Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-06-2009, 01:14 PM   #16
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,679
Similar to the comparison b/w Pentax and Tokina lenses, a few discussions about the Pentax DA* 16-50 vs the Tamron 17-50 have led people to ask why the big price difference between the two. Some people even prefer the images that come out of the 17-50 more than from the 16-50.

It does take some effort to produce a lens with the exemplary build quality of a DA* lens and have weather sealing in a non-IF zoom. Add to that the SMC coatings and SDM focusing, and you have basically justified how the DA* could cost that much more than the Tamron.

09-06-2009, 02:44 PM   #17
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Tokina and Pentax co-developed lenses have the same coatings. Both companies are Hoya owned, why wouldn't Hoya save on production costs by supplying ready-to-mount glass to their subsidiaries?
09-06-2009, 02:55 PM   #18
D W
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Hogtown, ON, Canada
Posts: 329
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Tokina and Pentax co-developed lenses have the same coatings. Both companies are Hoya owned, why wouldn't Hoya save on production costs by supplying ready-to-mount glass to their subsidiaries?
If Tokina was owned by Hoya, yes. But They are not. The confusion is Hoya optics (mostly filters) and Tokina lenses are DISTRIBUTED by the same organization in North American.
09-06-2009, 04:14 PM   #19
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
QuoteOriginally posted by D W Quote
If Tokina was owned by Hoya, yes. But They are not. The confusion is Hoya optics (mostly filters) and Tokina lenses are DISTRIBUTED by the same organization in North American.
I just read a long thread on Hoya, Pentax and Tokina. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/38669-structure-hoya-c...ut-tokina.html
The only thing I would say for sure is that Hoya may or may not own Tokina, and Tokina lenses co-developed with Pentax may or may not have SMC coatings.

09-06-2009, 06:10 PM   #20
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 2
I am quite sad too .... I had waited to buy some lenses and now everything has shot up in price. I cant recommend Pentax to someone else as a bang for the buck system.

A year ago, I would convert lots of people (and I did) by convincing them to buy a K100D or K200D kit + FA35 when most people are set on Canikon from the start. My argument would be to look at the total system price and quality. Then FA35 was 299. Now DA35 is almost double and the FA has gone away

BTW, Nikon's 35/1.8 is 200



QuoteOriginally posted by designinme_1976 Quote
So, I have been saving up some money, to get a few nice lenses.. couple of limiteds.. and perhaps a couple of quality zooms.

I was searching prices on the Pentax 50-135 and the Pentax 12-24.. and then I just HAD to check the prices of the Tokina variant.

Kinda bummed me out, to think as a Pentax user, I get slapped with a $500 - $600 " Tax" just to be able to shoot with these Re-Badged Tokina lenses. Kinda ticks me off. And No, I am not being a hater, or BASHING pentax, I love my K20D.. and look forward to learning it well.. but this bothers me a little

At B&H the prices are
Pentax 50-135 $799
Tokina 50-135 $529.00

Pentax 12-24 $719.00
Tokina 12-24 $399.00

And I am not really going to buy into some idea that the Pentax lenses are "specially coated" to give better quality... Let's face it.. $600 TAX.. kinda sucks!
09-06-2009, 06:17 PM   #21
Veteran Member
GLXLR's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sugar Land, TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 686
I always thought that the price difference between the 16-50mm and 50-135mm were right ($200 for weather sealing, lighter body, and SDM? Hell yeah...) But the 35mm macros and 12-24mm (yes they are identical) kinda bum me out...
09-07-2009, 09:10 AM   #22
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,010
They aren't always lower. I recommended the Tokina 10-17 fisheye to a Canon shooting friend who liked my fish. This was back in June but at that time the Tokina was around $100 more than the Pentax for that lens from just about every vendor.
09-07-2009, 09:48 AM   #23
Pentaxian
ryan s's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,370
QuoteOriginally posted by ddutta Quote
I am quite sad too .... I had waited to buy some lenses and now everything has shot up in price. I cant recommend Pentax to someone else as a bang for the buck system.

A year ago, I would convert lots of people (and I did) by convincing them to buy a K100D or K200D kit + FA35 when most people are set on Canikon from the start. My argument would be to look at the total system price and quality. Then FA35 was 299. Now DA35 is almost double and the FA has gone away

BTW, Nikon's 35/1.8 is 200
Ok, so one lens is cheaper than another. So? We could compare other lenses all day and come to the conclusion that some are more expensive from Pentax, some are cheaper. Who really cares, besides those who whine about their gear constantly? I could give a shit about what X lens costs in Y brand from Z retailer.

The part I bolded...what is quality worth? How does one determine quality when looking at price tags?

As Wheatfield has said before, regarding the price increases...Pentax users are finally paying the prices the lenses are really worth. It's not about the bottom line for the quality offered.
QuoteOriginally posted by reeftool Quote
They aren't always lower. I recommended the Tokina 10-17 fisheye to a Canon shooting friend who liked my fish. This was back in June but at that time the Tokina was around $100 more than the Pentax for that lens from just about every vendor.
Yep...that Tokina for Canon was (is?) more expensive than the Pentax mount. It's also nice telling Canon users they're technically using a Pentax lens

09-07-2009, 10:25 AM   #24
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
QuoteOriginally posted by ryan s Quote
Yep...that Tokina for Canon was (is?) more expensive than the Pentax mount. It's also nice telling Canon users they're technically using a Pentax lens
I have a friend with a 50D who loves the deep rich colours he gets from the Tokina 10-17 and 12-24. That's another reason I think that Tokina may be using the SMC coatings on co-developed lenses.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
couple, k-mount, lenses, pentax, pentax lens, prices, slr lens, tokina
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Windows 7 64 bit & CS4 64 bit ? holdgaj Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 2 10-20-2009 06:12 AM
24 bit or 48 bit scanning photolady95 Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 3 05-29-2009 08:14 AM
12-bit, 14-bit and 48-bit capture Clarkey Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 1 02-19-2009 09:16 PM
what is the difference bwt exporting to 8-bit or 16-bit tiffs? rdrum76 Photographic Technique 3 01-22-2009 01:51 PM
I think i kinda like it... Quaffle Post Your Photos! 6 05-24-2007 05:16 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:08 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top