[RGlasel]

I wonder if the PH-RBK hood will fit -- the DA*50-135 and 60-250 both use it and both also have a 67mm filter thread.

Probably not.




Pentax PH-RBC and Tamron 2C9FH (DA 18-135 and SP Di 90 respectively) have the same diameter opening and it is possible to put these hoods on the wrong lens, but only about 1/64th of a turn compared to a quarter turn on the right lens. In the male grooves, there are differences in how they taper, particularly at what distance along the groove that the taper changes. My PH-RBC is more worn than the Tamron hood, but it doesn't go any further on the Tamron lens than the other way around.

My only other comment is to point out that the tweaking done for the Pentax version of the 70-210 f4 doesn't appear to extend to building a cheap plastic hood with Pentax features to mate with a Tamron designed lens barrel. Tamron probably doesn't apply coatings in the same facility as the final assembly of lenses in Vietnam and once firmware is reprogrammed to provide a focus limiter instead of OIS, it doesn't cost extra to install Pentax specific firmware. I wouldn't read too much into other apparent differences between versions based on marketing material from two different companies.

[clackers]

Well, I gave up my K-1 to move to a 645z...so going back to that would sort of be a downgrade :-) And I had both the Tamron 70-200 and DFA 70-200 at various times with the K-1. So I have a pretty good idea what quality is in that focal range on FF. Had I hung on to the K-1, I'd be thinking about buying the 70-210 once it drops in price.



I fully understand what the 55-300 PLM is, and as you say, from my experience it punches above its weight. And I think those Pentax charts might make sense if one did have both a KP and K-1. But for just an APSC owner, buying the 70-210 and the TC puts one at $1500, and you won't be at F4 anymore. It's probably still better than the 55-300 PLM, but is it enough better to justify 3x cost and 3x size and weight?

I don't think that you personally moving to 645 is all that relevant to other people, Steve.

I wouldn't be using it for wildlife or sports or portraits, though. F4 is too slow, especially when the TC goes on.

It is full frame, but on APS-C it offers advantages over the current DA*60-250 (a good lens in itself)

[Kunzite]

Combat flare, not only with coatings, was high on the priority list.

Interesting. From what I see, the Tamron version doesn't have that baffle.

[clackers]

I wonder if this cooperation with Tamron will eventually go beyond just rebadging of some lenses from current Tamron's portfolio. Just like Panasonic & Leica team reached out to Sigma, maybe a joint initiative between Ricoh and Tamron will form and we'll see some entirely new lenses for either Pentax K mount, 645 mount or hypothetical mirrorless system from Ricoh.

I guess anything's possible, it's just that lens sales are dying like camera sales, so a project really has to be able to get its money back in a declining market. A joint project can either have economic sharing of cost or halving of profit.

Tamron will make lenses they don't sell themselves - a lot of Sony's, for instance.

And that's all Cosina does, make OEM lenses for camera companies like Zeiss and Sony.

---

Last edited by clackers; 01-24-2020 at 01:37 PM.

[Mistral75]

interesting, can you quote the source ?

The URL of the picture will give you the source.

Interesting. From what I see, the Tamron version doesn't have that baffle.

No, it does not.

[Mistral75]

(...)

My only other comment is to point out that the tweaking done for the Pentax version of the 70-210 f4 doesn't appear to extend to building a cheap plastic hood with Pentax features to mate with a Tamron designed lens barrel. Tamron probably doesn't apply coatings in the same facility as the final assembly of lenses in Vietnam and once firmware is reprogrammed to provide a focus limiter instead of OIS, it doesn't cost extra to install Pentax specific firmware. I wouldn't read too much into other apparent differences between versions based on marketing material from two different companies.

The HD Pentax-D FA 15-30mm and 24-70mm f/2.8 ED SDM WR are made in Japan and not assembled in Vietnam. They are manufactured by Tamron in a factory dedicated to high-end lenses for third parties (OEM or ODM or contract manufacturing) and to their own SP lenses.

I presume the HD Pentax-D FA 70-210mm f/4 ED SDM WR will be made in Japan as well but I'm not certain since the Tamron version is not an SP lens. What I'm sure of is that it will be manufactured by Tamron, not Ricoh.

[Mistral75]

(...)

Tamron will make lenses they don't sell themselves - a lot of Sony's, for instance.

And that's all Cosina does, make OEM lenses for camera companies like Zeiss and Sony.

Tamron also manufacture the Zeiss Batis lenses and patented the optical formula of some of them (e.g. Batis Distagon T* 18mm f/2.8 and Batis Sonnar 85mm f/1.8).

As for Cosina they indeed manufacture the Zeiss Otus, Milvus, Classic and ZM lenses but which Sony lenses?

[baro-nite]

Pentax PH-RBC and Tamron 2C9FH (DA 18-135 and SP Di 90 respectively) have the same diameter opening and it is possible to put these hoods on the wrong lens, but only about 1/64th of a turn compared to a quarter turn on the right lens. In the male grooves, there are differences in how they taper, particularly at what distance along the groove that the taper changes. My PH-RBC is more worn than the Tamron hood, but it doesn't go any further on the Tamron lens than the other way around.

Thanks for that, kind of what I expected. Oh well.

[Wheatfield]

interesting, can you quote the source ?

Controlling flare through any means possible is a given in lens design.

[WorksAsIntended]

Controlling flare through any means possible is a given in lens design.

Intresting enough in film making there are a lot of lenses that are stripped of the coatings to intentionally create such flares.

There are a few lenses out there that have two versions, film and photographie. Would be rather interesting to compare those on that matter.

[Wheatfield]

Intresting enough in film making there are a lot of lenses that are stripped of the coatings to intentionally create such flares.

There are a few lenses out there that have two versions, film and photographie. Would be rather interesting to compare those on that matter.

What people do with their lenses after taking delivery is beyond the control of the manufacturer. In half a century of being in this particular game, I have NEVER heard of a manufacturer going after flare as a design parameter.
Perhaps you have heard differently? I would be interested to see a citation for a lens that is designed with high flare levels as a design parameter.

[WorksAsIntended]

What people do with their lenses after taking delivery is beyond the control of the manufacturer. In half a century of being in this particular game, I have NEVER heard of a manufacturer going after flare as a design parameter.
Perhaps you have heard differently? I would be interested to see a citation for a lens that is designed with high flare levels as a design parameter.

I cannot deliver a quote right along but the Canon CN-E line for example mostly does not use coatings that reduce flairs.

[Kunzite]

I cannot deliver a quote right along but the Canon CN-E line for example mostly does not use coatings that reduce flairs.

Maybe. But then...
https://downloads.canon.com/nw/camera/misc-pages/4k-lenses/white-paper-what-...ce-4k-lens.pdf

[reh321]

Maybe. But then...
https://downloads.canon.com/nw/camera/misc-pages/4k-lenses/white-paper-what-...ce-4k-lens.pdf

Referral Denied

[Wheatfield]

I cannot deliver a quote right along but the Canon CN-E line for example mostly does not use coatings that reduce flairs.

Presuming this is true, it is not the same as going after flare as a design parameter.