Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-19-2013, 08:57 AM   #16
Veteran Member
joe.penn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,902
QuoteOriginally posted by pxpaulx Quote
No kidding! Not to mention lenses like the 100-300mm F4 being readily available used for half the cost of the pentax version
That's a $500 lens all day long in Nikon mount, bought mine for that. And speaking of TC's, I picked a practically brand new sigma 1.4 DG for $120 which matches up with my Sigma 300 2.8 and Sigma 100~300 f/4.

04-19-2013, 09:06 AM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Albums
Posts: 612
QuoteOriginally posted by Sol Invictus Quote
The new Tamron 24-70 is an entirely different lens.
Yes it is, but I suppose my point is we have a similar answer to that lens in the 28-75.

I generally stay away from third party lenses. It's not that I hate them, it's just that in my experience with Tamron in particular, they engineer the lenses to test well in benchmarks but otherwise they aren't that great. The 28-75 and 17-50 I feel are good examples; they may be sharp but they're lacking in contrast, color rendition, and zoom ring friction (they do not zoom smoothly).

But if you need or want a sharp 2.8 constant zoom, the Tamrons give it to you...for $500. Hard to beat from that perspective.

Last edited by brofkand; 04-19-2013 at 09:08 AM. Reason: grammatical errors
04-19-2013, 09:21 AM   #18
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,678
QuoteOriginally posted by brofkand Quote
The 28-75 and 17-50 I feel are good examples; they may be sharp but they're lacking in contrast, color rendition, and zoom ring friction (they do not zoom smoothly).
This has not been my experience with either lens, or the Tamron 70-200 which I also have. All of these lenses zoom beautifully smooth with no creep and are excellent in microcontrast and colours, even wide open (caveat is the 70-200, which at 200mm and f/2.8 is slightly soft and has significant haloing of OOF objects in its bokeh). They are optically sound lenses (when you get a good copy) and are everything Pentax have made in their DA* lenses in terms of IQ IMHO, but none of the Tamron lenses are WR and all are prone to sucking in specks of dust into their internal structures. That to me is their weak point. I couldn't even fault their build otherwise as they are great designs of plastic and glass for the price, and all of my lenses have stood the test of time and rigor.
04-19-2013, 09:22 AM   #19
Veteran Member
joe.penn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,902
QuoteOriginally posted by brofkand Quote
they may be sharp but they're lacking in contrast, color rendition, and zoom ring friction
[pentax specific] and good fast silent focusing, no quick shift option, and sub-par coatings. There is no way that I would settle without these options when for a little more money I can get these options in other lenses.

04-19-2013, 09:26 AM   #20
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,678
QuoteOriginally posted by joe.penn Quote
good fast silent focusing, no quick shift option, and sub-par coatings
Indeed these are also points of disadvantage, including the sloppy means for manual focusing on the 70-200 on Pentax dSLRs, but they do perform well.
04-19-2013, 09:27 AM   #21
Pentaxian
Miguel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Near Seattle
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,695
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
I worry about it too, because it's a downward spiral:

1. Pentax market decreases-->
2. 3rd party lens manufacturers become less interested.-->
3. Less potential Pentax customers think of Pentax as a valid option due to less lens options available and uncertain Pentax future. And less Pentax presence in general. Having the name "Pentax" in the available lens mount options next to the lens is of high value.-->
4. As a result, go to 1.

Escaping from such a spiral seems very difficult. Especially taking into consideration that this spiral is also strengthened by the other weak points of the Pentax system and their strong points appearing in the competing brands as well.
That's just an excellent summary and an accurate one at that. Years of brand neglect and pathetic product distribution have contributed mightily to these ends. The Ricoh regime hasn't done much to spur my confidence either, as their energy seems to be focused on either little stuff (watches, failed mirrorless cameras) or a bizarre vanity product like the 560mm tele. The newer Sigma releases that are not in K-mount are the ones most sorely needed as they don't compete directly with Pentax-branded lenses. A real shame. I wouldn't assume that K-mount versions will be available. It seems like market perceptions are that Pentax owners are too cheap to spend serious money (unlike enough Canon and Nikon owners).

M
04-19-2013, 09:46 AM   #22
Pentaxian
Miguel's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Near Seattle
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,695
QuoteOriginally posted by pxpaulx Quote
The ironic thing about 3rd party availability is that the Nikon and Canon owners stare down their noses at sigma and tamron wayyyyyy more than the lower market share brand owners
I found that phenomena highly entertaining when I added a Canon 7D three years ago. I was able to secure the Tokina equivalents to the DA 12-24mm, the DA* 50-135mm, and the DA Ltd 35mm macro for at least half what the Pentax used market prices were and still are. And I must admit the Tokina versions are better built (I owned or still own the Pentax versions) with the 12-24mm being optically superior around the edges.

QuoteOriginally posted by pxpaulx Quote
he sheer volume of lenses available that I can use with my d600
Agreed. I can put more diverse lenses on my 7D than on my Pentax. Using M42 lenses is a lot more convenient as the mount stays on the lens.

M
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
f/2.8, k-mount, lens, mount, pentax lens, slr lens, sp, tamron, usd, vc
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
adapters for non-K-mount lenses to Pentax K-mount DSLRs: new dimensions for LBA Douglas_of_Sweden Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 151 11-01-2014 09:26 AM
No Pentax Mount for new Tamron lenses tram57 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 24 07-19-2012 11:25 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax M 28mm 2.8 K mount lens w/case no caps 17dew Sold Items 5 10-19-2011 04:04 PM
Why there is no Zeiss K-mount lens in lens database henryjing Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 05-18-2010 01:39 AM
For Sale - Sold: Vivitar 28mm f2 (Kiron) Lens In K mount - Like New warpedwoof Sold Items 4 05-07-2009 06:01 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:11 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top