[thibs]

The DA* are not Tokina zooms rebadged.

This is Pentax which sold the design to Tokina. And BTW if the 100 macro is Tokina design, the 50 is a Pentax design AFAIR.
I dunno about the 35 Limited Macro.

Most of the Tokina/Pentax lenses (until now) are Pentax designed, not Tokina designed.
The fact that anyone may be annoyed by the fact that other brands users get the "same lens" (which is not correct btw, there are enough differences) is very understandable.

But the FUD stating that Pentax only reabdged lenses from Tokina is either stupidity or problem in the ability of reading what people int the know write.

If you want to beleive something, then beleive that Pentax sold designs to Tokina (and got 2-3 others in exchange), sold design (both lenses and bosies) to Samsung (well, pretty clear this is Pentax which manufactures those Samsung lenses/bodies).

Now if you prefer K mount to be doomed, then yes, maybe Pentax should not share K mount or design with anybody. Then, for sure, Hoya will not consider it financially interesting.

You chose, but do not come later complaining. Pentax HAS to sell low-end lenses as the rebadged Tamron. If you think that's stupid, then you really not want Pentax having time/money to design other DA*/Limited lenses. That'd be very stupid but of course, that's just my opinion.

[NaClH2O]

what is the wisdom of 18-250 zoom lens? From reading and research it is suggested that 2 - 3X optical zoom is recommended, hence the plethora of manufacturers 12-24, 16-45, 16-50, 17-40, 70-210, etc....

Now Pentoya has bought a 14X optical zoom?

This lens sounds like a piece of shit mistake before it even exists. I also don't understand the sycophants drooling over any Pentoya piece of shit no matter the rumour or how (im)probable.

Actually the 28-250 Tamron has gotten good reviews. It's prolly not as good as a prime and maybe not as good as 3 or 4 smaller zooms, but I have used the lens (borrowed from a friend) and have found it much better than the Pentax DA 50-200. And it's not too bad on the wide end either. No it's not a FA 31mm Ltd, but then again it doesn't cost $900. If I did a lot of traveling and wanted to limit myself to 3 lenses, this would be one of them.

NaCl(just because it's a superzoom doesn't mean it's poop)H2O

[lapeen]

what is the wisdom of 18-250 zoom lens? From reading and research it is suggested that 2 - 3X optical zoom is recommended, hence the plethora of manufacturers 12-24, 16-45, 16-50, 17-40, 70-210, etc....

Now Pentoya has bought a 14X optical zoom?

This lens sounds like a piece of shit mistake before it even exists. I also don't understand the sycophants drooling over any Pentoya piece of shit no matter the rumour or how (im)probable.

I hate snotty crap like this. I will be getting this lens because I have 2 kids and 2 dogs. I want a lens that I can leave on most of the time for those quick moments when I want to capture a moment. I don't always have time to change lenses. I also don't want to carry around a 50lb camera bag while I am hiking in the woods with the kids...at the beach...camping.... etc. I want to ENJOY THE MOMENT AND take some great pictures. With this lens I will be able to have my cake and eat it too.

I will still have my 50mm 1.7 and my 135mm for portraits and low light situations. But I would imagine that the new 18-250 will pretty much live on my camera and the IQ WILL be better than any point n shoot. Even with a high end P&S you can't get the DOF that you can with a DSLR.... and their sensors are smaller too so low light is impossible.

[regken]

what is the wisdom of 18-250 zoom lens? From reading and research it is suggested that 2 - 3X optical zoom is recommended, hence the plethora of manufacturers 12-24, 16-45, 16-50, 17-40, 70-210, etc....

Now Pentoya has bought a 14X optical zoom?

This lens sounds like a piece of shit mistake before it even exists. I also don't understand the sycophants drooling over any Pentoya piece of shit no matter the rumour or how (im)probable.

Donald,
Think in terms of making money which is what Hoya is after. This lens is going to be a BIG seller much like the Nikon and Canon versions. I am a real "Lens snob" but must admit I'm considering one for travel.

Regards,

Ken

[Miserere]

I hate snotty crap like this. I will be getting this lens because I have 2 kids and 2 dogs. I want a lens that I can leave on most of the time for those quick moments when I want to capture a moment. I don't always have time to change lenses. I also don't want to carry around a 50lb camera bag while I am hiking in the woods with the kids...at the beach...camping.... etc. I want to ENJOY THE MOMENT AND take some great pictures. With this lens I will be able to have my cake and eat it too.

These are my feelings exactly. I have the 18-55mm and 50-200mm pair, and regularly lose shots because I don't have the appropriate lens on the body at that time. Just because I have it in my bag, doesn't mean that special bird is going to wait for me to change lenses. Also, if I'm anywhere near the sea, I don't want to change lenses; airborne sand and salt, and high humidity are not what cameras like.

A friend of mine has the Sigma 18-200 mounted on his Canon 30D. It's his only lens, and he swears by it; he loves its versatility. The IQ of his shots? Incredible, both technically and artistically; he proves that it's the photographer that makes the picture, not the camera.

I will gladly give up 1% image quality (if it's even that much) if it means I will always have the right lens on the body to take that shot.

Oh, and this lens will be a big seller, which will put money in Pentax's bockets, which will help them continue to design great primes, which one day I'll be able to afford. However, I see primes as task-specific tools (I use my 50mm f/1.4 for portraits mostly), while a super zoom like the 18-250mm is simply life-specific, 'cos most of the time you just don't know how far away your subjects are going to be..

[ZaphodB]

The DA* are not Tokina zooms rebadged.

This is Pentax which sold the design to Tokina. And BTW if the 100 macro is Tokina design, the 50 is a Pentax design AFAIR.
I dunno about the 35 Limited Macro.

Most of the Tokina/Pentax lenses (until now) are Pentax designed, not Tokina designed.
The fact that anyone may be annoyed by the fact that other brands users get the "same lens" (which is not correct btw, there are enough differences) is very understandable.

But the FUD stating that Pentax only reabdged lenses from Tokina is either stupidity or problem in the ability of reading what people int the know write.

I didn't say that they rebadged Tokina lenses. I just fail to see why you are so confident that Pentax alone designed them, just because a couple of people supposedly "in the know" (and of whom most of us have never heard) believe it to be true... If my lack of total blind faith in Pentax is stupidity then so be it.

As for the Samsung deal... of course they are Pentaxes. This is universally accepted and repeatedly stated by many, many, many sources, as well as being quite clearly noticeable simply by looking at the bodies and lenses. This is not the same as the Pentax/Tokina situation.

Now if you prefer K mount to be doomed, then yes, maybe Pentax should not share K mount or design with anybody. Then, for sure, Hoya will not consider it financially interesting.

You chose, but do not come later complaining. Pentax HAS to sell low-end lenses as the rebadged Tamron. If you think that's stupid, then you really not want Pentax having time/money to design other DA*/Limited lenses. That'd be very stupid but of course, that's just my opinion.

I never said it was stupid. Look back at my earlier posts in this thread; I made it quite clear that if this lens significantly helps Pentax sales then of course it will be a good thing. And please would you stop this ridiculous business of claiming that I want Pentax to be doomed. That is absolutely the last thing I want. But on the other hand, I am still asking why this lower-end third-party lens is the only new lens we are seeing; no high-end ones, and the ones we were previously promised have had their proposed release dates removed. But if Hoya/Pentax are planning to continue selling only their current bodies with only the current lens line-up, and if the decision of whether or not to keep the company alive is taken based on that, then yes that is spectacularly stupid. It seems quite clear to me that in order to be considered "interesting" in this market - which is now one of consumer 'gadgets' as much as anything - you have to keep coming up with new products; you have to be seen to be doing something. I doubt that the announcement of an 18-250 and nothing else will draw that many people towards Pentax... but hey, I'm not "in the know"

[thibs]

ZaphodB if you understood you were specificaly targeted, then I apologize: it was not my point.
The thing is, loads of people (you're one of them but only one of them) are reacting the same way, and I suppose that DPR user reactions do get me on my nerves (you won't be surprised I think ).

So I was responding in a general way and not directly against you.

IMO the delay of next DA*/SDM lenses is linked to the delay of both 16-50/50-135. If they have had problems with those, it is very logical for them to fix those problems (which are maybe of no relation to quality btw) before getting out with other lenses which would bring the same problems.

For now, there's no reason to worry IMO but indeed if Pentax does not do better, let's say 3 months from now, then we should start to ask questions.

Now something else but if the 35macro limited is nothing else than a Tokina design also sold for other mounts (seems like it is) I won't be too happy and won't be the only one, probably. Collaboration is one thing and I have nothing against it. Selling the design of a limited lens or buying a design from someone else and calling it "limited" is very stupid IMO.

[Finn]

I personally think this was a brilliant move: almost no R&D costs, a guaranteed seller, and a broad consumer base.

I'll be the first in line to buy one. My wife currently complains about using the FA 31 because there's nothing for here left hand "to do" (i.e. zooming), which makes my skin crawl. She'll love it, as long as she doesn't find out it was $500!

All kidding aside, this will be a great lens for taking out with the family, so I don't get dirty looks from my loved ones for lugging around a giant camera bag and changing primes every 5 minutes...

[Miserere]

She'll love it, as long as she doesn't find out it was $500!

People who aren't interested in photography have no idea what the costs are (this goes for any other hobby, by the way). $500 sounds like a lot of money for a chunk of metal and glass (well, plastic and glass now ), because...imagine how many shoes you could buy with $500!!!! But the truth is, this lens is pretty damn cheap for what it can do (assuming the IQ is as good as Tamron's version).

Just ask your wife if she wants this lens, or some 300mm you saw on eBay for $3000

[Tom M]

You're right, the lens IS pretty damn cheap... In more ways than one if it doesn't include quick-shift focusing..

Which, by the way, was a major marketing point in the first DA lenses and I still think it's absolutely a great thing. Hard to believe they no longer think it's a worthy addition.

Lastly, so far we've seen the 'other' 18-250 get good reviews.. Good reviews compared to what?

You know full well the lens is NOT going to be very good at 250mm and it's not going to be good wide open.. And, based on the lens creep the DA 16-45 has (I love the lens though) you can bet your a$$ that this one is going to flop around.

So, what are we talking about really? A good lens compared to other crappy zooms? A lens that's not as bad as the others?

Give me something useful Pentax!! I want my DA* 200-400mm f2.8-3.5 Now~!

[little laker]

Sorry to say that I'm not going to read all the posts, however I wanted to say Don't Slam it until you've tried it.

Some camera stores will let you try this lens in their store to decide for yourself

You wouldn't buy a car without test driving it first would you?

If my local camera store has it when I return from my short trip I'll borrow it for a couple of hours, and take some sample pic's. Although I'm sure that some people will beat me to it.

I have tried the Tamron on their camera, and really like it as a budget lens. If Pentax has come up with some improvements then it's a good deal.

If I don't buy a Sigma SD14 I'll probably get myself a copy of this lens.

[ZaphodB]

ZaphodB if you understood you were specificaly targeted, then I apologize: it was not my point.
The thing is, loads of people (you're one of them but only one of them) are reacting the same way, and I suppose that DPR user reactions do get me on my nerves (you won't be surprised I think ).

So I was responding in a general way and not directly against you.

IMO the delay of next DA*/SDM lenses is linked to the delay of both 16-50/50-135. If they have had problems with those, it is very logical for them to fix those problems (which are maybe of no relation to quality btw) before getting out with other lenses which would bring the same problems.

For now, there's no reason to worry IMO but indeed if Pentax does not do better, let's say 3 months from now, then we should start to ask questions.

Now something else but if the 35macro limited is nothing else than a Tokina design also sold for other mounts (seems like it is) I won't be too happy and won't be the only one, probably. Collaboration is one thing and I have nothing against it. Selling the design of a limited lens or buying a design from someone else and calling it "limited" is very stupid IMO.

This all sounds very reasonable to me ... I can see your point about DPR. I avoid that site and try not to follow the tone of posts which are often seen there... however lately I have been rather an angry man... I know you meant no personal offence to me; likewise my irritation is not personally directed at you or any other individuals here, but a cumulative frustration at Pentax, Hoya, and the nature of the market in general.

Everything else you said there is also very sensible... if there is an issue with quality control then resolving that should definitely be Pentax's priority, especially for "Star" lenses costing over £500. I can agree with giving Pentax the benefit of the doubt for another three months too. There are good possible reasons for their relative lack of noticeable activity now, but if they go the New Year period without any signs of life then we really do need to start asking why. Also I agree that collaboration or even pure outsourcing for lower-end gear not a problem in itself... but if they start to buy someone else's designs for lenses with the Star or Limited labels, then that will really devalue the Pentax name. Hopefully Pentax/Hoya understand this.

[mutley]

Now Pentoya has bought a 14X optical zoom?

I also don't understand the sycophants drooling over any Pentoya piece of shit no matter the rumour or how (im)probable.

This lens is coming from Tamron. Articles are in Japanese but they report on the speculation of Tamron buying the Pentax camera division. The new reported name will be Tampax.

[lapeen]

This lens is coming from Tamron. Articles are in Japanese but they report on the speculation of Tamron buying the Pentax camera division. The new reported name will be Tampax.

[thibs]

what is the wisdom of 18-250 zoom lens? From reading and research it is suggested that 2 - 3X optical zoom is recommended, hence the plethora of manufacturers 12-24, 16-45, 16-50, 17-40, 70-210, etc....

Now Pentoya has bought a 14X optical zoom?

This lens sounds like a piece of shit mistake before it even exists. I also don't understand the sycophants drooling over any Pentoya piece of shit no matter the rumour or how (im)probable.

Fine, fine, sell all your gear and look somewhere else.