[BROO]

When you market share is 2% it's unlikely anything you do to spread your development costs is going to help you. After all do you want to sell to the whole camera market or 2% of the market?

Is it possible that Ricoh have entered into a strategic alliance with Tokina where they jointly share development costs and then target the larger market by developing a range of lenses to rival Sigma Art?

Imagine if Tokina could take a significant share of this market segment. I think the quality of the Opera lens will be good if the images taken with the D FA*50 mm are anything to go by. https://www.flickr.com/photos/kennychi/40669342715
I also find it interesting that Ricoh have a fisheye zoom lens on the road map. Didn't they jointly develop a ASP-C fish eye in the past?

---

Last edited by BROO; 06-17-2018 at 06:29 AM.

[Winder]

Ouch! So mean to Tokina.

It's true. The Samyang 135mm F/2 is better than the Canon 135L. The 35mm f/1.4 and the 50mm F/1.4 for the Sony FE mount are really good lenses for the money. Tokina has not shown near the improvement in quality that Samyang or Sigma have over the years. Even Tamron with its SP line of lenses is rivaling the big names in terms of image quality and construction. Tokina has been pretty stagnate.

[aurele]

It's true. The Samyang 135mm F/2 is better than the Canon 135L. The 35mm f/1.4 and the 50mm F/1.4 for the Sony FE mount are really good lenses for the money. Tokina has not shown near the improvement in quality that Samyang or Sigma have over the years. Even Tamron with its SP line of lenses is rivaling the big names in terms of image quality and construction. Tokina has been pretty stagnate.

Samyang better than Canon ? Opticaly maybe. Construction wise not at all ! Canon lenses, may be far from perfect, but the build quality of their L lens, remains a very good one. Far better than Samyang manual one, where you have to try many copies to get one good.

[normhead]

It's true. The Samyang 135mm F/2 is better than the Canon 135L. The 35mm f/1.4 and the 50mm F/1.4 for the Sony FE mount are really good lenses for the money. Tokina has not shown near the improvement in quality that Samyang or Sigma have over the years. Even Tamron with its SP line of lenses is rivaling the big names in terms of image quality and construction. Tokina has been pretty stagnate.

Does Tokina actually design and build lenses ro do they just license what they can and make the designs available to other brands?

If Tokina hasn't kept up, maybe it's because pentax hasn't tossed them any any bones lately.

[BROO]

Does Tokina actually design and build lenses ro do they just license what they can and make the designs available to other brands?

If Tokina hasn't kept up, maybe it's because pentax hasn't tossed them any any bones lately.

Norm. Are you familiar with the Tokina Vista cine lenses?

[Reed]

Actually recent ATX-Pro Tokina zooms are very good(70-200/4 is awesome in build and accuracy terms) , but lens coating they used is decades behind even when compared with old Sigma lenses. Not to mention Pentax old Smc.

[reh321]

I like my 10-20mm, even though I agree on color rendition: I have to fiddle a little bit in the HSL panel to get the color(s) I want.

I like my 70-300mm APO, too. It's plastic rubbish, but great glass. Lightweight anyway, and I can use it with my MZ-S. I wish there was a FF digital back for that camera, or the (FF) MZ-D would exist.

Gesendet von meinem Mi A1 mit Tapatalk

When I was a child "Made in Japan" was a joke; my Dad used to talk about a Japanese town named Usa, which put "Made in Usa" on their products to fool Americans. He lived long enough for Japanese goods to surpass US goods in quality.

I see similar progression for "plastic". When I was a child, goods made of plastic were junky; today, supersonic aircraft are made of space-age "plastics". In 1995, I switched from Pentax to Canon because Canon lenses were clearly superior in my view; over the next twenty years I had two different kit lenses {28-80mm for 35mm and 18-55mm for APS-C} each with a plastic mount. Neither lens ever gave me any trouble. Canon lenses were lighter than Pentax lenses - they also focused much faster. Amongst Pentax and Nikon users, "plastic" is a joke, but I have seen what others have done with plastics, and I believe "writing off" plastics is making a mistake.

Now, finally, I come back to the subject here. I have both of the Sigma lenses. When I was a Canon user, with all the fine lenses out there, the Sigma 10-20mm was the lens I valued the most {for cost/performance reasons}, and I really missed it when I moved back to Pentax in 2015. I was very happy when I could get the K-mount version of that lens. I won't claim it is the best lens in that range, but it's entirely acceptable. I know it has a lot of glass in it; it feels like it has a lot of metal also - but, that should not be the issue ... it is well-built, regardless of what it is made of. The 70-300mm APO lens is also very good; when I tested lenses at 300mm on my Q-7, this lens placed even with Pentax's 55-300 @ f5.6, and slightly better at apertures smaller than that.

[normhead]

Amongst Pentax and Nikon users, "plastic" is a joke, but I have seen what others have done with plastics, and I believe "writing off" plastics is making a mistake.

What does lenrentals.com say? Both mounts break, plastic is easier and cheaper to repair. Metal mounts when they suffer from drop that involves leverage type force on the lens, tend to take out the mount, and the hardware the supports the mount. Plastic generally just takes out the mount. They found no difference in performance.

[awscreo]

I'm guessing there's a good reason behind the move, otherwise they'd keep it exclusive. Maybe joining forces means more resources for R&D, which is good for us in the long run.

[normhead]

Norm. Are you familiar with the Tokina Vista cine lenses?

No... I have no cause to use Cine lenses. There are probably a ton of other lenses for other formats I know nothing about, swell. But I assume you're lying they are actually Tokina designs.

My familiarity with Tokina is wiht the 20-35, reputed to be the same as the Pentax 20-35 by some, and the 50-135, ditto. SO what you are saying is they have their own lens design department? Or do they just convert other's lens designs to other mounts? Or in the case of the 20-35, the same mount with less build quality or something.

[BROO]

.

My familiarity with Tokina is wiht the 20-35, reputed to be the same as the Pentax 20-35 by some, and the 50-135, ditto. SO what you are saying is they have their own lens design department? Or do they just convert other's lens designs to other mounts? Or in the case of the 20-35, the same mount with less build quality or something.

you can read what I am saying Norm the above quote is what you are saying.

[reh321]

What does lenrentals.com say? Both mounts break, plastic is easier and cheaper to repair. Metal mounts when they suffer from drop that involves leverage type force on the lens, tend to take out the mount, and the hardware the supports the mount. Plastic generally just takes out the mount. They found no difference in performance.

When I was in high school, the first time I tried to change oil on my own I managed to cross-thread the plug. My Dad explained they make the plug out of a softer metal and the oil pan out of better stuff, because replacing the plug is a lot cheaper and easier. I guess a plastic mount follows a similar philosophy.

[LensBeginner]

When I was in high school, the first time I tried to change oil on my own I managed to cross-thread the plug. My Dad explained they make the plug out of a softer metal and the oil pan out of better stuff, because replacing the plug is a lot cheaper and easier. I guess a plastic mount follows a similar philosophy.

Little trick - maybe you already know it.
To put a screw in without risking of ruining it, slowly start screwing it in the wrong direction (counterclockwise), until you hear the "clock" of it dropping one thread, then screw it normally.
This way it will be in the optimum position, lined up with the threads on the hole.

[normhead]

.
you can read what I am saying Norm the above quote is what you are saying.

You said they make some excellent Cine lenses. They also made an excellent 50-135 2.8.
What 'm asking is, do we know where the design originated?

From wiki...

Tokina Co., Ltd. (株式会社トキナー Kabushiki-gaisha Tokinā) is a Japanese manufacturer of photographic lenses and CCTV security equipment.

Tokina - Wikipedia

A brief google search I can find no reference to a design department, only referred to as manufacturer. And no where can I find a list of Tokina designed lenses broken down by where the original design came from. We all know the 18-270. 15-30 and 24-70 are Tamron designs. I can find no such list for Tokina. So the question is still unanswered.

I really like references with posts like that.

[LensBeginner]

You said they make some excellent Cine lenses. They also made an excellent 50-135 2.8.
What 'm asking is, do we know where the design originated?

The 50-135 should have been a joint venture with Pentax (or licensed design).
Tokina made its own barrel etc.