[mbukal]

on Pentax K 1 I use Tokina ATX PRO SV 28-70 / 2,8, would a replacement for TAMRON 28-75 / 2,8 AF XR Di LD Macro SP be worth it, I'm interested in the optical difference and the difference in speed / determination of autofocus ,
has anyone used both lenses on K1 (K1 ll)

[stevebrot]

I have not owned nor used either, but based on build alone, I suspect the Tamron's plastic construction would be a disappointment.


Steve

[pres589]

There's also different versions of the Tokina; The four Tokina 28-70 AF lenses and their Angenieux roots – CamerAgX – a new life for old gear

I have only used the Tamron on a crop Pentax and not much so I cannot speak to the question at hand about a comparison. I believe the Tamron is quite good optically. My copy has some stiction in the zoom mechanism that isn't hard to deal with but does not lend an air of premium quality.

[AfterPentax Mark II]

on Pentax K 1 I use Tokina ATX PRO SV 28-70 / 2,8, would a replacement for TAMRON 28-75 / 2,8 AF XR Di LD Macro SP be worth it, I'm interested in the optical difference and the difference in speed / determination of autofocus ,
has anyone used both lenses on K1 (K1 ll)

Wrong question. Should not it be Tokina ATX PRO SV 28-70 / 2,8 vs HD Pentax D FA 24-70 mm F2.8 ED SDM WR? If you are going to spend money, why not on a Pentax branded lens that works well with the camera and has several options to let you enjoy the camera and the lens much more?

[pres589]

Wrong question. Should not it be Tokina ATX PRO SV 28-70 / 2,8 vs HD Pentax D FA 24-70 mm F2.8 ED SDM WR? If you are going to spend money, why not on a Pentax branded lens that works well with the camera and has several options to let you enjoy the camera and the lens much more?

Budget may preclude the Tamron/Pentax 24-70. Also size & weight; the Tokina and Tamron 28-70/75's are easier to carry, especially the Tamron.

[mbukal]

pres589 thanks for the link about Tokina lens variations, I read it all a long time ago (about 10 years ago) - before I decided to buy the Tokina ATXPROSV version (back in the days when I used the apsc format and on them 28-70 / 2.8 ATXPROSV), primarily when buying me as an amateur enthusiast was the criterion:
1. limited financial resources
2. the best sharpness for that limited money
3. internal focus and internal zoom
4. quick and determined autofokus
5. reliable material construction

from the first day on the Tokina lens is a Hoya HMC UV(c) 77mm, with it I got suction protection and gaps in front of the front inner part of the lens that retracts when focusing and zooming (and slightly improved contrast),

stevebrot reading reviews about Tamron and the knowledge I gained that way I think you are completely right, but that's why I emphasized the criteria that primarily interest me (mass and construction not mentioned) more personal experiences of using both lenses (or experience with only one on K1 / K1ll ),

AfterPentax Mark II for as much as it costs Pentax DFA 24-70 / 2.8 (my belief is that it is too expensive for what it offers) I expect the lens to have what I stated I was looking for when buying Tokina and much more considering current year and current high quality lens manufacturing technology — I expect Pentax to make its DFA * 24-70 / 2.8 mkll design (as in apsc DA * 16-50 / 2.8 mkll) primarily with internal focusing and internal zoom a this Tamron rebrand starts selling at a more reasonable price (the price of a DFA lens and not DFA * because he to is not)

I wanted a change with a limited budget, but I'm looking for advice on whether my wish pays off at all or is there a better option for not much more money (if I go to DFA 28-105 of course then there are compromises-overall big compromises that I don't think I want-it has no internal zoom and focus as well as a constant large aperture and I doubt DFA is optically better than ATXPROSV when Tokina is attached to f4 in the 28-70mm range)

[mikesbike]

I am familiar with that Tokina PRO SV lens. I believe it was the last of the Tokina 28-70 f/2.8 lenses, and I remember its lab tests ran substantially inferior to its predecessor, the Tokina ATX 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 PRO II (which I have, bought new and is outstanding), as well as the build quality being not as good.

Actually, you can still find a lab review of the f/2.6-2.8 PRO II by OpticaLimits if you google this lens.

---

Last edited by mikesbike; 06-23-2021 at 07:45 PM.

[Spock]

Wrong question. Should not it be Tokina ATX PRO SV 28-70 / 2,8 vs HD Pentax D FA 24-70 mm F2.8 ED SDM WR? If you are going to spend money, why not on a Pentax branded lens that works well with the camera and has several options to let you enjoy the camera and the lens much more?

I am familiar
with that Tokina PRO SV lens. I believe it was the last of the Tokina 28-70 f/2.8 lenses, and I remember its lab tests ran substantially inferior to its predecessor, the Tokina ATX 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 PRO II (which I have, bought new and is outstanding), as well as the build quality being not as good.

Actually, you can still find a lab review of the f/2.6-2.8 PRO II by OpticaLimits if you google this lens.

I have the ATX Pro II and also own the Pentax FA* 28-70. I find them basically indistinguishable in image quality and build quality. Both superb.
If the budget doesn't stretch to the new D-FA 24-70 (which is really a rebadged Tamron) neither of these will disappoint.

[W.j.christy]

I have the Tokina ATX PRO 28-70 F2.8 lenses and have used both side by side on the K-3. I have found that the Tokina is soft wide open compare to the Tamron at the shortest focal length. However, the Tokina offers great coloration and personality compared to the Tamron. I found the Tamron needs a touch more saturation and vibrance (Speaking in microsoft photo terms here can't remember what affinty calls them) to get the same "pop" as the Tokina. If it makes any difference, even with the slight lack of "pop" the sharpness of my copy of the Tamron has made it my go to instead of the Tokina. YMMV.

[kiwi_jono]

I have an original Tokina ATX PRO 28-70 f2.6-2.8 but not the Tamron. I'm not convinced the Tokina stacks up that well against modern equivalent glass but as a budget option its pretty good and certainly has its own character (which really works in some scenes).
I think I liked mine more on my K-5 than on the K-1, as the later really shows up the Tokinas weaknesses (like frame edge sharpness). But then I have be spoiled rotten by the 3 FA limiteds.

[mbukal]

reading your experiences presented so far on this topic my conclusion is that it may be worth replacing Tokina ATXPROSV 28-70 / 2.8 with a surcharge on Pentax FA * 28-70 / 2.8 as the safest solution with a limited budget

[mikesbike]

reading your experiences presented so far on this topic my conclusion is that it may be worth replacing Tokina ATXPROSV 28-70 / 2.8 with a surcharge on Pentax FA * 28-70 / 2.8 as the safest solution with a limited budget

I have the ATX PRO II of 1997 as described in the link given by pres589, which includes the improvements in the optical formula indicated also. The Pentax FA* 28-70mm I have never owned, but it is very highly rated from what I have read, including the post above by Spock.

[Spock]

reading your experiences presented so far on this topic my conclusion is that it may be worth replacing Tokina ATXPROSV 28-70 / 2.8 with a surcharge on Pentax FA * 28-70 / 2.8 as the safest solution with a limited budget

The best bang for your buck would be to replace the SV with the ATX PRO II version. But if you can find a nice, well priced FA*28-70 then go for it. The two are very close in build and performance.
There is a thread somewhere on this forum where someone compared these two lenses with photos side by side of the same subject.

[zapp]

What’s missing from your Tokina? This should be the question for you. You already have a lens.

[mbukal]

What’s missing from your Tokina? This should be the question for you. You already have a lens.

Simply put: at 28 / 2.8 only the center is noticeably sharp and at 70 / 2.8 the whole frame is not sharp enough, that doesn't mean I can't use the above settings - I'm just a little limited by the lens properties I have with compromises, f4 is fantastic throughout the range (on apsc my Tokina was sharper at 28-70 / 4 than YES 17-70 / 4, on ff my Tokina is not even close to 28 / 2.8 like Pentax F28 / 2.8, after About 10 years of total use, ie approx. 6 on apsc and 4 on ff as if I was fed up with that lens with its compromises, otherwise the lens is built as a tank and with Hoya HMC UV (c) 77 mm as a whole that has internal focus and zoom I'm wondering if it's worth replacing with the TAMRON 28-75 / 2.8 AF XR Di LD Macro SP or some other version of Tokine that has the same focus and zoom characteristics (or to completely ignore the internal focus and zoom in the event of a replacement because these are just cosmetic features that I personally really like) , reading reviews of different versions of the mentioned Tokina it turns out that there are an awful lot of compromises from version to version and I am not smart or ready to go through the use of another version of Tokina that would have some other compromises unlike the current ones, an inner uneasiness appeared in me