[officiousbystander]

Should be able to find a Sigma 24-60 f2.8 EX at a reasonable price second hand. It's quite compact for a constant aperture zoom.

[DeadJohn]

...I hike a lot, both in the forest and in mountain areas...

I prefer lenses with moisture protection in case of light rain, fog, or condensation while hiking. As far as I know the Pentax DA* 24-70 and DFA 28-105 are the only WR, full frame, general purpose zooms (not ultrawide and not telephoto). I don't think any other legacy Pentax or 3rd party general purpose zoom was ever WR.

Note: I use "WR" as a general term for having some resistance to moisture. I think Pentax has sold lenses with 2 different levels of moisture resistance but I no longer remember the nuances.

[mikesbike]

Which Tokina do you have?
If it's the AT-X Pro 28-70mm, that is an excellent lens. I have this lens and the FA* 28-70/2.8, and they are very similar in IQ.
The Tokina has a push-pull focus ring with a clutch to change from AF to manual focus - maybe that's why it won't autofocus?

The Tokina 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 ATX pro II is the one to look for. Probably the one meant in this recommendation above. I bought mine new back during the1990's for use on my Pentax PZ-1p. I still have it and will employ it again more often if Should get a FF Pentax body.

---------- Post added 10-07-20 at 03:45 PM ----------

Hey, Spock! It's AT-C Pro SV! Yes, the clutch mechanism works. And to use manual focus I have to put the camera on MF as well as the clutch has to be pulled against the camera. Maybe I'll test it out in MF. But I don't love MF for zoom lenses generally, because you have to "administrate" 2 wheels.

I'm afraid that lens is the cheaper, less desirable, less fine-performing later plastic version. It should be able to AF with both the camera setting and the clutch set correctly. If not, I would say return the lens!

[Serkevan]

Should be able to find a Sigma 24-60 f2.8 EX at a reasonable price second hand. It's quite compact for a constant aperture zoom.

There is, in fact, one listed in the Marketplace, in Europe like the OP: Sigma EX DG 24-60 2.8 Pentax New! Very Rare! - PentaxForums.com
(No affiliation whatsoever to the seller).

[Spock]

The Tokina 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 ATX pro II is the one to look for. Probably the one meant in this recommendation above.

---------- Post added 10-07-20 at 03:45 PM ----------



I'm afraid that lens is the cheaper, less desirable, less fine-performing later plastic version. It should be able to AF with both the camera setting and the clutch set correctly. If not, I would say return the lens!

Yes, the AT-X Pro II is the one I have. As I said I also have the FA*28-70 and the Tokina is so good I am considering whether to sell my FA*.

[pres589]

I thought the Tokina 28-70 f2.6-f2.8 was not the version of that lens to get out of the four (or more?) versions that were produced by Tokina?

I believe the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 is supposed to be the equal to that series of lenses from Tokina anyway and they weigh less and were until very recently available brand new.

I'd still want to know what's wrong with the D-FA 28-105 that I know the OP has asked us to not discuss further. That lens seems very good and pretty much perfect for what he's asking for.

[mikesbike]

There is, in fact, one listed in the Marketplace, in Europe like the OP: Sigma EX DG 24-60 2.8 Pentax New! Very Rare! - PentaxForums.com
(No affiliation whatsoever to the seller).

I would recommend strongly considering this if possible! I've had this lens also, though not as long as the Tokina. I got a great deal on one new after their 24-70mm model came out, which did not do as well in test reports as did this Sigma 24-60mm. I bought it for the fact it has 24mm capability, which even on APS-C will provide some wide angle. If you get a good copy, it is indeed a high-performing lens.

---------- Post added 10-07-20 at 07:39 PM ----------

Yes, the AT-X Pro II is the one I have. As I said I also have the FA*28-70 and the Tokina is so good I am considering whether to sell my FA*.

I know what you mean! Lucky to have one of these, which I also bought new in a very good price deal, and a real money saver over the FA* lens. Doesn't have the power zoom feature, of course, but it is built like a tank!

[clackers]

Well, the DFA 24-70 is the pro standard zoom for the situations you describe, Norwegianoutdoors, WR, modern fast and silent focus, capable of f2.8.

You can read this person's review or that person's review, but you're not buying their copy. They make the mistake that their copy represents the model.

Here are its MTF curves, that's the industry accepted reference, and you send it back if the copy you receive is not up to spec, that's the way it works.

This Tamron lens is well-regarded in the industry, and was designed by Jun Hirakawa, Pentax's former chief lens designer, so rendering will be a priority. It is super sharp in the centre under all conditions, and wide open its microcontrast falls away at the edges, althought the contrast holds up well all around the frame.

As is common, there is no data for stopped down, what you're looking at is the performance of the lens at its worst, aperture wide open letting in all the crappy light from off the optical axis. Everyone understands that all measures improve when stopped down.

[norwegianoutdoors]

Have you tried the DFA 24-70? I find mine to be quite good. I have the DFA 28-105 and the DFA 24-70. To me the 24-70 is noticeably sharper, particularly in the corners than the 28-105. That's not to say the 28-105 is bad, it is actually quite good but the 24-70 is better. At least that is what I see with my two copies. And there are variables here that must be considered. Copy variation for one and the other is whether AF fine tuning was done properly on each lens. And sometimes what the individual is looking for in an image.

I know you have written off the DFA 28-105 and that's fine but I would like to ask out of curiosity if you did the AF fine tune on that lens?

My only complaint on the 24-70 is that it is quite heavy, which is why I use the 28-105 on hikes. But for most work the DFA 24-70 is my go to.

Nope! Never tried it. But I think ephotozine did a test of them both and found them to be around equal sharpness. But that was perhaps stopped down? I would love f/2.8 in situations where i'm zooming in or doing type of portraits or product photography Thanks for the feedback!

---------- Post added 10-08-20 at 12:54 AM ----------

own one Tokina 28-70 AT-X (non-PRO).

It is soft wide open but fine from F/4 (looks like spherical aberration).
However, it is a bargain because few people seem interested by this non-PRO lens.

So there are three drawbacks:
The AF sound can be a problem
It has a "vintage" look
It is soft wide open (but I may own a bad copy).

Here is an example @ 70mm F/2.8:

I found that many vintage lenses suit me. Sometimes the vintage looks brings character. This is why I personally prefer the Pentax 43mm to the HDFA Pentax 50mm sdm*aw Lovely cat. Wish this lens had a working AF for me But sems it's broken and I dont think I should open it up and try and fix it

---------- Post added 10-08-20 at 12:56 AM ----------

Look for this lens. Cheaper than the DFA And still quite good, even though it is screw drive. Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 EX DG Macro Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

This is interesting! I identified 3 zoom lenses of f/2.8 aperture. Sigma, Tokina and Tamron. The broken AF on the Tokina let me down on that lens. But the Sigma is on my list! Maybe I will buy that one! Thanks!

---------- Post added 10-08-20 at 12:58 AM ----------

I ask my self how you would define a "general zoom lens". I would define it as a zoom with a zoomrange from 18 to 250mm. It also means that you will have general sharpness. But I do not think it would be F2.8, because that is not general. I think that the FA 28-70 F4 is a great general zoomlens. Pentax called it a "standard" zoom lens back then. I own one and it is actually a great lens. It is sharp enough but it is a film era product. Would it work well on you K-1? I used it mostly on a MZ-5 for which line of camera's it was actually made.

Good question! I don't think a 15-30 or 70-200 could be characterized as a general zoom lens. It could just be that my English is poor (I'm Norwegian), but maybe walkaround lens is better.

Yes f/2.8 is maybe not general. For landscape f/4 is nice. And to be honest, I would prefer if the 28-105 was a constant aperture f/4 instead. Like the slightly wider Sony and Canon equivalents.

That 28-70 f/4 must be a lot lighter than the 24-70 f/2.8. Sometime f/2.8 would be nice for when you're maybe doing a portrait. But then the lens has to be reasonably sharp too at 2.8. So maybe the f/4 would work. Thanks a lot for the recommendation!

---------- Post added 10-08-20 at 12:59 AM ----------

Should be able to find a Sigma 24-60 f2.8 EX at a reasonable price second hand. It's quite compact for a constant aperture zoom.

great tip! thanks!

---------- Post added 10-08-20 at 12:59 AM ----------

I prefer lenses with moisture protection in case of light rain, fog, or condensation while hiking. As far as I know the Pentax DA* 24-70 and DFA 28-105 are the only WR, full frame, general purpose zooms (not ultrawide and not telephoto). I don't think any other legacy Pentax or 3rd party general purpose zoom was ever WR.

Note: I use "WR" as a general term for having some resistance to moisture. I think Pentax has sold lenses with 2 different levels of moisture resistance but I no longer remember the nuances.

Good point!

---------- Post added 10-08-20 at 01:02 AM ----------

I'm afraid that lens is the cheaper, less desirable, less fine-performing later plastic version. It should be able to AF with both the camera setting and the clutch set correctly. If not, I would say return the lens!

Didn't quote your whole text (dont' know what happened), but yes the 2.6-2.8 is supposedly better. Wish I got that one instead. Maybe I'll return it. Cost me 200 usd including shipping and customs. The seller offered me 20 usd discount if I keep it. Maybe I will just to keep it as a 180 usd mf lens. Getting taxes back from customs is worse than a hip replacement operation. Shipping overseas too from Norway is a loooooot of hassle.

---------- Post added 10-08-20 at 01:06 AM ----------

There is, in fact, one listed in the Marketplace, in Europe like the OP: Sigma EX DG 24-60 2.8 Pentax New! Very Rare! - PentaxForums.com
(No affiliation whatsoever to the seller).

Great tips my friend!
To me 395 usd is too steep. Add 20 usd for shipping and 25% tax for import (Norway stuff) and its 500 usd. Ive seen used Pentax dfa 24-70 go for 700 usd in Norwegian ebay equivavelent. To me theyre too close in price. That goes for a lot of Pentax glass or glass made for Pentax in the last decades. I know a lot of that stuff is good. But when wide angle lenses from the 90's cost as much as the new 15-30 mm. It's just ridicilous in my view

---------- Post added 10-08-20 at 01:09 AM ----------

Well, the DFA 24-70 is the pro standard zoom for the situations you describe, Norwegianoutdoors, WR, modern fast and silent focus, capable of f2.8.

You can read this person's review or that person's review, but you're not buying their copy. They make the mistake that their copy represents the model.

Here are its MTF curves, that's the industry accepted reference, and you send it back if the copy you receive is not up to spec, that's the way it works.

This Tamron lens is well-regarded in the industry, and was designed by Jun Hirakawa, Pentax's former chief lens designer, so rendering will be a priority. It is super sharp in the centre under all conditions, and wide open its microcontrast falls away at the edges, althought the contrast holds up well all around the frame.

As is common, there is no data for stopped down, what you're looking at is the performance of the lens at its worst, aperture wide open letting in all the crappy light from off the optical axis. Everyone understands that all measures improve when stopped down.

Love your post, man! I think you're right. That this is the lens I need and want. A good and fast all around lens. Besides 700-800 g is nothing compared to the giant 70-200 which i carried around in the woods for an hour yesterday. Big workout! Haha!

---------- Post added 10-08-20 at 01:14 AM ----------

I'd still want to know what's wrong with the D-FA 28-105 that I know the OP has asked us to not discuss further. That lens seems very good and pretty much perfect for what he's asking for.

It's hard to say really. For landscapes where I can stop down and lower the iso and put the camera on a tripod, I'm getting good results. But general shots turn out a bit un-extraordinary. I also got dust inside the lens really early. I have a few good shots with it, like this: Photo Sharing. Your Photos Look Better Here. and this Photo Sharing. Your Photos Look Better Here. but also so many that don't turn out like "they should" haha. Maybe I have a bad copy since all of you are so happy with it (DONT KNOW WHAT HAPPENED WITH THAT URL, BUT THE PHOTO WITH THE LITTLE BOATHOUSE AND SAILING BOAT IN THE BACKGROUND IS SHOT WITH THE 28-105, AS WELL AS THE PHOTO WITH THE LITTLE ISLAND ON THE LAKE WITH THE TREES THAT ARE LIT UP AND THE LAST SHOT ON THE BOTTOM WITH THE BRIDGE AND RIVER ANF MOUNTAINS BEHIND)

[Wheatfield]

Hey guys!

I have almost 20 lenses for my K-1. Some new, some old.

Mostly I use primes, or the 70-200 DFA.

But, it would be nice to have a general zoom lens that is mostly sharp all the way. It can be a benefit if it's a f/2.8 for those close shots.

I hike a lot, both in the forest and in mountain areas.

Especially the forest has poor light. I know the Pentax DFA 28-105 has a good record, but to me I find it a bit too soft, except from f/8. But I cant always stop down that much. If I do, we're talking ISO 3200 or carry a tripod everywhere. I don't love neither. To me the 28-105 looks "mushy" even at f/4 and f/5.

So I bought a Tokina 28-75 f/2.8 which arrived yesterday. But the AF is not working

Any recommendations? I have the 15-30mm f/2,8 from Pentax, but it's freaking huge and too wide mostly for my needs.

Pentax 24-70/2.8 seems well regarded.

[leekil]

I ask my self how you would define a "general zoom lens". I would define it as a zoom with a zoomrange from 18 to 250mm. It also means that you will have general sharpness. But I do not think it would be F2.8, because that is not general. I think that the FA 28-70 F4 is a great general zoomlens. Pentax called it a "standard" zoom lens back then. I own one and it is actually a great lens. It is sharp enough but it is a film era product. Would it work well on you K-1? I used it mostly on a MZ-5 for which line of camera's it was actually made.

I have this lens, and really liked it, but it generally suffers from balsam separation (as mine does), and this causes it to be hazy. I've tried to get another one more recently, but all the ones I have seen advertised seem to have the haze.

[norwegianoutdoors]

This is show with the 28-105mm yesterday. Guess it's not all bad allthough not a spectacular lens


[IMG][/IMG]

[pres589]

28-105 shot is sharp like tack!

[northcoastgreg]

This is show with the 28-105mm yesterday. Guess it's not all bad allthough not a spectacular lens

I am largely in agreement with other posters who think well of the DFA 28-105, and it is a lens I would strongly recommend to anyone shooting landscapes with the K-1. However, I would also admit that while a fine lens, it's hardly spectacular; and maybe that's what the problem is here. What about those of us who wish to go beyond what the 28-105 is capable of providing? Are there any options? I can't comment on 3rd party f2.8 zooms other posters have recommended, as I know nothing about them. The strategy I have pursued to go beyond the 28-105 is to acquire some of the better FA primes lenses available in the system. A year ago I purchased the FA 43. Since then I have only used the 28-105 three times. In March I add the FA 31 and FA 50 Macro. The primes have allowed me to get better images than what I could have achieved with the 28-105. But that doesn't mean the primes will completely replace the zoom. Whenever I need the FOV flexibility of a zoom or weather sealing, I will reach for the DFA 28-105. When I'm familiar with the landscape I'm shooting and know what kind of shots I want to get, I'll reach for the primes. It's simply about being a pragmatist and getting the right tool for the job at hand.

[Serkevan]

I am largely in agreement with other posters who think well of the DFA 28-105, and it is a lens I would strongly recommend to anyone shooting landscapes with the K-1. However, I would also admit that while a fine lens, it's hardly spectacular; and maybe that's what the problem is here. What about those of us who wish to go beyond what the 28-105 is capable of providing? Are there any options? I can't comment on 3rd party f2.8 zooms other posters have recommended, as I know nothing about them. The strategy I have pursued to go beyond the 28-105 is to acquire some of the better FA primes lenses available in the system. A year ago I purchased the FA 43. Since then I have only used the 28-105 three times. In March I add the FA 31 and FA 50 Macro. The primes have allowed me to get better images than what I could have achieved with the 28-105. But that doesn't mean the primes will completely replace the zoom. Whenever I need the FOV flexibility of a zoom or weather sealing, I will reach for the DFA 28-105. When I'm familiar with the landscape I'm shooting and know what kind of shots I want to get, I'll reach for the primes. It's simply about being a pragmatist and getting the right tool for the job at hand.

Yes, it's not really a spectacular lens, but it's good enough that, like you said, the better alternatives are prime lenses - that's a compliment to the zoom!

That said, I do the same, when I know what I'm going to be shoot I take the prime or two I want (say, M20/4 and FA 77). Still, if I have some doubts, the 28-105 is first in line because while it's not the best lens I have for any part of its zoom range, it's always a close second.