon D810

here: Tamron SP 15-30mm F/2.8 Di VC USD (Model A012) Nikon on Nikon D810 vs Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR on Nikon D810 vs Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED on Nikon D810
and here: Tamron SP 15-30mm F2.8 Di VC USD Nikon- mount lens review: Tempting option? - DxOMark

I'm posting here just to say that if the Pentax FF is similar in quality to the D810 (and it will likely be better) AND if the Tamron 15-30mm becomes available for the Pentax K mount, that would be a compelling combination to encourage me to add Pentax FF to my existing Pentax K-3. Things are starting to look good for Pentax.

Michael

ElJamoquio · 10-06-2015, 02:28 PM

If Pentax sells a Tamron that is more expensive than the same lens on Nikon, it... is not a compelling reason to choose Pentax over Nikon.

Better than no Tamron (or Pentax) lens at all, of course, but still not a net plus.

**jatrax** · 10-06-2015, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

If Pentax sells a Tamron that is more expensive than the same lens on Nikon, it... is not a compelling reason to choose Pentax over Nikon.

But isn't the 24-70 priced not much different than the Tamron badged one? I think something like $1,299 if I remember right. If they do the same with the 15-30.......... Which looks like about $1,199 even $1,299 on the Pentax badge would not be too bad.

**RGlasel** · 10-06-2015, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

if the Tamron 15-30mm becomes available for the Pentax K mount

Kenneth Sporheim has made a few comments raving about this lens, if the new Pentax 24-70 is any indication, this might be another tweaked rebadge. I believe his experience with the Tamron is on Nikon bodies.

sefesoft · 10-06-2015, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

If Pentax sells a Tamron that is more expensive than the same lens on Nikon, it... is not a compelling reason to choose Pentax over Nikon.

Better than no Tamron (or Pentax) lens at all, of course, but still not a net plus.

The Nikkor 14-24 2.8 is $2000, the Tamron is $1200 (nikon version).

**mwilky55** · 10-06-2015, 03:58 PM

Originally posted by sefesoft

The Nikkor 14-24 2.8 is $2000, the Tamron is $1200 (nikon version).

We'll have to wait and see, but I have noticed that Tamron for Pentax tends to sell at a discount to the Canikon versions, at least I believe that's true for the 70-200 on the B&H site. A 15-30 for full frame would be pretty tempting.

redcat · 10-07-2015, 02:54 AM

I believe Pentax will adopt the Tamron 15-30 ^^ it will strengthen the FF system !

ddamski · 10-07-2015, 03:52 AM

this lens would be my first choice for the FF, perfect for landscape! .. i wonder how it would compete with the FA 31mm :-)

pathdoc · 10-07-2015, 04:00 AM

Originally posted by ddamski

i wonder how it would compete with the FA 31mm :-)

It's a bit like asking how a P-51 Mustang would compete with a Spitfire - the P-51 has the longer range, the higher top speed, a not-unsatisfactory armament and a proven battle record, yet the fighting reputation of the Spitfire (an older design by five years, at a time where that mattered a lot) is justifiably legendary. Each has its place in the pantheon of air enthusiasts' favourite fighters, and no enemy aircraft particularly wanted either on its tail.

The Tammy, FWIW, leaves off where the FA31 picks up (30 vs 31mm, which is a trifling distance) but is a bit over a stop slower. This makes a difference both in low-light performance and in the fact that at any f-stop the two have in common, the FA31 will be slightly further stopped down and therefore possibly at an advantage (at least until diffraction effects start setting in).

Canuck_west · 10-07-2015, 06:01 AM

Originally posted by MJSfoto1956

DxO just release a comparison of the Tamron 15-30mm vs Nikkor 14-24mm on a Nikon D810

here: Tamron SP 15-30mm F/2.8 Di VC USD (Model A012) Nikon on Nikon D810 vs Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR on Nikon D810 vs Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED on Nikon D810
and here: Tamron SP 15-30mm F2.8 Di VC USD Nikon- mount lens review: Tempting option? - DxOMark

I'm posting here just to say that if the Pentax FF is similar in quality to the D810 (and it will likely be better) AND if the Tamron 15-30mm becomes available for the Pentax K mount, that would be a compelling combination to encourage me to add Pentax FF to my existing Pentax K-3. Things are starting to look good for Pentax.

Michael

If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

ElJamoquio · 10-07-2015, 08:35 AM

Originally posted by sefesoft

The Nikkor 14-24 2.8 is $2000, the Tamron is $1200 (nikon version).

Sincere and friendly question - why do you (seem to) compare the Pentax/Tamron lens to the Nikon lens, rather than the Tamron lens in Nikon mount?

normhead · 10-07-2015, 08:46 AM

Originally posted by pathdoc

It's a bit like asking how a P-51 Mustang would compete with a Spitfire - the P-51 has the longer range, the higher top speed, a not-unsatisfactory armament and a proven battle record, yet the fighting reputation of the Spitfire (an older design by five years, at a time where that mattered a lot) is justifiably legendary. Each has its place in the pantheon of air enthusiasts' favourite fighters, and no enemy aircraft particularly wanted either on its tail.

The Tammy, FWIW, leaves off where the FA31 picks up (30 vs 31mm, which is a trifling distance) but is a bit over a stop slower. This makes a difference both in low-light performance and in the fact that at any f-stop the two have in common, the FA31 will be slightly further stopped down and therefore possibly at an advantage (at least until diffraction effects start setting in).

Exactly, without this lens, I'm not sure I even want the Pentax FF. it will be a landscape camera for me, and the lens will replace my Sigma 8-16. No replace meant for the 8-16, no buy. Simple as that for me.

**Rondec** · 10-07-2015, 10:45 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

Sincere and friendly question - why do you (seem to) compare the Pentax/Tamron lens to the Nikon lens, rather than the Tamron lens in Nikon mount?

I think the question is how much difference there is between the Tamron version and the Pentax version of the lens. With the 14-70, it sounds like it is supposed to use Pentax coatings and may have some adjustment of optics.

Either way, this lens fills a gap in the line up for a reasonable price and I doubt the Tamron will be released, at least in initially in a K mount. If you are buying a k mount camera rather than an f mount camera, you probably will have the option of this lens and maybe a Sigma ultra wide (assuming they make one in the k mount).

I, personally, am interested in k mount cameras specifically because I can use lenses like my DA 40 limited and FA limiteds without an adapter. I still will need a wide-ish angle lens and having options that won't break the bank will be nice (I am not really in the market for a Nikon 14-24 f2.8, as stellar as it might be).

10-06-2015, 02:04 PM - 1 Like	#1
MJSfoto1956 Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Boston Posts: 1,305	Tamron 15-30 keeps up with Nikkor 14-24 DxO just release a comparison of the Tamron 15-30mm vs Nikkor 14-24mm on a Nikon D810 here: Tamron SP 15-30mm F/2.8 Di VC USD (Model A012) Nikon on Nikon D810 vs Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR on Nikon D810 vs Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED on Nikon D810 and here: Tamron SP 15-30mm F2.8 Di VC USD Nikon- mount lens review: Tempting option? - DxOMark I'm posting here just to say that if the Pentax FF is similar in quality to the D810 (and it will likely be better) AND if the Tamron 15-30mm becomes available for the Pentax K mount, that would be a compelling combination to encourage me to add Pentax FF to my existing Pentax K-3. Things are starting to look good for Pentax. Michael

10-07-2015, 06:01 AM	#10
Canuck_west Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 59	Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 DxO just release a comparison of the Tamron 15-30mm vs Nikkor 14-24mm on a Nikon D810 here: Tamron SP 15-30mm F/2.8 Di VC USD (Model A012) Nikon on Nikon D810 vs Nikon AF-S Nikkor 16-35mm f/4G ED VR on Nikon D810 vs Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED on Nikon D810 and here: Tamron SP 15-30mm F2.8 Di VC USD Nikon- mount lens review: Tempting option? - DxOMark I'm posting here just to say that if the Pentax FF is similar in quality to the D810 (and it will likely be better) AND if the Tamron 15-30mm becomes available for the Pentax K mount, that would be a compelling combination to encourage me to add Pentax FF to my existing Pentax K-3. Things are starting to look good for Pentax. Michael If wishes were horses, beggars would ride.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Unscientific Comparison HD DA 15 Ltd vs Tamron 10-24	ramseybuckeye	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	01-02-2015 09:05 AM
DA 12-24 vs DA 15 vs Samyang 14?	someguy42	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	31	12-10-2013 04:50 AM
Choosing the DA 14 instead of DA 15 or DA 12-24 - am I crazy?	sTi	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	01-22-2013 08:55 AM
12-24 vs 21 ltd vs sigma 15-30	gokenin	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	01-22-2008 05:50 AM

10-06-2015, 02:28 PM	#2
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	If Pentax sells a Tamron that is more expensive than the same lens on Nikon, it... is not a compelling reason to choose Pentax over Nikon. Better than no Tamron (or Pentax) lens at all, of course, but still not a net plus.

10-06-2015, 02:48 PM	#3
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by ElJamoquio If Pentax sells a Tamron that is more expensive than the same lens on Nikon, it... is not a compelling reason to choose Pentax over Nikon. But isn't the 24-70 priced not much different than the Tamron badged one? I think something like $1,299 if I remember right. If they do the same with the 15-30.......... Which looks like about $1,199 even $1,299 on the Pentax badge would not be too bad.

10-06-2015, 02:48 PM	#4
RGlasel Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Saskatoon Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,228	Originally posted by MJSfoto1956 if the Tamron 15-30mm becomes available for the Pentax K mount Kenneth Sporheim has made a few comments raving about this lens, if the new Pentax 24-70 is any indication, this might be another tweaked rebadge. I believe his experience with the Tamron is on Nikon bodies.

10-06-2015, 03:00 PM	#5
sefesoft Junior Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 38	Originally posted by ElJamoquio If Pentax sells a Tamron that is more expensive than the same lens on Nikon, it... is not a compelling reason to choose Pentax over Nikon. Better than no Tamron (or Pentax) lens at all, of course, but still not a net plus. The Nikkor 14-24 2.8 is $2000, the Tamron is $1200 (nikon version).

10-06-2015, 03:58 PM	#6
mwilky55 Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Southeastern Connecticut Photos: Albums Posts: 816	Originally posted by sefesoft The Nikkor 14-24 2.8 is $2000, the Tamron is $1200 (nikon version). We'll have to wait and see, but I have noticed that Tamron for Pentax tends to sell at a discount to the Canikon versions, at least I believe that's true for the 70-200 on the B&H site. A 15-30 for full frame would be pretty tempting.

10-07-2015, 02:54 AM	#7
redcat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2014 Location: Paris Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,939	I believe Pentax will adopt the Tamron 15-30 ^^ it will strengthen the FF system !

10-07-2015, 03:52 AM	#8
ddamski Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Fribourg , Switzerland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 163	this lens would be my first choice for the FF, perfect for landscape! .. i wonder how it would compete with the FA 31mm :-)

10-07-2015, 04:00 AM	#9
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	Originally posted by ddamski i wonder how it would compete with the FA 31mm :-) It's a bit like asking how a P-51 Mustang would compete with a Spitfire - the P-51 has the longer range, the higher top speed, a not-unsatisfactory armament and a proven battle record, yet the fighting reputation of the Spitfire (an older design by five years, at a time where that mattered a lot) is justifiably legendary. Each has its place in the pantheon of air enthusiasts' favourite fighters, and no enemy aircraft particularly wanted either on its tail. The Tammy, FWIW, leaves off where the FA31 picks up (30 vs 31mm, which is a trifling distance) but is a bit over a stop slower. This makes a difference both in low-light performance and in the fact that at any f-stop the two have in common, the FA31 will be slightly further stopped down and therefore possibly at an advantage (at least until diffraction effects start setting in).

10-07-2015, 08:35 AM	#11
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by sefesoft The Nikkor 14-24 2.8 is $2000, the Tamron is $1200 (nikon version). Sincere and friendly question - why do you (seem to) compare the Pentax/Tamron lens to the Nikon lens, rather than the Tamron lens in Nikon mount?

10-07-2015, 08:46 AM	#12
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by pathdoc It's a bit like asking how a P-51 Mustang would compete with a Spitfire - the P-51 has the longer range, the higher top speed, a not-unsatisfactory armament and a proven battle record, yet the fighting reputation of the Spitfire (an older design by five years, at a time where that mattered a lot) is justifiably legendary. Each has its place in the pantheon of air enthusiasts' favourite fighters, and no enemy aircraft particularly wanted either on its tail. The Tammy, FWIW, leaves off where the FA31 picks up (30 vs 31mm, which is a trifling distance) but is a bit over a stop slower. This makes a difference both in low-light performance and in the fact that at any f-stop the two have in common, the FA31 will be slightly further stopped down and therefore possibly at an advantage (at least until diffraction effects start setting in). Exactly, without this lens, I'm not sure I even want the Pentax FF. it will be a landscape camera for me, and the lens will replace my Sigma 8-16. No replace meant for the 8-16, no buy. Simple as that for me.

10-07-2015, 10:45 AM	#13
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by ElJamoquio Sincere and friendly question - why do you (seem to) compare the Pentax/Tamron lens to the Nikon lens, rather than the Tamron lens in Nikon mount? I think the question is how much difference there is between the Tamron version and the Pentax version of the lens. With the 14-70, it sounds like it is supposed to use Pentax coatings and may have some adjustment of optics. Either way, this lens fills a gap in the line up for a reasonable price and I doubt the Tamron will be released, at least in initially in a K mount. If you are buying a k mount camera rather than an f mount camera, you probably will have the option of this lens and maybe a Sigma ultra wide (assuming they make one in the k mount). I, personally, am interested in k mount cameras specifically because I can use lenses like my DA 40 limited and FA limiteds without an adapter. I still will need a wide-ish angle lens and having options that won't break the bank will be nice (I am not really in the market for a Nikon 14-24 f2.8, as stellar as it might be).