[skierd]

Yes, anyone could get the Pentax star lens for 70% of the Pentax price. So basically, as soon as you buy 2 lenses, you save as much as the price difference between a K1 and a 5DIV or K1 and D850.

Bull pies.

The current Canon 50 1.4and Nikon 50 1.4 are comparable to the FA 50 1.4 and yet are $50-100 more expensive than the FA. I also think its safe to assume that the Sigma 50 1.4, Zeiss Milvus, Tokina Opera, and the DFA 50 1.4 will be in the price ballpark with each other but unless Pentax whiff's it the DFA should be at least equal if not the best of the bunch.

The DFA 70-200 is $400 less than the Canon v2 IS and $1000 less than the current Nikon.

The Nikon 200-500 f5.6 is $600 less than the DFA 150-450, but the equivalent canon 100-400 is $100 more. And you're saving $800 to $1200 when you by the K1 mk2 vs the D810 or D850.

The Canon and Nikon 2.8 wide zooms (15-30, 16-35, etc) are all $100-400 more expensive.

High quality primes? The Pentax Limiteds fall in between the Canon and Nikon 1.8 and 1.4 35-50-85's. The limiteds are slower but less expensive than the latter, but are way better optically than the formers.

Sure I could build a fun nearly do it all system around a Canon 6D for about $3000 (17-40, 50 1.4, Tamron 150-600), but I know I wouldn't get the same IQ as a K1 mk2 with the 15-30, 43ltd or 55 1.4, and 150-450 at $5500. The equivalent Nikon Setup (D810, 200-500, 50 1.4, 16-35) is $6500.

---

Last edited by skierd; 03-02-2018 at 12:18 PM.

[pres589]

I thought it was determined that the 15-30 and 24-70 Pentax rebadge lenses did get Pentax coatings before the lens was assembled.

[monochrome]

I thought it was determined that the 15-30 and 24-70 Pentax rebadge lenses did get Pentax coatings before the lens was assembled.

If HD is in the name they have Pentax coatings. If they have SuperProtect on the front element they got Pentax coatings. If they have Ghostless on the rear element they have Pentax coatings. If the interior elements are SMC coated (IIRC that is claimed) they have Pentax coatings.

[Dan Rentea]

I thought it was determined that the 15-30 and 24-70 Pentax rebadge lenses did get Pentax coatings before the lens was assembled.

I think some people are trying to find out if Pentax 15-30mm and 24-70mm are better than the equivalent lenses from Tamron. As long as Tamron will not release these lenses in Pentax mount, no one can give a verdict in this regard. All I know is that the G2 lenses from Tamron are very good and if Ricoh will colaborate with Tamron for other lenses also, it could be a plus for Pentax users. A Pentax rebadge 150-600mm lens would be a very desirable lens for a lot of people.

[monochrome]

People have speculated about Pentax not making its own lenses forever - and started unfounded rumors to that effect. Here’s a reference on Steven Gandy’s Cameraquest page to a rumor that Cosina actually made the FA43. That was 2001

Forever!! And the arguments were exactly the same as this Tokina BS.

[robjmitchell]

Remember the "fun" we had around here when the D-FA 50 was leaked, with pictures, and the suggestion that it was a rebadged Sigma was tossed around? That was pretty neat.

Yes but that was just silly, Sigma isn’t known as a company people work with, and it didn’t have a person with at least some insider knowledge (asahiman) saying they were connected. Asahiman certainly isn’t correct on everything he states, just ask Kenspo about timelines, but his info has a probability of being correct of >50%
Of course we could all be wrong and its just a coincidence.

---------- Post added 03-03-2018 at 08:07 AM ----------

People have speculated about Pentax not making its own lenses forever - and started unfounded rumors to that effect. Here’s a reference on Steven Gandy’s Cameraquest page to a rumor that Cosina actually made the FA43. That was 2001

Forever!! And the arguments were exactly the same as this Tokina BS.

And remember when the 15-30 and 24-70 images were leaked and people claimed they were Tamron lenses!
Edit
The thing with the opera 50 is the front half of the lens looks like it came out of the same plastic mould. Its much more similar than when Tokina and pentax shared optical designs but made their own lenses. This leads me to believe that Pentax may actually be manufacturing these lenses for tokina. There is a new rumour the Tokina will cost $1400, posted in the DFA* 50 thread. That sugests that Pentax may have some control of Tokina in regard to pricing as part of their contract. Of course this is just a theory that currently is not supported by evidence. Until we have offical word, or an opera lens with a AIV sticker we just wont know.

[pres589]

Not quite - it doesn't follow that it would Pentax coatings or build quality - in fact it wouldn't - assuming, for the sake of argument that the Tokina is a Pentax rebadge - even the lenses that are Pentax rebadges of Tamron don't have Pentax coatings etc.

OTOH - it could benefit Pentax if Canikon users see how good Pentax lenses are

I went and looked at the Pentax 15-30 has HD and SP coatings. Ref: HD PENTAX-D FA 15-30mmF2.8ED SDM WR / Wide-Angle Lenses / K-mount Lenses / Lenses / Products | RICOH IMAGING

I wish we weren't rehashing this again...

[robjmitchell]

I went and looked at the Pentax 15-30 has HD and SP coatings. Ref: HD PENTAX-D FA 15-30mmF2.8ED SDM WR / Wide-Angle Lenses / K-mount Lenses / Lenses / Products | RICOH IMAGING

I wish we weren't rehashing this again...

Yes the following photo shows both the tamron and pentax 24-70 lenses shot on an adapted sony. The pentax on the right clearly has better coatings. You can barely make out the ghost at the bottom (which demonstrates its the same lens design.)

[monochrome]

I’ll grant this is the News and Rumors Forum. I’m stepping aside from the conversation. I suggest everyone read the new Commentary about Pentax’s aims and vision on the K-1 Special Site under the K-1II Production tab.

It ain’t rebadges.

[Fenwoodian]

Bull pies.

The current Canon 50 1.4and Nikon 50 1.4 are comparable to the FA 50 1.4 and yet are $50-100 more expensive than the FA. I also think its safe to assume that the Sigma 50 1.4, Zeiss Milvus, Tokina Opera, and the DFA 50 1.4 will be in the price ballpark with each other but unless Pentax whiff's it the DFA should be at least equal if not the best of the bunch..

I agree! They all are (or in Pentax's case "will be") what I would consider to be preimium prime lenses all of supreme quality and producing wonderful images. The Sigma and Tokina can't be used on Pentax bodies, the Zeiss needs to be adapted to be used on a Pentax body, and the DFA can be used without modification and of course has auto-focus.


Each of these 4 premium 50mm lenses will of course have a slightly different rendering. Generally, I don't care for Sigma and Tokina "signatures". I do like the typical Zeiss Milvus signatures I've seen. Not having yet seen photos taken with the new DFA I don't yet have an opinion on it's rendering.


I find that even lenses made by the same manufacturer can have widely different signatures. It's possible that this new, 50mm DFA lens ushers in a whole new Pentax look. An all new look that could be better than any of its' competitors, and even better than past Pentax lenses.

[robjmitchell]

I’ll grant this is the News and Rumors Forum. I’m stepping aside from the conversation. I suggest everyone read the new Commentary about Pentax’s aims and vision on the K-1 Special Site under the K-1II Production tab.

It ain’t rebadges.

No they are not rebadged! They are definitely made by pentax. If you read the section on lens design it emphasises just how much more precision is required in modern complex lens designs like the 70-200/2.8. They literally had to completely change their manufacturing practices to make the new lenses.
Challengers | PENTAX K-1 Special site | RICOH IMAGING

---------- Post added 03-03-2018 at 08:56 AM ----------

I agree! They all are (or in Pentax's case "will be") what I would consider to be preimium prime lenses all of supreme quality and producing wonderful images. The Sigma and Tokina can't be used on Pentax bodies, the Zeiss needs to be adapted to be used on a Pentax body, and the DFA can be used without modification and of course has auto-focus.


Each of these 4 premium 50mm lenses will of course have a slightly different rendering. Generally, I don't care for Sigma and Tokina "signatures". I do like the typical Zeiss Milvus signatures I've seen. Not having yet seen photos taken with the new DFA I don't yet have an opinion on it's rendering.


I find that even lenses made by the same manufacturer can have widely different signatures. It's possible that this new, 50mm DFA lens ushers in a whole new Pentax look. An all new look that could be better than any of its' competitors, and even better than past Pentax lenses.

From the very limited number of DFA*50 OOF photos available (like 2) it definitely has pentax rendering similar to what’s seen in DFA*70-200 and fa43ltd. Definitely on the Milvus level I’d say, although time will tell.

[monochrome]

Which strongly argues against simply borrowing or buying someone else’s lens design. Product design is production process design.

Whatever. I’m out. Out.

[Wheatfield]

Same for me. Perhaps 50mm was the kit lens of the film era because it was the easiest to design with large aperture due the flange distance (flange distance defined by sensor size and need of space for the mirror). The normal FoV on FF is about 40mm and not 50mm. The idea of the 50mm would be to have a lens that can do everything, but in practice it's trying to fit all but it fits nothing except boring shots. 35 as normal/wide and 85 as short tele can play a decent role in use cases, the 50mm is hard to fit. I believe there is much more volume for the 35 and 85, so it's like not buy random that Tamron and Sigma offer those 35mm and 85mm primes.

The 50 was the standard lens for a couple of reasons. One,, as you said, is that it is a pretty easy lens to design with the flange depth of the cameras of the day. The other is that though it is a very short telephoto, it still is a very close match to the field of view that most people pay attention to.
It is also the most versatile single focal length lens for the 35mm format.
If all a person can make is boring shots with a 50, they are saying more about their photography skills than they are about the focal length.
In an ideal world, Ricoh would have released a 35mm, 50mm and 85mm concurrent to the K1, but it isn't an ideal world, and it is nice to see them finally starting to put some new design prime lenses on the market.

[robjmitchell]

Which strongly argues against simply borrowing or buying someone else’s lens design. Product design is production process design.

Whatever. I’m out. Out.

Codeveloped with tokina (11-18) made by pentax, Tokina would have to retain the patent if the new lens design infringed on their other patents. BTW I own pentax because I think they make the best glass, I’m just a big a fanboy as you are, I’m just a realist when it come to moves Ricoh could potentially make due to financial reality. Getting ahead is more important than pride, even for a Japanese company.

[SteveinSLC]

Even if the Tokina is a rebadged version of the new Pentax 50, I can't imagine that Pentax would let it go for a lot less than their lens. That would make zero business sense. A little less perhaps, as it might gain them $ they wouldn't otherwise get in the Canikon market. But a lot less, no.

As far as Pentax re-branding or co-developing, if they are good lenses at a reasonable price, that's really all that matters to me. The 15-30 is a really good lens for what I like to shoot, and it bothers me not one bit that it was originally a Tamron.