[Lowell Goudge]

in terms of the question from the OP I believe it is not a question of "rebranding lenses"

pentax and tokina have a cooperative lens development program where the following lenses were jointly designed optically, but pentax and tokina have made the mechanics independantly

10-17 fisheye
12-24
15-50 F2.8
50-135 f2.8

and I believe there are more.

The tonkia lenses ARE NOT available in pentax mount

[ftpaddict]

The tonkia lenses ARE NOT available in pentax mount

Which begs the question.. where is Pentax' advantage when it comes to pro-grade optics? Whatever you can get for Pentax you can get for any of the big two.

[Lowell Goudge]

Which begs the question.. where is Pentax' advantage when it comes to pro-grade optics? Whatever you can get for Pentax you can get for any of the big two.

I wouldn't bet the farm that lens coatings and glass quality are necessairly the same.

remember optical design is one thing, production is quite another.

[ftpaddict]

I wouldn't bet the farm that lens coatings and glass quality are necessairly the same.

remember optical design is one thing, production is quite another.

You have a point, but Tokina's lenses have been getting nothing but excellent reviews for their latest versions. So you can't go wrong with either Tokintax lens.

[Marc Sabatella]

Which begs the question.. where is Pentax' advantage when it comes to pro-grade optics? Whatever you can get for Pentax you can get for any of the big two.

Not true - just those few particular co-designed lenses (which, by all accounts, were mostly designed by Pentax, with Tokina just licensing the design from them - maybe in exchange for having put up some up-front cash to fund the development?)

But there's still nothing like the Limited series for any other system...

[ftpaddict]

Not true - just those few particular co-designed lenses (which, by all accounts, were mostly designed by Pentax, with Tokina just licensing the design from them - maybe in exchange for having put up some up-front cash to fund the development?)

But there's still nothing like the Limited series for any other system...

As good as Pentax' primes are, zooms attract a lot more attention and make up the bulk of lens sales.

Apart from the overpriced 60-250, there's no pro zoom lens unique to the Pentax system.

[kristoffon]

As good as Pentax' primes are, zooms attract a lot more attention and make up the bulk of lens sales.

why should you care? aren't you happy with your primes?

Apart from the overpriced 60-250, there's no pro zoom
lens unique to the Pentax system.

and is that even a disadvantage? so go ahead and pay for IS in each lens you buy

[ftpaddict]

why should you care? aren't you happy with your primes?

I use and like both, but I would rather see more zooms from Pentax.

and is that even a disadvantage? so go ahead and pay for IS in each lens you buy

Yes, as far as anybody who isn't a fanboy and thinks about things logically, yes it is a disadvantage.
You can actually see the effect of the extra money you pay for a Canon lens (through the viewfinder, no less!). Whereas with Pentax, when you buy the lens, you pay for your camera body's ability to shift the sensor. Wait.. didn't I pay for that already when I bought the body?

[kristoffon]

Yes, as far as anybody who isn't a fanboy and thinks about things logically, yes it is a disadvantage.
You can actually see the effect of the extra money you pay for a Canon lens (through the viewfinder, no less!). Whereas with Pentax, when you buy the lens, you pay for your camera body's ability to shift the sensor. Wait.. didn't I pay for that already when I bought the body?

What I meant to say, and should probably had phrased better, was: Do you find yourself lacking in the choices of lenses you have? Even counting the tons of third-party lenses available? When you bought into the system were you not aware of this limitations and find yourself now wanting?

We all know C/N have better options available. I chose Pentax because I'm cheap and after lots of research determined it offered me lots more bang for the buck than C/N/S, so I'm not a fanboy. If I had money to burn maybe I'd enjoy IS through the viewfinder yet I doubt it'd somehow help me take better pictures.

Also, the 60-250 will inevitably go down in price... quickly. It's basic marketing strategy, launch with a higher price so people who really want it will buy at a big margin and afterwards let the price go down. I bet in a year this lens will be in the ballpark of the 70-200 L non-IS version.

[ftpaddict]

What I meant to say, and should probably had phrased better, was: Do you find yourself lacking in the choices of lenses you have? Even counting the tons of third-party lenses available? When you bought into the system were you not aware of this limitations and find yourself now wanting?

We all know C/N have better options available. I chose Pentax because I'm cheap and after lots of research determined it offered me lots more bang for the buck than C/N/S, so I'm not a fanboy. If I had money to burn maybe I'd enjoy IS through the viewfinder yet I doubt it'd somehow help me take better pictures.

Also, the 60-250 will inevitably go down in price... quickly. It's basic marketing strategy, launch with a higher price so people who really want it will buy at a big margin and afterwards let the price go down. I bet in a year this lens will be in the ballpark of the 70-200 L non-IS version.

I bought into this system mostly because of the availability of old, high quality lenses. Though I have some of the ones I want already, since I love shooting a lot of telephoto, I'd really like to see a 70-200 from Pentax. You'd expect the FA 80-200 to be quite affordable now that it's no longer produced, and not old enough yet to be a classic. Instead I see prices sky-rocketing like somehow they replaced the Pentax badge with "Leica".

[zaurus]

pentax and tokina have a cooperative lens development program where the following lenses were jointly designed optically

Not true - just those few particular co-designed lenses (which, by all accounts, were mostly designed by Pentax, with Tokina just licensing the design from them - maybe in exchange for having put up some up-front cash to fund the development?)

Not only you both contradict each other, but again neither has any shred of evidence.
OK, I'll try once more again to make it as explicit as I can.
1. The only lens Pentax has claimed "co-design" with Tokina is the 10-17mm fish-eye. This is the only lens Pentax has announced and delivered (seven (7) months) before Tokina.
2. Pentax did NOT claim "co-design" with Tokina of any other lens after that. Since then ALL lenses with common optical design have been announced and delivered by Tokina way ahead of Pentax.
3. Tokina has delivered the 11-16mm f/2.8 which is an integral part of their pro line-up (11-16mm, 16-50mm, 50-135mm) -- which is not even on the Pentax roadmap.

True, all of this is not direct evidence, but I doubt it will ever get more clear than this.
The only possible conclusion is:
Tokina has designed all lenses which have a common optical design with the Pentax counterparts (with the exception of the fish-eye).
If you have credible evidence for the opposite, please share.
Repeat: evidence, not wishful thinking, or fanboyism.

I wouldn't bet the farm that lens coatings and glass quality are necessairly the same.

remember optical design is one thing, production is quite another.

You indeed successfully managed to say nothing with this vague statement, congratulations.
However, if you meant to say "the Pentax version is better" -- you are wrong, again.
Photozone rates both the Canon and Nikon version of the 50-135mm f/2.8 at least equal, and even better than the Pentax one:
tokina-af-50-135mm-nikon
canon-eos-tokina-af-50-135mm
pentax-smc-da-50-135mm

[seacapt]

I don't know about hard evidence but I find a few "coincidences alarming.
1) in 2006 Tokina stopped producing Pentax mount lenses
2)Tokina and Hoya share the same US distributer
3)The leneses mentioned seem very similar
4) The Pentax labled lens is considerably more expensive
5) the N&C guys I talk to love the new Tokinas and swear that they are being made by or with Pentax
I do not KNOW but it sure sounds like market manipulation. Sure would like to hear the definitive answer.

[Marc Sabatella]

Not only you both contradict each other, but again neither has any shred of evidence.
OK, I'll try once more again to make it as explicit as I can.
1. The only lens Pentax has claimed "co-design" with Tokina is the 10-17mm fish-eye. This is the only lens Pentax has announced and delivered (seven (7) months) before Tokina.
2. Pentax did NOT claim "co-design" with Tokina of any other lens after that. Since then ALL lenses with common optical design have been announced and delivered by Tokina way ahead of Pentax.

I couldn't find an actual announcement date for the Tokina 16-50 & 50-135, but the Pentax versions were pre-announced (with limited specs) September 21, 2006, and with full specs February 21, 2007. Rumors about the lenses had of course been floating around for quite a while before then. There was a widely quoted statement in Japanese only (?) by Tokina during 2006 (I couldn't find the exact date) that mentioned the development of the lenses as being a joint venture between Tokina and Pentax, but I don't read Japanese so I can't really report on the specifics of what was claimed. This was still long before any official announcement of the details of lenses by either Tokina or Pentax.

I did find a press release by Tokina from December 11, 2007 proclaiming the immediate availability of the 50-135 (not sure when their 16-50 started shipping). But by then, the Pentax versions of both lenses had been shipping for *months* - hands-on reviews from ordinary users (not press or beta testers) were showing up before fall.

Oh, and the Pentax press release with the full specs for the 16-50 and 50-135 *does* specifically say "Optical system for this product was jointly developed and designed with Tokina Co, Ltd.". This is buried in the fine print at the bottom of the page, but here is the page straight from the Pentax web site:

PENTAX NEWS release 2007 : Two new smc PENTAX-DA* ( DA Star ) Zoom Lenses

So basically, I think you are wrong on pretty much all of the above counts, unless you have other facts that contradict mine. That is, the above suggests that in fact:

* Both Tokina and Pentax publicly acknowledged cooperation on both the 16-50 and 50-135 (this much is absolutely incontrovertible, unless you believe someone has hacked the Pentax website and put up a doctored copy of the press release).

* While vague rumors and statements about the upcoming lenses were floating around form both companies for quite a while, I couldn't find any announcement of an actual product from Tokina that predates the 2/21/2007 press release from Pentax. Here, I can certainly believe you might know of something else by Tokina to support you statement about an earlier announcement.

* Pentax definitely started shipping their 50-135 months before Tokina did; this again is absolutely incontrovertible.

The only possible conclusion is:
Tokina has designed all lenses which have a common optical design with the Pentax counterparts (with the exception of the fish-eye).

Your conclusion may or may not be correct - I don't know for sure - but I do not believe your facts are correct. I don't have any stake in this, and couldn't care less who designed the lens. But I do believe my assessment of the situation to be consistent with the facts.

[zaurus]

The official 50-135mm f/2.8 press release of the US distributor of Tokina is dated September 1st, 2006 containing full specs and quoting availability date November 2006:
THK Photo Products, Inc. Announcement of Tokina 50-135mm

An extensive hands-on review of a production Tokina 50-135mm is dated December 15th, 2006:
Tokina AT-X 535 PRO DX 50-135mm F2.8

Both is way ahead of the Pentax announcement.

Also, keep in mind the Nikon version is using a screw drive, whereas the Canon version a micro-motor, so Tokina would have needed more time than Pentax to put into production the lens in both mounts once the optical design has been set -- but in fact Tokina delivered the lens before Pentax.

All this clearly shows Tokina was the (primary) designer the lens.

[Marc Sabatella]

The official 50-135mm f/2.8 press release of the US distributor of Tokina is dated September 1st, 2006 containing full specs and quoting availability date November 2006

OK, so they announced before Pentax. But of course they didn't come *close* to making their targeted availability date - they missed it by over a year. And as I mentioned, Pentax beat them to release by several months. So at best, I'd call the evidence inconclusive. There is simply no basis for reaching the conclusion you have, given that your original facts are basically all wrong *except* for the announcement date. It may happen to be true that Tokina designed the lens, but this certainly can't be said to follow from the fact that *both* Pentax *and* Tokina have explicitly stated it was a joint design or the fact that Pentax got the lens out quite a bit sooner.