[MikeyBugs95]

hank you for your help.
However, I will stay at my price ...
Sigma is 4 months old and it's like, at this price I prefer to send to Sigma for a bayonet change on Sony E

You can certainly try but Sigma won't change the mount from K to E. Their Global mount exchange service is only applicable between lenses offered in both mounts and mounts that are either SLR or mirrorless mounts. They can't interchange between SLR and mirrorless mounts.

[Wheatfield]

I've never sold a lens. Ever. Nor a camera, for that matter. I couldn't part with the attached memories.

I just listed off in my head lenses from 24mm to 200mm that I figure I am done with, especially 50mm lenses that I have acquired a lot of over the years. I'm not using them, probably never will, and I've recently gotten past the whoever dies with the most toys wins attitude.
My goal will be to sell a dozen and a half lenses and half a dozen or more film bodies if anyone still uses them, and use the proceeds to put at least a dent in the cost of the D FA* 85/1.4 and D FA 80-200/4 lenses.

[RobA_Oz]

With the reported impending announcement of the new Tokina 85 and “leaked” specifications, two questions arise for me: when will we hear similarly for the D FA85/1.4 (the answer, I know, being “when they’re good and ready”); and given the obvious cooperation between the two companies on the recent 50/1.4 lenses, why there was no obvious sharing of optical design between the two 85s?

I realise this Tokina lens is for the Sony E-mount, which has a shorter flange distance than the Pentax K-mount, and that it’s F1.8, whereas the Pentax lens is F1.4. Perhaps the Tokina has the advantage of being smaller (and most likely cheaper) than its E-mount rivals, and a version based on the Pentax lens (presumably with a different rear element group, to account for the different flange distance) would have been too large and costly.

All of which makes me wonder how the sales of the Tokina 50 are going, too.

[Mistral75]

^ The Tokina atx-m 85mm f/1.8 FE is bigger and heavier than its peers, Sony and Zeiss Batis for instance. Its look and the published specifications are suspiciously close to those of the Viltrox PFU RBMH 85mm f/1.8 STM, also in Sony E mount:

- optical formula: 10 elements in 7 groups for both
- minimum focusing distance: 80cm for both
- maximum magnification: 0.125x for both
- filter size: 72mm for both
- maximum diameter: 80mm for both
- length: 93.23mm for the Tokina lens vs. 92mm for the Viltrox lens
- weight: 645g for the Tokina lens vs 626g for the Viltrox lens.

Let's wait until we know the AF motor type and see the optical diagram of the Tokina to conclude...

[Rondec]

With the reported impending announcement of the new Tokina 85 and “leaked” specifications, two questions arise for me: when will we hear similarly for the D FA85/1.4 (the answer, I know, being “when they’re good and ready”); and given the obvious cooperation between the two companies on the recent 50/1.4 lenses, why there was no obvious sharing of optical design between the two 85s?

I realise this Tokina lens is for the Sony E-mount, which has a shorter flange distance than the Pentax K-mount, and that it’s F1.8, whereas the Pentax lens is F1.4. Perhaps the Tokina has the advantage of being smaller (and most likely cheaper) than its E-mount rivals, and a version based on the Pentax lens (presumably with a different rear element group, to account for the different flange distance) would have been too large and costly.

All of which makes me wonder how the sales of the Tokina 50 are going, too.

I think it is pretty unlikely that the Tokina 85 is related at all to the Pentax DFA 85 f1.4. Seems totally different. That said, it wouldn't be suprising if Tokina licenses the formula for the DFA *85 when Pentax is done with it, just as they did with the DFA *50. As far as I know, they haven't made an 85mm f1.4 in the past (except for the Cine lens), but it is an obvious focal length to have in their line up.

[WorksAsIntended]

Is there any difference in optical quality between the DFA* 50 and the Tokina one?
I ask because I had the chance to compare the Tokina against the Sigma ART on a D850 and the Sigma did extremly well.

However, I am very pleased with my DFA* anyway and cannot compare to Tokina now.

[Rondec]

Is there any difference in optical quality between the DFA* 50 and the Tokina one?
I ask because I had the chance to compare the Tokina against the Sigma ART on a D850 and the Sigma did extremly well.

However, I am very pleased with my DFA* anyway and cannot compare to Tokina now.

I believe that the Tokina is made by Tokina and the Pentax made by Pentax. The Tokina is manufactured in Japan and the Pentax in Vietnam. The ephotozine review of both lenses did give slightly different performance levels with the Pentax having better edge sharpness wide open, as I recall, although the optical formula should be the same, manufacturing tolerances are probably different between factories.

Probably the biggest difference is in the lens coatings, where Pentax's should be quite a bit better.

[WorksAsIntended]

I read about those coatings over and over, but to me it sounds like pixy dust.

What do you expect those coatings actually do? Looking at it from a physisists standpoint, I can only see real value if it changes polarisation, absorbs scattered light or if you are able to put on different thicknesses over the single lenses radius to work the same way an aspherical element does.

What does the coating actually do?

[Reed]

I read about those coatings over and over, but to me it sounds like pixy dust.

What do you expect those coatings actually do? Looking at it from a physisists standpoint, I can only see real value if it changes polarisation, absorbs scattered light or if you are able to put on different thicknesses over the single lenses radius to work the same way an aspherical element does.

What does the coating actually do?

Try out older than Opera series Tokinas They for years did decent RMC(rainbow multi coating) job. I would like to know if Opera and Firin series was in any way improved in that matter from ATX-Pro lenses. One can get very creative in use of rainbow flares and halos with that stuff

[Serkevan]

A couple of older RMC lenses do make a very nice rainbow flare effect - if you are into it. I have to upload some of the pics when I'm home.

[clackers]

I read about those coatings over and over, but to me it sounds like pixy dust.

What do you expect those coatings actually do? Looking at it from a physisists standpoint, I can only see real value if it changes polarisation, absorbs scattered light or if you are able to put on different thicknesses over the single lenses radius to work the same way an aspherical element does.

What does the coating actually do?

The main purpose of the coating is to retain light transmission and contrast, WAI.

The surface of both sides of each element reflect/scatter an amount of light, and this really adds up so that the picture is very flat, with no true blacks.

Pentax made history with its SMC coatings that Zeiss lusted after and licensed in a deal that included supplying Pentax with their 28mm Distagon to sell.

All the big camera companies ended up licensing from Pentax and 98 percent transmission from a single surface is possible. The patent has now expired, but all photographers benefited from the technology.

Pentax has continued to iterate, and there's a Cameraville video where the guy shows the difference in IQ between the old FA35 f2 and the new one last year. Only the coatings are different.

[RobA_Oz]

^ The Tokina atx-m 85mm f/1.8 FE is bigger and heavier than its peers, Sony and Zeiss Batis for instance. Its look and the published specifications are suspiciously close to those of the Viltrox PFU RBMH 85mm f/1.8 STM, also in Sony E mount:

- optical formula: 10 elements in 7 groups for both
- minimum focusing distance: 80cm for both
- maximum magnification: 0.125x for both
- filter size: 72mm for both
- maximum diameter: 80mm for both
- length: 93.23mm for the Tokina lens vs. 92mm for the Viltrox lens
- weight: 645g for the Tokina lens vs 626g for the Viltrox lens.

Let's wait until we know the AF motor type and see the optical diagram of the Tokina to conclude...

Thanks. I just found the specs etc on the Sony and the Zeiss. From the looks of things, the Tokina is going to have a tough time up against the similarly-priced Sony lens, unless it offers better performance (and possibly weather-sealing, which the quoted specifications don’t indicate). Then there’s the Samyang offering – the field’s getting pretty crowded, something Pentax doesn’t have to worry about.

[WorksAsIntended]

The main purpose of the coating is to retain light transmission and contrast, WAI.

The surface of both sides of each element reflect/scatter an amount of light, and this really adds up so that the picture is very flat, with no true blacks.

Pentax made history with its SMC coatings that Zeiss lusted after and licensed in a deal that included supplying Pentax with their 28mm Distagon to sell.

All the big camera companies ended up licensing from Pentax and 98 percent transmission from a single surface is possible. The patent has now expired, but all photographers benefited from the technology.

Pentax has continued to iterate, and there's a Cameraville video where the guy shows the difference in IQ between the old FA35 f2 and the new one last year. Only the coatings are different.

So the just try to correct non perferct surfaces on the single lenses with, I assume, in best case identical optical behaviour as the glass hat. I can see that this is a very valid thing.

[reh321]

So the just try to correct non perferct surfaces on the single lenses with, I assume, in best case identical optical behaviour as the glass hat. I can see that this is a very valid thing.

I understand it to be a very complicated art. Prisms demonstrate that different colors refract differently when light hits a change in materials at an angle, so a lens depends on having several aspherical {each of called such because it has a surface which is not a sphere; simple physics uses a lens which is a section of a sphere} lenses together to get the desired effect.

[Rondec]

I read about those coatings over and over, but to me it sounds like pixy dust.

What do you expect those coatings actually do? Looking at it from a physisists standpoint, I can only see real value if it changes polarisation, absorbs scattered light or if you are able to put on different thicknesses over the single lenses radius to work the same way an aspherical element does.

What does the coating actually do?

From a practical standpoint, they reduce flares and improve light transmission. This is especially useful in a lens as complex as the DFA *50 (15 elements is enough that without coatings you could have disastrous results when taking any type of images with a strong light source in them).