[IchabodCrane]

See what I mean! Complainingggg.. Besides, if it had a Nikon badge, it would have 500 dollars added to the price (go look at the price of the lens on B&H).

I am just happy we have a decent 24-70 f/2.8 WR FF lens for an upcoming FF DSLR body..

If you want a 5 year warranty buy one on the side and it will be around the same price of the Nikon in total.


This must be to what we have to look forward with the body itself too.. it doesn't have this, it doesn't have that, it costs too little, it costs too much, what was Pentax thinking, was Pentax thinking at all, what a piece of junk, yadda yadda.. never happy. It makes me wonder why do I even come here? ..I expect news and (granted) a bit of back and forth.. but I just come away feeling down and negative after reading all the negative bickery garbage here lately.

You're overreacting. In general, Pentax lenses don't cost less than Nikon lenses (the 24-70/2.8 is a welcome exception) but there is a big disparity in USA warranty between the brands. Ricoh might do themselves a favor to think this through a little more. It might actually help them sell some more cameras.

[Chris Giles]

Who thinks the upside of removing the VR indicates a strong possibility the new body which has in built stability?

[Kunzite]

Who thinks that releasing the 150-450 and the 70-200 without in-lens SR indicates an even stronger possibility of in-body SR?

[Sandy Hancock]

Well for what it's worth, I'm stoked about this lens. A known good performer given the Pentax tweak and still hitting the market at a very competitive price.
My DA*16-50 is starting to look over its shoulder.

[jgnfld]

$2,300 versus $1,300.

Sounds like a great lens and I would love the WR as I take my camera sailing all the time. Unfortunately, $1300 probably won't be enough to make make me trade in my Sigma 17-50 unless and until I get an FF camera.

[Edgar_in_Indy]

Ok for video, but I don't expect any Tamron VC to work with an EOM dual IBIS system anyway.

I'm not sure what "EOM" stands for here, but this new 24-70 is essentially a first-party lens, and if Pentax did have intentions of going dual IS/OS, there is no reason to think that a 24-70mm wouldn't be able to work.

But it doesn't look like Pentax is interested in any kind of dual system anyway, since there are no Pentax lenses with OS. Which is fine with me, as long as they keep working on improving their IBIS to stay competitive. Olympus gets a lot of praise for their 5-axis IBIS, and my impression is that it's better than Pentax's system, but I don't know how large the difference is.

[monochrome]

The Tamron lens was already weather-resistant and no doubt the lens elements were coated. Granted, the Pentax coatings are going to be different but that doesn't mean they are significantly more expensive.

Given that Ricoh just installed the new evaporator(s) at $1MM EA. a couple years ago, on an accounting basis HD does 'cost' more.

All this discussion misses the real point though. This time Pentax didn't ask a premium price for their name whether or not the lens is identical to the Tamron.

[Kharan]

I still keep seeing people saying this is nothing more than a rebadge of the Tamron. It is not. Here is the product page for this lens. Reading the text and looking at the lens design shown, this lens has an AD element (anomalous dispersion glass). The Tamron does not. There may also be a difference in the front aspherical element with the Tamron being hybrid and the Pentax being glass, but so far it's unclear from Ricoh's descriptions. Either way, it's at least an upgrade with the AD element over the Tamron.

Except the Tamron features two XR elements, the same thing as an AD (it's just marketing speak). The Tamron lens features weather sealing, quick shift, stabilization, advanced coatings and all the bells and whistles you could imagine, short of a focus hold button. It's an extremely advanced optic, and it would do you and other users well to read up on it instead of just imagining how it should be, in your minds.

On the other hand, the removal of the stabilization group probably afforded Pentax an opportunity to improve some aspects of the design by adding extra asphericals in there, which should be good news.

The part that really worries me is the lens sealing schematic shown by Ricoh. It looks like the lens has a low amount of seals, much less than we're used to. Which means, in turn, that they're just employing exactly the same dubious sealing of the original Tamron, which is more in line with Canikon lenses.

[Zygonyx]

All this discussion misses the real point though. This time Pentax didn't ask a premium price for their name whether or not the lens is identical to the Tamron.

Yeah, for once, perpetual mouners should remember their attitude when the two first DFA 2015 prices where unveiled...

[Scintilla]

I'm not sure what "EOM" stands for here, but this new 24-70 is essentially a first-party lens, and if Pentax did have intentions of going dual IS/OS, there is no reason to think that a 24-70mm wouldn't be able to work.

But it doesn't look like Pentax is interested in any kind of dual system anyway, since there are no Pentax lenses with OS. Which is fine with me, as long as they keep working on improving their IBIS to stay competitive. Olympus gets a lot of praise for their 5-axis IBIS, and my impression is that it's better than Pentax's system, but I don't know how large the difference is.

Pretty sure it was just a typo of "OEM", in which case you did address the point.

[lytrytyr]

From Tamron:

" ...It includes three Low Dispersion (LD) glass elements, two Extra Refractive Index (XR) glass elements, three glass molded aspheric elements"

and From Pentax:

"By incorporating three Extra-low Dispersion (ED) optical elements and four aspherical optical elements, the lens assures sufficient light levels even at the edges of the image field"

There is an extra Aspherical in the Pentax lens

Or the fourth aspherical mentioned by Pentax is just the hybrid element (fourth element of the 17)

[infoomatic]

I wonder why they exchanged the zoom ring with the focus ring compared to the DA* 16-50 ... hope they keep it consistent with the DFA line then.

[mecrox]

All this discussion misses the real point though. This time Pentax didn't ask a premium price for their name whether or not the lens is identical to the Tamron.

Not true, I'm afraid. In the UK, the introductory price for the lens (£1149) is nearly twice that of the Tamron version (£675), going from SRS who are likely the biggest full Pentax dealers here. Of course, Pentax should ask what they think they can get but I'd be wary of assuming that prices will be the same in all territories. The value will likely look better in 6-12 months when the introductory price has worn off and by which point the Pentax may cost 50-60 per cent of the new Nikon equivalent and maybe 75 per cent or so of the current Canon one. The folks who are really charging for their lenses at the moment are Nikon.

Look at it this way. If Pentax do not ask a premium for their name, they are sending out the message that their name is not worth any premium. Not much of a message, imho.

[Rondec]

Not true, I'm afraid. In the UK, the introductory price for the lens (£1149) is nearly twice that of the Tamron version (£675), going from SRS who are likely the biggest full Pentax dealers here. Of course, Pentax should ask what they think they can get but I'd be wary of assuming that prices will be the same in all territories. The value will likely look better in 6-12 months when the introductory price has worn off and by which point the Pentax may cost 50-60 per cent of the new Nikon equivalent and maybe 75 per cent or so of the current Canon one. The folks who are really charging for their lenses at the moment are Nikon.

Look at it this way. If Pentax do not ask a premium for their name, they are sending out the message that their name is not worth any premium. Not much of a message, imho.

Different countries are different with regard to pricing.

Looking at B and H, the Tamron is 1100 dollars with a rebate, so a couple of hundred less than the Pentax version. Nikon sells theirs for 1900 dollars and Canon for 1800.

The fact that Pentax has a release price of 1300 dollars definitely indicates that street price will likely be in the 1100 to 1200 range in the future, which is a very nice price for what looks to be a solid optic.

[normhead]

Everyone seems to for get the advantages of being a Pentax lens. Cheaper because of in camera shake reduction. Automatically remembers lens corrections when alleging lenses, for that lens, in body lens correction for jpegs, in the case of Tamron, probably a much higher quality barrel assembly.