need quick advice: Pentax 70-200/2.8 vs. older Tamron 70-200/2.8

**loyalt** · 12-21-2021, 06:06 PM

Originally posted by cdd29

I may have to make a spot decision shortly and don't have time to research this, so I need some quick input. I have an opportunity to buy a Pentax 70-200mm f2.8 ED HD D FA DC AW pretty cheap (about half the retail price). Cosmetically it looks like it has some wear on the foot and collar knob but rest looks clean, based on the pics. Just wondering how it compares to the older Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD AF (IF) SP Macro Lens for Pentax (A001P), IQ, focusing, low light performance. I shoot marching band & winter guard comps and need something with relatively decent low light performance. Would the Pentax 70-200 be an improvement over the Tamron?

I have owned both of the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 and the Pentax 70-200 f2.8. The Pentax is far superior, although the Tamron is not bad. If you can do it, go with the Pentax, do it, as it goes seamlessly with the Pentax cameras, is weather-sealed, takes fabulous photos and is top-notch! I am not sure why people repeatedly recommend different lenses when asked about specific ones, but since you asked about these two, here goes: The Tamron is a decent lens with good glass. When compared head to head with the Pentax, there is no contest in terms of sharpness, bokeh, weather-ready, and durability. The Pentax wins hands down. I have used mine for 100's of sports contests, portrait shootings and wildlife/landscape shoots. It is a DA* lens and earns its badge of excellence. It is clear edge to edge at all distances, has f2.8 all the way through and doesn't step down. Highly recommend and I have put them both through the ringer. I gave my daughter my Tamron, so it is still good, just not nearly as great! It's really hard to beat Pentax glass and design in their lenses.

---------- Post added 12-21-21 at 07:09 PM ----------

Originally posted by loyalt

I have owned both of the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 and the Pentax 70-200 f2.8. The Pentax is far superior, although the Tamron is not bad. If you can do it, go with the Pentax, do it, as it goes seamlessly with the Pentax cameras, is weather-sealed, takes fabulous photos and is top-notch! I am not sure why people repeatedly recommend different lenses when asked about specific ones, but since you asked about these two, here goes: The Tamron is a decent lens with good glass. When compared head to head with the Pentax, there is no contest in terms of sharpness, bokeh, weather-ready, and durability. The Pentax wins hands down. I have used mine for 100's of sports contests, portrait shootings and wildlife/landscape shoots. It is a DA* lens and earns its badge of excellence. It is clear edge to edge at all distances, has f2.8 all the way through and doesn't step down. Highly recommend and I have put them both through the ringer. I gave my daughter my Tamron, so it is still good, just not nearly as great! It's really hard to beat Pentax glass and design in their lenses.

And, I forgot to add, the Pentax is much better in low light, as I shoot a lot of night soccer games under bad stadium lighting...the Pentax has much less noise in the photos at each level.

redpit · 12-22-2021, 12:22 AM

I had the Tamron and I sold it when I got the DFA* 70-200/2.8. The Tamron is a good lens that when you have the time to focus properly will give excellent results. It is great optically and with shorter minimum focus distance in comparison with the Pentax lens but the DFA* is better in every other aspect, with better IQ across the frame from wide open and the characteristic Pentax colours and rendering. 2 more comments. If you will be using the lens for AF-C fast action photography then the Tamron is out of question. And lastly I really like the Tamron shape better than the Pentax! I don't know why, but I prefer lenses that are not a simple barrel from mount to front

Lev · 12-22-2021, 12:42 AM

Originally posted by redpit

I had the Tamron and I sold it when I got the DFA* 70-200/2.8. The Tamron is a good lens that when you have the time to focus properly will give excellent results. It is great optically and with shorter minimum focus distance in comparison with the Pentax lens but the DFA* is better in every other aspect, with better IQ across the frame from wide open and the characteristic Pentax colours and rendering. 2 more comments. If you will be using the lens for AF-C fast action photography then the Tamron is out of question. And lastly I really like the Tamron shape better than the Pentax! I don't know why, but I prefer lenses that are not a simple barrel from mount to front

I was also wondering why Pentax has the same thickness across whole body, whereas all other lenses from other brands start with narrower shape at the mount point, even lenses with IBIS. What Pentax had to put there forcing them to leave the shape as it is? Quick Shift? Big circuit board? Glass shape? I'm curious what's inside.

redpit · 12-22-2021, 01:03 AM

Originally posted by Lev

I was also wondering why Pentax has the same thickness across whole body, whereas all other lenses from other brands start with narrower shape at the mount point, even lenses with IBIS. What Pentax had to put there forcing them to leave the shape as it is? Quick Shift? Big circuit board? Glass shape? I'm curious what's inside.

Maybe it's just a design decision, as all the new FF lenses more or less follow this shape.

Lev · 12-22-2021, 06:31 AM

Originally posted by redpit

Maybe it's just a design decision, as all the new FF lenses more or less follow this shape.

Seem so.. new 70-210mm for example is also one of them. I donno, I like mine how it looks and feels anyway.

redpit · 12-23-2021, 03:25 AM

It's not that the lenses are ugly and I also love the feel in my hands, but there are similar lenses from other brands that are more attractive...

This new Nikon 100-400 for example:

https://www.cameralabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/nikon-z-100-400mm-hero-3.jpg

ChristianRock · 12-23-2021, 06:54 AM

Originally posted by redpit

It's not that the lenses are ugly and I also love the feel in my hands, but there are similar lenses from other brands that are more attractive...

This new Nikon 100-400 for example:

https://www.cameralabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/nikon-z-100-400mm-hero-3.jpg

But then you have to be invested in that system.

redpit · 12-24-2021, 12:42 AM

Originally posted by ChristianRock

But then you have to be invested in that system.

Yes obviously. This was just an example that good looking lenses are still constructed. For me the DA* 20-40 is one of the most beautiful contemporary lenses. You want it by just looking at it! I wonder why Ricoh/Pentax haven't taken advantage of this design heritage. The DFA* 70-200/2.8 is a great lens but beautiful is not the first thing that comes to your mind.

ahilgaz · 12-24-2021, 02:22 AM - **1 Like**

Very true.

Originally posted by redpit

Yes obviously. This was just an example that good looking lenses are still constructed. For me the DA* 20-40 is one of the most beautiful contemporary lenses. You want it by just looking at it! I wonder why Ricoh/Pentax haven't taken advantage of this design heritage. The DFA* 70-200/2.8 is a great lens but beautiful is not the first thing that comes to your mind.

Lev · 12-24-2021, 03:59 AM

Originally posted by redpit

Yes obviously. This was just an example that good looking lenses are still constructed. For me the DA* 20-40 is one of the most beautiful contemporary lenses. You want it by just looking at it! I wonder why Ricoh/Pentax haven't taken advantage of this design heritage. The DFA* 70-200/2.8 is a great lens but beautiful is not the first thing that comes to your mind.

not very beautiful but sexy

repaap · 12-24-2021, 04:48 AM

Originally posted by redpit

Maybe it's just a design decision, as all the new FF lenses more or less follow this shape.

Also those new DA* lenses follow this same shape/and almost thickness trend. I do actually like that shape, and the fact that they have similar look.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Add a foot or ring to an older SMC Pentax-A 300 mm (older model)	Pentagel	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	01-23-2020 08:59 AM
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs.......	Steelski	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	2	06-28-2017 04:59 PM
Old vs New on K-1 Tamron 80-200 F2.8 vs/ Tamron 70-200 F2.8 (plus SMCP F35-105 added)	Erictator	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	10	06-18-2016 12:19 PM
Tamron 70-200 F2.8 vs Sigma 70-200 F2.8 EX DG HSM II - Battle of the older telephotos	JinDesu	Pentax Lens Articles	45	11-03-2014 06:30 AM
DA35 vs DA40 vs vs FA43 + DA70 vs FA77 bying advice	plunun	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	11-23-2008 05:16 AM

12-21-2021, 06:06 PM	#31
loyalt Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2017 Location: Minnesota Photos: Albums Posts: 261	Originally posted by cdd29 I may have to make a spot decision shortly and don't have time to research this, so I need some quick input. I have an opportunity to buy a Pentax 70-200mm f2.8 ED HD D FA DC AW pretty cheap (about half the retail price). Cosmetically it looks like it has some wear on the foot and collar knob but rest looks clean, based on the pics. Just wondering how it compares to the older Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di LD AF (IF) SP Macro Lens for Pentax (A001P), IQ, focusing, low light performance. I shoot marching band & winter guard comps and need something with relatively decent low light performance. Would the Pentax 70-200 be an improvement over the Tamron? I have owned both of the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 and the Pentax 70-200 f2.8. The Pentax is far superior, although the Tamron is not bad. If you can do it, go with the Pentax, do it, as it goes seamlessly with the Pentax cameras, is weather-sealed, takes fabulous photos and is top-notch! I am not sure why people repeatedly recommend different lenses when asked about specific ones, but since you asked about these two, here goes: The Tamron is a decent lens with good glass. When compared head to head with the Pentax, there is no contest in terms of sharpness, bokeh, weather-ready, and durability. The Pentax wins hands down. I have used mine for 100's of sports contests, portrait shootings and wildlife/landscape shoots. It is a DA* lens and earns its badge of excellence. It is clear edge to edge at all distances, has f2.8 all the way through and doesn't step down. Highly recommend and I have put them both through the ringer. I gave my daughter my Tamron, so it is still good, just not nearly as great! It's really hard to beat Pentax glass and design in their lenses. ---------- Post added 12-21-21 at 07:09 PM ---------- Originally posted by loyalt I have owned both of the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 and the Pentax 70-200 f2.8. The Pentax is far superior, although the Tamron is not bad. If you can do it, go with the Pentax, do it, as it goes seamlessly with the Pentax cameras, is weather-sealed, takes fabulous photos and is top-notch! I am not sure why people repeatedly recommend different lenses when asked about specific ones, but since you asked about these two, here goes: The Tamron is a decent lens with good glass. When compared head to head with the Pentax, there is no contest in terms of sharpness, bokeh, weather-ready, and durability. The Pentax wins hands down. I have used mine for 100's of sports contests, portrait shootings and wildlife/landscape shoots. It is a DA* lens and earns its badge of excellence. It is clear edge to edge at all distances, has f2.8 all the way through and doesn't step down. Highly recommend and I have put them both through the ringer. I gave my daughter my Tamron, so it is still good, just not nearly as great! It's really hard to beat Pentax glass and design in their lenses. And, I forgot to add, the Pentax is much better in low light, as I shoot a lot of night soccer games under bad stadium lighting...the Pentax has much less noise in the photos at each level.

12-22-2021, 12:22 AM	#32
redpit Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Greece Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,858	I had the Tamron and I sold it when I got the DFA* 70-200/2.8. The Tamron is a good lens that when you have the time to focus properly will give excellent results. It is great optically and with shorter minimum focus distance in comparison with the Pentax lens but the DFA* is better in every other aspect, with better IQ across the frame from wide open and the characteristic Pentax colours and rendering. 2 more comments. If you will be using the lens for AF-C fast action photography then the Tamron is out of question. And lastly I really like the Tamron shape better than the Pentax! I don't know why, but I prefer lenses that are not a simple barrel from mount to front

12-22-2021, 12:42 AM	#33
Lev Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: Tbilisi, Georgia Posts: 1,197	Originally posted by redpit I had the Tamron and I sold it when I got the DFA* 70-200/2.8. The Tamron is a good lens that when you have the time to focus properly will give excellent results. It is great optically and with shorter minimum focus distance in comparison with the Pentax lens but the DFA* is better in every other aspect, with better IQ across the frame from wide open and the characteristic Pentax colours and rendering. 2 more comments. If you will be using the lens for AF-C fast action photography then the Tamron is out of question. And lastly I really like the Tamron shape better than the Pentax! I don't know why, but I prefer lenses that are not a simple barrel from mount to front I was also wondering why Pentax has the same thickness across whole body, whereas all other lenses from other brands start with narrower shape at the mount point, even lenses with IBIS. What Pentax had to put there forcing them to leave the shape as it is? Quick Shift? Big circuit board? Glass shape? I'm curious what's inside.

12-22-2021, 01:03 AM	#34
redpit Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Greece Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,858	Originally posted by Lev I was also wondering why Pentax has the same thickness across whole body, whereas all other lenses from other brands start with narrower shape at the mount point, even lenses with IBIS. What Pentax had to put there forcing them to leave the shape as it is? Quick Shift? Big circuit board? Glass shape? I'm curious what's inside. Maybe it's just a design decision, as all the new FF lenses more or less follow this shape.

12-22-2021, 06:31 AM	#35
Lev Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: Tbilisi, Georgia Posts: 1,197	Originally posted by redpit Maybe it's just a design decision, as all the new FF lenses more or less follow this shape. Seem so.. new 70-210mm for example is also one of them. I donno, I like mine how it looks and feels anyway.

12-23-2021, 03:25 AM	#36
redpit Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Greece Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,858	It's not that the lenses are ugly and I also love the feel in my hands, but there are similar lenses from other brands that are more attractive... This new Nikon 100-400 for example: https://www.cameralabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/nikon-z-100-400mm-hero-3.jpg

12-23-2021, 06:54 AM	#37
ChristianRock Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: People's Republic of America Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,911	Originally posted by redpit It's not that the lenses are ugly and I also love the feel in my hands, but there are similar lenses from other brands that are more attractive... This new Nikon 100-400 for example: https://www.cameralabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/nikon-z-100-400mm-hero-3.jpg But then you have to be invested in that system.

12-24-2021, 12:42 AM	#38
redpit Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Greece Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,858	Originally posted by ChristianRock But then you have to be invested in that system. Yes obviously. This was just an example that good looking lenses are still constructed. For me the DA* 20-40 is one of the most beautiful contemporary lenses. You want it by just looking at it! I wonder why Ricoh/Pentax haven't taken advantage of this design heritage. The DFA* 70-200/2.8 is a great lens but beautiful is not the first thing that comes to your mind.

12-24-2021, 02:22 AM - 1 Like	#39
ahilgaz New Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: ISTANBUL, TURKEY Posts: 20	Very true. Originally posted by redpit Yes obviously. This was just an example that good looking lenses are still constructed. For me the DA* 20-40 is one of the most beautiful contemporary lenses. You want it by just looking at it! I wonder why Ricoh/Pentax haven't taken advantage of this design heritage. The DFA* 70-200/2.8 is a great lens but beautiful is not the first thing that comes to your mind.

12-24-2021, 03:59 AM	#40
Lev Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2015 Location: Tbilisi, Georgia Posts: 1,197	Originally posted by redpit Yes obviously. This was just an example that good looking lenses are still constructed. For me the DA* 20-40 is one of the most beautiful contemporary lenses. You want it by just looking at it! I wonder why Ricoh/Pentax haven't taken advantage of this design heritage. The DFA* 70-200/2.8 is a great lens but beautiful is not the first thing that comes to your mind. not very beautiful but sexy

12-24-2021, 04:48 AM	#41
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	Originally posted by redpit Maybe it's just a design decision, as all the new FF lenses more or less follow this shape. Also those new DA* lenses follow this same shape/and almost thickness trend. I do actually like that shape, and the fact that they have similar look.