[DaveR]

I would like to hear from anyone who has had experiences with both lenses as to their pros and cons, especially if used on a K-1

I shoot landscapes, macro, weddings, functions, families and other things.
I’m currently using a K-3II as my main body. I’ve gotten by for a number of years with the best lenses I could afford at the time; Tamron 28-75 2.8, Sigma 70-200 2.8, Tamron 17-35 2.8-4. My 28-75 is around 10 years old and has served me well and has seen lots of use plus some knocks and drops. I sent it to be serviced but was advised that it had resolution and focus issues as well as a loose barrel (not surprised about these and confirm some suspicions) and would cost about $AUD300 and need to be sent to Japan (from Australia) taking around 4 weeks.

I want to take my photography more seriously and earn more of my income from it so, my plans are to eventually upgrade to a K-1 (and possibly the Pentax 15-30mm 2.8 and DFA 70-200 2.8). Right now I need to decide about replacing my 28-75 with the same lens for around $AUD500 or go all out for the Pentax DFA 24-70 for $AUD2000. I’m not interested if it is a rebadged Tamron unless someone can confirm that it is totally Tamron – Maybe it is a Tamron barrel with Pentax glass? And even then, the real question is: is it better than the 28-75 in performance and handling and actual use?

---

Last edited by DaveR; 10-11-2016 at 05:04 AM.

[victormeldrew]

Sorry, I don't have any direct comparison experience. But the Pentax has the benefit of being weather sealed, has SDM (pros and cons) and quick-shift, and HD coatings. Looking at the sample images, I'm not convinced it is 4x better than the Tamron, but it is a significantly better lens and if you feel you need that bit extra and can afford it, then it is worth it.

[Groucho]

I'm in a similar conundrum. I have a K-1 arriving today and I used to own a Tamron 28-75 - which I replaced with the Pentax 16-50. I did like the Tamron quite a bit but on the APS sensor, it just wasn't wide enough so I sold it. Now I'm looking to buy one again (just waiting to find one for the magic price - they are regularly offered for $250-275 but ones that are actually bid up on eBay seem to go for slightly under $200.)

I would much prefer to get the Pentax 24-70 - I really, really like weather-sealing, but I'm already dropping a bunch of money on the K-1 body. I am sort of figuring that I'll get the Tamron and use that until I'm ready to pick up the Pentax lens, and assuming I've paid a fair price for the Tamron, I'll likely be able to sell it for just what I paid for it (maybe even a little more.) I will miss the weathersealing but I'll probably hang on to my 16-50 until I get the 24-70 so I can shoot in the rain. Whenever the 24-70 is bought, the 16-50 and Tamron 28-75 will be sold. The 16-50 probably won't fetch a ton of money when I sell it - the SDM still works but the lens hood is very loose and I'm not 100% sure on the SDM. It seems like it occasionally half-focuses. I want to figure out for sure if it's the body or the lens.

Now, if I found a really good deal on a Pentax 24-70, I'd go for that right away - but with prices going up on everything, that seems like a long shot.

[Miguel]

24-70mm is a standard wedding lens, and to me, one of the key drivers for Pentax quickly cutting a deal with Tamron which facilitates quick value for the K-1. I've used 24-70mm on Canon FF for years for event coverage, along with the 70-200mm f2.8. The 28-75mm older Tamron is a nice bargain, but I find that 24mm is better for groups of bodies.

We're in a transition period for Pentax lenses and it won't get settled for a few years. I've used the Tamron 24-70mm on Canon. It's just fine; I've only had my K-1 and Pentax 24-70mm for a few days, but it seems like the Pentax is 98% the same thing. No IS, Pentax coatings (which I doubt I can tell the difference). The price difference is ridiculous (used Tamron 24-70mm lenses are going for $600 in Seattle) but part of the razor blade strategy Ricoh has adopted for the K-1: the body is a bargain but the lenses are high margin. And the premium is reinforced by the lack of choice from both third parties and current Pentax options.

M

......I want to take my photography more seriously and earn more of my income from it so......Right now I need to decide about replacing my 28-75 with the same lens for around $AUD500 or go all out for the Pentax DFA 24-70 for $AUD2000...

Find a good used Tamron 28-75. Keep the $1500 for business expenses like marketing ( biz cards, website, logo, portfolio of samples), business liability insurance, etc. When your business takes off and you've lots of cash to see you through lean times, then go shopping. If you can get the job done and make happy customers, that's all the gear you need.

[walibo1]

You might also want to take a look at the Sigma 24-70. Not weather-sealed either but a lot more affordable than the Pentax, especially when you go with the non-HSM version. I bought the HSM version from a forum member and am very happy with it.

[hecubus]

You might also want to take a look at the Sigma 24-70. Not weather-sealed either but a lot more affordable than the Pentax, especially when you go with the non-HSM version. I bought the HSM version from a forum member and am very happy with it.

I did the same. Bought a used Sigma 24-70 2.8 non-HSM for less than $300 USD.
Image quality is good enough but kinda soft at the long end at 2.8.
Just be careful about the possible body scratching problem with the HSM one.

[DaveR]

24-70mm is a standard wedding lens, and to me, one of the key drivers for Pentax quickly cutting a deal with Tamron which facilitates quick value for the K-1. I've used 24-70mm on Canon FF for years for event coverage, along with the 70-200mm f2.8. The 28-75mm older Tamron is a nice bargain, but I find that 24mm is better for groups of bodies.

We're in a transition period for Pentax lenses and it won't get settled for a few years. I've used the Tamron 24-70mm on Canon. It's just fine; I've only had my K-1 and Pentax 24-70mm for a few days, but it seems like the Pentax is 98% the same thing. No IS, Pentax coatings (which I doubt I can tell the difference). The price difference is ridiculous (used Tamron 24-70mm lenses are going for $600 in Seattle) but part of the razor blade strategy Ricoh has adopted for the K-1: the body is a bargain but the lenses are high margin. And the premium is reinforced by the lack of choice from both third parties and current Pentax options.

M

Hi Miguel,

Thanks for your comments.
Regardless of whether it is a Tamron or Pentax lens, from what I've read online so far, the D FA 24-70 seems to be the best standard FF zoom available in K mount. I am open to other views here.

It also has SDM, Quick shift, weather sealing etc.

I would be interested in your actual experiences using and handling the 24-70 (especially on a K-1) as well as image quality generally and wide open, as well as in low light. If you get a chance over the next few days, that would be great. I need to make a decision soon as I have a wedding and school formals coming up (it's spring here in Oz.) and there isn't much stock of either lens in Australia.

Thanks again,
Dave

[wizofoz]

I have no experience of the tamron 28-75, but I have had the Pentax 24-70 in my bag for a couple of weeks now. I went with me on a trip to FNQ in the past week and I can tell you as a man who usually swears by prime lenses that the pentax is a stellar lens. Yes it is on the expensive side, but the build quality and image quality are exceptional. The IQ of this lens combined with the pixel shift mode of the K-1 is a revelation. Good luck with your decision

[Miguel]

Hi Miguel,

Thanks for your comments.
Regardless of whether it is a Tamron or Pentax lens, from what I've read online so far, the D FA 24-70 seems to be the best standard FF zoom available in K mount. I am open to other views here.

It also has SDM, Quick shift, weather sealing etc.

I would be interested in your actual experiences using and handling the 24-70 (especially on a K-1) as well as image quality generally and wide open, as well as in low light. If you get a chance over the next few days, that would be great. I need to make a decision soon as I have a wedding and school formals coming up (it's spring here in Oz.) and there isn't much stock of either lens in Australia.

Thanks again,
Dave

Hi Dave,

I was able to use the DFA 24-70mm for much of a free day recently. While I was concerned about the weight and even optical quality, the actual reality of using the thing turned out much more positively. I thought the balance on the camera (without the grip) was quite even keeled, and unlike a few others, I favored having the zoom ring at the longer end of the lens barrel. It seems to help stabilize the whole camera in hand there, and the large width of the band was appreciated. For wedding and event work (which I did for years as a corporate photographer using Canon gear), the combo with the K-1 would rock. Haven't used flash yet though. . .

Here are a few of my favorite shots taken in the week since I've owned the K-1. The last five are with the 24-70mm. Where I live we don't get much of an autumn, so any color change is a celebration.
New Pentax Shots - Eye In The Triangle Photography

M

[DaveR]

Thank you to those that gave informative comparisons and thoughtful replies. My apologies for taking so long to reply. A significant change in family circumstances recently has me with much less time than my already busy life had (I am now caring for my two year old daughter full time, plus working my day job).

I ended up buying a Pentax 24-70 from the Australian Pentax webstore at a 10% discount (AUD$1800). Why? On paper it would seem to be the best full frame normal zoom available with a 2.8 aperture.

Initial impressions are that although it is not a light weight, it feels perfectly at home on my K-3II with grip. It feels good in the hand with the zoom and focus rings well placed. It didn’t take much to get used to the zoom being out the front and now feels natural.

I was not impressed with the sharpness of images initially, but I did some focus accuracy checks and found it was back focussing. This info:

You Tube

You Tube

about Dot Tuning was quite helpful. Using this Focus Pyramid:

You Tube

You Tube

seemed to confirm what I was seeing with dot tuning. I calibrated the lens to +5.

I shot a wedding two weeks ago in a dimly lit chapel using ISO 1600 (mostly), f2.8 @ 1/60. Initial results seem quite good. I will post something when time permits.

Thanks again,

Dave

[Groucho]

Good to hear that you got one and are happy with it, and the focus tweaking is always useful although a pain; I'll have to check out the videos to see if there's a better way than I have been doing. (I'm sure there is, I usually end up noticing it on vacation and starting guessing and trying to focus on something nearby and then zoom in on the photo, not a great system! I have the focus charts at home but am usually too lazy to bother.) As an alternative to the 24-70, I'll mention what I ended up doing...

I actually almost bought Miguel's Pentax 24-70 but then he liked it too much to sell it. At that point, I was emotionally invested in the Pentax lens but might have still gone for the Tamron if I saw one for cheap. Unfortunately, neither lens came up at what I considered a good deal, and I suddenly realized that I had about a week before I was leaving for a vacation and had to do something if I wanted something other than using the 16-50 and cropping off the vignetting.

What I ended up doing was going the prime route. I already had the 31mm Limited for a reasonable wide autofocus and the FA 50mm F1.4 for a slightly longer. I started looking at wider primes and settled on the Samyang 24mm F1.4; the fast aperture sounded very intriguing.

As it turns out, I ended up shooting more than twice as many photos with my manual focus lenses, and while I brought a decent pile of lenses with me, I only used the Samyang 12mm fisheye, 24mm F1.4, 85mm F1.4, the Pentax 31mm and 50mm, and the only zoom I used was my Tamron 70-200mm, and only at a zoo we visited. It did mean a fair amount of lens swapping, but it did give me faster apertures than I could get with the zoom - the 24mm in particular can make some interesting low-DoF photos that you just can't do with a zoom, so I'm pretty happy overall. Yes, there's a few out-of-focus shots, but the catch-in focus works pretty well and when it didn't, going Live View and using focus peaking worked great. The vast majority of the time was spent between the 12mm fisheye, 24mm, and 31mm. I never even touched my M42s - although I did take a very few number of shots with my LensBaby, come to think of it.

For the future, I will probably keep an eye out for the Pentax 24-70 - I won't "need" one for a while so hopefully some deals will come along; it would be nice to be able to sometimes head out with just the camera and not need a bag of primes. I am also watching eBay for an old Sigma autofocus 24mm F2.8 - I just sold my bought-new-20-years-ago Sigma manual focus 28mm F2.8 which I liked a lot, and apparently the 24mm is similarly good and small and sometimes sells for very cheap, so that'd be a nice small wide lens for when I want autofocus. I didn't even know that such a lens existed until I startered researching.