Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-18-2015, 04:43 AM   #16
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,806
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
do you think these two lenses could possibly have been made in the same factory?
In the same factory, theoretically yes; on the same production line, most certainly not.

11-18-2015, 05:25 AM   #17
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,875
Do you guys think a whole lens is made and put together in just one factory? I think its completely possible that some elements get outsourced, others made locally, coatings added in a third facility, then the whole thing shipped and put into a barrel at a fourth. Isn't this the modern standard for many big industries? I once read that sheep from Ireland get sent down to Greece and Bulgaria for slaughter, then the meat gets sent back up to Ireland for packaging, and then it gets distributed to various European markets from there. Why? Because somehow, despite all the travel the poor animals have to do, that is the cheapest option, whilst retaining branding ("made in.."). Doing everything within 100km of the fields where the sheep graze would be economically far more expensive. I think similar examples can be found with smartphones ("made in", but then also "assembled in"), cars,.. why not lenses? We already know some of this is happening with camera bodies; various brands use Sony sensors or Seiko shutters, wifi module made by yet another third party, etc. So I think its possible that some parts of the lens get made at a certain factory, then sent to both brands, who assemble them in their own way. And the optical patent holder gets a small license on top of that.

Edit: Also, isn't the DFA 100mm macro (even though it goes back some generations to FA, F) somehow licensed with Tokina, as well?

Last edited by Na Horuk; 11-18-2015 at 05:31 AM.
11-18-2015, 05:29 AM   #18
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,075
Right,
there are different ways to share intellectual property, technology and production.
There are different ways to organise production.
But for us end-users, the only important thing is to get what we expect and/or need.
And this lens is definitely interesting, i hope Tokina and Ricoh wil make it marketable in a form or the other for the K-mount users !
11-18-2015, 06:32 AM - 2 Likes   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,345
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
In the same factory, theoretically yes; on the same production line, most certainly not.
You are nitpicking. Tokina factory employees are unable to assemble a lens as beautiful as the Limited, and Pentax factory employees would rather commit ritual suicide than assembling a lens as ugly as the Tokina

By the way, I wanted to make it about production lines, as that was a point zoolander made. I could have mentioned that all those Pentax lenses are constructively different, in a very obvious way, than their Tokina counterparts; completely rendering his point null and void. But I thought it was funnier the way I've done it

11-18-2015, 06:32 AM   #20
Site Supporter
Cynog Ap Brychan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucester
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,092
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Do you guys think a whole lens is made and put together in just one factory? I think its completely possible that some elements get outsourced, others made locally, coatings added in a third facility, then the whole thing shipped and put into a barrel at a fourth.
I see that some of my Limited lenses are marked as "Assembled in Vietnam". Does anyone know where the components are made?
11-18-2015, 12:42 PM   #21
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,267
QuoteOriginally posted by zoolander Quote
So what you're saying is that when Tokina made the 10-17, 12-24, 16-50, 50-135, they made them at Tokina. So Pentax set up its own plant to make virtually the same lenses 10-17, 12-24, 16-50, 50-135 ........

Yeah building two production lines, that makes complete fiscal sense !

Let me guess, the new Pentax 24-70mm 2.8 WR is made at Pentax too.

For a company that continues to outsource lens manufacture, Pentaxians continue to fantasize ...........apparently.
Well, you missed an occasion to keep quiet and not to be seen as a fool. You chose, deal with it.
11-18-2015, 03:22 PM   #22
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,798
QuoteOriginally posted by zoolander Quote
So what you're saying is that when Tokina made the 10-17, 12-24, 16-50, 50-135, they made them at Tokina. So Pentax set up its own plant to make virtually the same lenses 10-17, 12-24, 16-50, 50-135 ........ Yeah building two production lines, that makes complete fiscal sense !
For two independent companies it makes perfect sense. The optical elements and their arrangement are proprietary, and only able to be reproduced commercially under license. Manufacturers buy the rights to use the designs, they procure and assemble the optics, and place them in a different shell in their own manufacturing line, and run the batch through QC. The lens elements themselves are typically outsourced from Schott,Corning,Hoya,AGI,Ohara et al. - usually from the same supplier as the brand name, as bulk orders are more cost effective.

You're are thinking that pentax produces the optical assemblies, and sell them to Tokina who place them in their own shell - this arrangement would be inefficient and waste money. It would put Tokina at a disadvantage to Pentax, as production runs will be limited by the finishing capacity of the optical assembly line - which would be run by pentax. It would also introduce issues with QC between the two companies. No, having two independent optical assembly lines and QC managed in house eliminates bottlenecks.

Last edited by Digitalis; 11-18-2015 at 03:49 PM.
11-19-2015, 01:26 AM   #23
Veteran Member
zoolander's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gold Coast
Photos: Albums
Posts: 337
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
You do understand the difference between licensing an optical formula and rebadging an existing lens? The Pentax 24-70 and 18-270 lenses are rebadges made by Tamron. They may have tweaks introduced by Pentax -- different coatings in particular -- but the basic underlying lens is made by Tamron and is exactly the same as the versions made for other mounts, just with a different skin.

On the other hand, when Tokina licensed an optical formula from Pentax, they did make the lenses themselves and paid a small amount to Pentax per lens made and vice versa when Pentax would make a DA 12-24, they paid Tokina a fee for using their lens design. The 16-50 and 50-135 lens designs are completely different, in particular, as the Tokina versions are screw drive only, while the Pentax versions have both SDM and screw drive.

Anyway, as far as I can ascertain, Pentax owns the patents on the 16-50, 50-135, 10-17, and 35 macro, while Tokina owns the patent on the 12-24. In their glory years, Pentax wouldn't have licensed these designs to another company, but with how rocky things got financially before the Hoya acquisition, they were scraping for money anywhere to shore up their transition to digital.
The Tokina versions were screw drive only? Does Canon use screw drive:

Tokina 16-50mm f/2.8 AT-X 165 PRO DX Autofocus Lens ATX165PRODXC

I'm saying, that Pentax outsourced the manufacture at Tokina for the 10-17, 12-24, 16-50, 50-135 and maybe more. I'm also saying that they are probably still being manufactured by Tokina, despite Tokina deleting those lenses, and making more FF canikon lenses. I'm also saying that there is no reason to duplicate all the tools - injection moulding die's, glass production tools, so on and so forth - and assembly facilities to make what is essentially the same lens.

I'm also saying that Pentax definitely makes the Limiteds. Anything with inherrent problems with CA's are probably made at Tokina because Tokinas are notorious for CA's, and do not manufacture with stricter tolerances. DFA lenses are probably made at Pentax and some DA lens.

When there are so many lenses in the Pentax line up being similar to so many other lenses, its pretty obvious that Pentax is outsourcing. Unless someone can varify with photos of the Pentax factories and which lenses are produced there.

---------- Post added 11-19-15 at 06:38 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
zoolander, let me ask you a question: do you think these two lenses could possibly have been made in the same factory?
I've never felt that the Limiteds were produced by Tokina, I was saying those DA and DA* apsc lenses which Tokina also sold were made at Tokina and built to Pentax's specifications. Pentax might have its own employees checking the lenses and opt for the best 10% of glass to go into the Pentax versions.

Your photo above showing the Tokina 35mm and the limited are not of the same design. The Tokina is a lens with an inbuilt motor for Canikon - all it would take is a different circuit board, mount and pins for a Pentax mount.

Here's the ephotozine review: https://www.ephotozine.com/article/tokina-at-x-m35-pro-dx-35mm-f-2-8-macro-lens-review-16457 And guess what ? CA's galore, a classic trait of a Tokina lens. Thats the smoking gun with some of these Pentax lenses that have big CA's and are also badged by Tokina. I think all the DA* lenses are made under contract by Tokina, they're outsourced. Perhaps I'm wrong, unless somebody who works at Tokina or Pentax can confirm where they are being manufactured.

---------- Post added 11-19-15 at 06:52 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
You are nitpicking. Tokina factory employees are unable to assemble a lens as beautiful as the Limited, and Pentax factory employees would rather commit ritual suicide than assembling a lens as ugly as the Tokina

By the way, I wanted to make it about production lines, as that was a point zoolander made. I could have mentioned that all those Pentax lenses are constructively different, in a very obvious way, than their Tokina counterparts; completely rendering his point null and void. But I thought it was funnier the way I've done it
Once the lens ellements are manufactured at Tokina, they placed in packaging and sent to Pentax for SMC coatings. The body of the lens is manufactured at Tokina as well. The lens elements get sent back to Tokina and installed into the body then they are finished and packed and sent off to Pentax.

The Tamron 24-70 would have its glass elements made, then shipped to Pentax and receive HD coatings. Then back to Tamron for assembly and final packaging. Its really quite a logical approach to outsourcing.

To imagine that Pentax makes virtually all its lenses, and have - what is it now - 8% market share. Look, all I'm doing is tracing the CA lenses back up the Tokina trail.

---------- Post added 11-19-15 at 06:58 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Do you guys think a whole lens is made and put together in just one factory? I think its completely possible that some elements get outsourced, others made locally, coatings added in a third facility, then the whole thing shipped and put into a barrel at a fourth. Isn't this the modern standard for many big industries? I once read that sheep from Ireland get sent down to Greece and Bulgaria for slaughter, then the meat gets sent back up to Ireland for packaging, and then it gets distributed to various European markets from there. Why? Because somehow, despite all the travel the poor animals have to do, that is the cheapest option, whilst retaining branding ("made in.."). Doing everything within 100km of the fields where the sheep graze would be economically far more expensive. I think similar examples can be found with smartphones ("made in", but then also "assembled in"), cars,.. why not lenses? We already know some of this is happening with camera bodies; various brands use Sony sensors or Seiko shutters, wifi module made by yet another third party, etc. So I think its possible that some parts of the lens get made at a certain factory, then sent to both brands, who assemble them in their own way. And the optical patent holder gets a small license on top of that.

Edit: Also, isn't the DFA 100mm macro (even though it goes back some generations to FA, F) somehow licensed with Tokina, as well?
Ya see, the Slovenian Pentaxian gets it. I saw a video on the maclaren MC4 engine manufacture. Pistons came from a third party (Possibly Mahle in a lovely box too), the connecting rods from another (probably Carrillo), and maybe the engine block was cast and machine elsewhere also.


Last edited by zoolander; 11-19-2015 at 01:53 AM.
11-19-2015, 01:58 AM   #24
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,255
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by zoolander Quote
The Tokina

You are simply wrong and it's all...
11-19-2015, 02:06 AM   #25
Veteran Member
zoolander's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gold Coast
Photos: Albums
Posts: 337
QuoteOriginally posted by Cynog Ap Brychan Quote
I see that some of my Limited lenses are marked as "Assembled in Vietnam". Does anyone know where the components are made?
My GUESS, would be that the lens elements would probably be made at Pentax in Japan. Then receive SMC or HD coatings there, and shipped to Vietnam for assembly. But, it may very well be that the glass is manufactured in Vietnam as well. I would think that the body of the lens is machined and completely made in Vietnam.

I'm guessing that mineral sands that go into making glass, would probably be more readily available in Japan. Plus you wouldn't let foreign workers see or work on your production line for glass lens manufacture - Pentax would probably keep that process highly secret in Japan.

---------- Post added 11-19-15 at 07:24 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
You're are thinking that pentax produces the optical assemblies, and sell them to Tokina who place them in their own shell - this arrangement would be inefficient and waste money. It would put Tokina at a disadvantage to Pentax, as production runs will be limited by the finishing capacity of the optical assembly line - which would be run by pentax. It would also introduce issues with QC between the two companies. No, having two independent optical assembly lines and QC managed in house eliminates bottlenecks.
All I'm saying is like in the instance of the Tamron 24-70 2.8 aka the new Pentax lens, is the lenses elements get selected by Pentax QC at Tamron, then get shipped to Pentax for HD coatings then back to Tamron for final assembly. Its the path of least resistance and cost for Pentax.

Tokina and Tamron are already geared up to manufacture lenses for various mounts. Circuit boards need to have different lingo to talk to the different camera brands ..... pins etc.

---------- Post added 11-19-15 at 07:28 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
You are simply wrong and it's all...
Thats a good argument !

This was all pretty obvious to me when I wasn't even a Pentax fan, but looking at ALL the lenses on Photozone.
11-19-2015, 03:21 AM   #26
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,798
QuoteOriginally posted by zoolander Quote
in the instance of the Tamron 24-70 2.8 aka the new Pentax lens, is the lenses elements get selected by Pentax QC at Tamron, then get shipped to Pentax for HD coatings then back to Tamron for final assembly. Its the path of least resistance and cost for Pentax.
If the supplier of the optical elements is doing their job properly, each batch of elements will be more or less identical*. This is a waste of time and resources for both pentax and tamron..shipping takes time and costs money. Stock isn't making money whilst in transit between manufacturing plants. And in any case what you are saying is pure speculation, and also showing a gross lack of comprehension regarding finance and supply side economics.


QuoteOriginally posted by zoolander Quote
My GUESS, would be that the lens elements would probably be made at Pentax in Japan.
Pentax doesn't have the capability to manufacture lens elements on their own, their glass fabrication facility was sold off decades ago - this also includes their optical coating facility which is now owned by HOYA.

* or at least within manufacturing tolerances, the median variance across the industry is about -/+0.05mm

Last edited by Digitalis; 11-19-2015 at 02:10 PM.
11-19-2015, 04:18 AM   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,851
I think if the Pentax version of the 24-70 says 'made in Japan', everything was likely done at Tamron's facilities there.
11-19-2015, 05:58 AM   #28
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,255
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by zoolander Quote

[/COLOR]

Thats a good argument !

This was all pretty obvious to me when I wasn't even a Pentax fan, but looking at ALL the lenses on Photozone.
lazy to answer to all your guesses.... other users already did it before
11-19-2015, 08:31 AM   #29
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,736
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The Pentax 24-70 and 18-270 lenses are rebadges made by Tamron. They may have tweaks introduced by Pentax -- different coatings in particular -- but the basic underlying lens is made by Tamron and is exactly the same as the versions made for other mounts, just with a different skin.
The versions of the Tamron 24-70 for Canon and Nikon have optical stabilization.
The Sony version of the Tamron, and the Pentax 24-70, do not.

http://www.tamron-usa.com/lenses/prod/assets/pdfs/24_70_A007_Catalog.pdf
11-20-2015, 01:33 AM   #30
Veteran Member
zoolander's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gold Coast
Photos: Albums
Posts: 337
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
If the supplier of the optical elements is doing their job properly, each batch of elements will be more or less identical*. This is a waste of time and resources for both pentax and tamron..shipping takes time and costs money. Stock isn't making money whilst in transit between manufacturing plants. And in any case what you are saying is pure speculation, and also showing a gross lack of comprehension regarding finance and supply side economics.
So what you are saying is that Pentax is gonna GIVE Tamron the recipes for the HD coating, and let them coat the Lenses - that would have to be a manufacturing secret. Time will tell whether the Pentax lens is any different to the Tamron - perhaps its given the Tamron coating (I forget what its called), and is labeled as HD.

Sending materials to other merchants is commonplace. Steel fabricators routinely send steel fabrications such as lamp poles to the galvanizing plant to be hot dipped in molten zinc (boat trailers, fencing etc). Also materials of all kinds get sent to powder coating workshops. Screws, nuts and bolts get sent to electroplating workshops for coatings or electrical hardening.

The Hubble telescopes lenses were famously sent to a specialist grounding and polishing company, and weren't polished at NASA.

I was at a minesite in WA back in the 90's at an engineering department, the engineers sent their sea water pumps to the opposite side of Australia for refurbishment.

You look at the automotive industry in Aus or ANYWHERE in the world. Ford Falcon door handles, headlights, tail lights and windows aren't made at Ford, a lot of their components are outsourced from companies that make ancillary components for the large car manufacturers - even from over seas. In fact there are Renault engines sitting in the engine bay of many Mercedes Benz models - why would they ship engines from France to Germany when Mercedes could make their own engines.

My "comprehension" of finance and supply side economics is perfectly exact ! Outsourcing is commonplace.

---------- Post added 11-20-15 at 06:40 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
lazy to answer to all your guesses.... other users already did it before
Okay then: Pentax makes all of its lenses at its factory in Vietnam ! You happy now ?

I suppose we all believe that Pentax makes its own sensors, micro chips, o'rings and gaskets, gyroscopes, electrical ribbons ....... and what was that switch that caused the K-3ii recall ? Oh thats right, an item from one of Pentaxes suppliers.

---------- Post added 11-20-15 at 06:42 PM ----------

Back on this 14-20 f2 Tokina CA machine ! It probably won't come in Pentax mount. So what-cha-gonna-do !
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!
auto, canikon, coatings, components, da, drive, employees, factory, ford, glass, japan, lens, lenses, line, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, qc, schneider, screw, tamron, time, tokina, tools, versions, vietnam, workshops
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Budget Wide Angle (20 or 24mm) for APS-C and film ChristianRock Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 49 03-28-2014 02:14 PM
Ricoh patent for 24/2 APS-C lens robbiec Pentax News and Rumors 3 03-19-2014 09:40 AM
New lens patent — Ricoh 2/24 for APS-C mirrorless Uluru Pentax News and Rumors 78 03-01-2014 10:00 AM
New Ricoh patent for a 16mm/2.8 lens designed for APS-C MILC NickLarsson Pentax News and Rumors 5 01-17-2014 09:05 PM
For Sale - Sold: Tokina AT-X 235AF PRO 20-35mm/2.8 for Nikon FF and APS-C (Worldwide) pspentax Sold Items 3 09-06-2010 03:53 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:05 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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