HD Pentax-D FA 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 ED PLM WR SR & HD Pentax-DA★ 50-135mm f/2.8 ED PLM

**Rondec** · 03-20-2022, 03:15 AM

Originally posted by Apas

Well, I saw sample images and most of them were stunning, agree. But I found more than one, and more than five reviews/opinions from reliable source, with sample images as proof, which clearly indicated that there was an issue with quality control of that particular lens. Well, to be honest I found few very enthusiastic user opinions about IQ of that lens, with very soft sample images attached, taken with wide open lens, and this is another example that in some occasions a new toy turning on owner's wishful thinking mode ... Even if only one per 20 units was affected I don't like to became the owner of this one, especially as in my country Pentax is not existing in form of any service or official dealer, so exchange of this lens may be difficult. I know, however, that there are many very happy users of this piece of glass across the planet, and they have reasons to be so...

---------- Post added 03-20-22 at 02:16 AM ----------

That's interesting - can you link a source, please? I am asking, as any source I found so far says that there was cooperation, or lens was designed TOGETHER by Tokina and Pentax - but to be honest I had more important things to do and this research wasn't any priority in my life, thus I may skip something... However, for sure there is one design (whoever did it) and two clones, one branded by Pentax and one by Tokina, and both statements that Tokina is a clone of Pentax and Pentax is a clone of Tokina are true from formal logic point of view.

The patents show that Pentax designed the 100 macro, 10-17 FE, 16-50 and 50-135 and hence own the patents to them. The same is true for the more recently released DFA *50. On the other hand, the DA 12-24 was designed by Tokina and Pentax licensed the optical formula from them.

This has all been litigated numerous times on the Forum.

I would comment further that the 50-135 is an excellent lens optically, the only issue in the past has been the SDM which is both slow and prone to failure. I'm sure they can (and will) tweak the design -- in particular if they are planning to release it with PLM, but the issues with this lens are not optical.

Mistral75 · 03-20-2022, 03:27 AM - **4 Likes**

The optical design of the 50-135mm f/2.8 was patented by Pentax. Tokina use it under licence.

On the basis of this design, Pentax and Tokina each designed their own lens with specific barrel, autofocus mechanism and so on.

Both are optically similar (only 'similar', not identical since their coatings differ) and mechanically completely different.

Neither is a clone of the other.

Apas · 03-20-2022, 04:31 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Rondec

The patents show that Pentax designed the 100 macro, 10-17 FE, 16-50 and 50-135 and hence own the patents to them. The same is true for the more recently released DFA *50. On the other hand, the DA 12-24 was designed by Tokina and Pentax licensed the optical formula from them.

This has all been litigated numerous times on the Forum.

I would comment further that the 50-135 is an excellent lens optically, the only issue in the past has been the SDM which is both slow and prone to failure. I'm sure they can (and will) tweak the design -- in particular if they are planning to release it with PLM, but the issues with this lens are not optical.

@Rondec, MIstral75 - thanks for clarification, this piece of information was missing from my knowledge base. I considered this lens few years ago and performed some research, but mostly focused on reviews and samples, and in few occasions a form of cooperation between Pentax and Tokina with development of this lens was mentioned.

Kunzite · 03-20-2022, 04:49 AM - **1 Like**

Every single time there is at least one troll claiming that a Pentax lens must be a Sigma or Tamron or Tokina. Once, some dude said a Pentax prime resembles a Tamron perfectly, then exemplified... with the picture of a Tamron zoom.
We need something stronger than someone saying something on the internet (articles included)

bladerunner6 · 03-20-2022, 10:21 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by Kunzite

Every single time there is at least one troll claiming that a Pentax lens must be a Sigma or Tamron or Tokina. Once, some dude said a Pentax prime resembles a Tamron perfectly, then exemplified... with the picture of a Tamron zoom.
We need something stronger than someone saying something on the internet (articles included)

Unfortunately we live in a world where someone can just say anything on the Internet and they feel it becomes a fact.

thibs · 03-20-2022, 11:09 AM

You all forgot the 35 Limited macro, also licensed to Tokina.

texandrews · 03-20-2022, 11:34 AM - **4 Likes**

It is exceptionally important to know whether a lens is designed by Pentax and then licensed on to Tokina, or vice versa, or it's a Tamron design...& etc. Probably this is more important than any other possible knowledge one could have. I will spend much more time thinking about this from now on.

Kunzite · 03-20-2022, 11:41 AM

Originally posted by thibs

You all forgot the 35 Limited macro, also licensed to Tokina.

Nope. Although I'd like to forget about it, as Tokina took the beautiful Limited and transformed it into such an ugly thing!

Kunzite · 03-20-2022, 11:50 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by texandrews

It is exceptionally important to know whether a lens is designed by Pentax and then licensed on to Tokina, or vice versa, or it's a Tamron design...& etc. Probably this is more important than any other possible knowledge one could have. I will spend much more time thinking about this from now on.

The reason we are discussing this to an exaggerated extent is because of these well intended gentlemen always willing to educate us how Pentax cannot possibly design a lens, thus every Pentax lens must be a Tamron, Sigma, or whatever.

thibs · 03-20-2022, 12:12 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Nope. Although I'd like to forget about it, as Tokina took the beautiful Limited and transformed it into such an ugly thing!

Hahahaha yep, that one really is ugly.

**StiffLegged** · 03-20-2022, 12:20 PM - **1 Like**

Well, whoever designs, makes or markets a new 70-300 for Pentax, I’d like to think I’ll be able to retire the FA 80-320 I still occasionally use.

**TwoUptons** · 03-20-2022, 06:07 PM

I will admit, after finding out the 70-200 f4 wasn't a native Pentax design, I was a tiny bit hesitant...
The price, on the other hand, made me a lot more hesitant... it just hasn't broken that value equation for me... if it was a $700 lens, maybe... but at $1,000? my F 70-210 still works...

I hope the 70-300 (regardless of who designed, tweaked, or whatever) hits the right spots on the performance/value curve...
And I'll admit to being very happy with the 55-300 (not PLM) I have now for the KP.
Pentax did that one right... and like everyone else, I am hoping the do the same quality in a DFA without breaking the bank...

-Eric

**jersey** · 03-21-2022, 05:42 AM

^^^^
Not gonna happen, 55-300 PLM is a budget lens. If new lenses will be on pair IQ wise with all other new lenses (be it perfection of 16-50 DA* or pixie dust of 21 FAL) then the price will be similarly high. I would be surprised if it was lower then 1500$.

Kunzite · 03-21-2022, 05:47 AM

The D FA 28-105 is surprisingly good for its price; I expect the 70-300 will be quite good (though obviously not a high-end lens).

**Rondec** · 03-21-2022, 06:25 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

The D FA 28-105 is surprisingly good for its price; I expect the 70-300 will be quite good (though obviously not a high-end lens).

I agree. The 55-300 PLM is a well thought of lens -- fast focusing. It still isn't an f4 or f2.8 constant aperture lens. If you need one of those, there are options out there that will be better. I own the DFA *70-200 f2.8 and I wouldn't get rid of it just because I bought a 70-300 variable aperture zoom, but there would certainly be times that due to weight, etc I chose the cheaper lens.

My experience is that Pentax consumer zooms often punch above their weight, even though they still have their flaws -- among which are relatively slow apertures.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Introducing the HD Pentax-DA★ 16-50mm f/2.8 ED PLM AW	Mistral75	Pentax News and Rumors	143	07-20-2021 10:56 AM
Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE vs Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 Apo DG	tsode	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	06-28-2020 03:55 PM
The WR in HD DA 55-300mm f/4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE	ThorSanchez	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	09-25-2018 08:08 AM
DA-L 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED Versus HD PENTAX-DA 55-300mm f/4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE	NickTent	Pentax K-S1 & K-S2	22	08-15-2018 04:29 PM
★★NOW IN STOCK★★Pentax K-5 Limited Edition★★	Chuck-B&H	Ask B&H Photo!	11	03-31-2011 05:29 AM

03-20-2022, 03:15 AM	#61
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Originally posted by Apas Well, I saw sample images and most of them were stunning, agree. But I found more than one, and more than five reviews/opinions from reliable source, with sample images as proof, which clearly indicated that there was an issue with quality control of that particular lens. Well, to be honest I found few very enthusiastic user opinions about IQ of that lens, with very soft sample images attached, taken with wide open lens, and this is another example that in some occasions a new toy turning on owner's wishful thinking mode ... Even if only one per 20 units was affected I don't like to became the owner of this one, especially as in my country Pentax is not existing in form of any service or official dealer, so exchange of this lens may be difficult. I know, however, that there are many very happy users of this piece of glass across the planet, and they have reasons to be so... ---------- Post added 03-20-22 at 02:16 AM ---------- That's interesting - can you link a source, please? I am asking, as any source I found so far says that there was cooperation, or lens was designed TOGETHER by Tokina and Pentax - but to be honest I had more important things to do and this research wasn't any priority in my life, thus I may skip something... However, for sure there is one design (whoever did it) and two clones, one branded by Pentax and one by Tokina, and both statements that Tokina is a clone of Pentax and Pentax is a clone of Tokina are true from formal logic point of view. The patents show that Pentax designed the 100 macro, 10-17 FE, 16-50 and 50-135 and hence own the patents to them. The same is true for the more recently released DFA *50. On the other hand, the DA 12-24 was designed by Tokina and Pentax licensed the optical formula from them. This has all been litigated numerous times on the Forum. I would comment further that the 50-135 is an excellent lens optically, the only issue in the past has been the SDM which is both slow and prone to failure. I'm sure they can (and will) tweak the design -- in particular if they are planning to release it with PLM, but the issues with this lens are not optical.

03-20-2022, 03:27 AM - 4 Likes	#62
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527	The optical design of the 50-135mm f/2.8 was patented by Pentax. Tokina use it under licence. On the basis of this design, Pentax and Tokina each designed their own lens with specific barrel, autofocus mechanism and so on. Both are optically similar (only 'similar', not identical since their coatings differ) and mechanically completely different. Neither is a clone of the other.

03-20-2022, 04:31 AM - 1 Like	#63
Apas Junior Member Join Date: May 2020 Posts: 40	Originally posted by Rondec The patents show that Pentax designed the 100 macro, 10-17 FE, 16-50 and 50-135 and hence own the patents to them. The same is true for the more recently released DFA 50. On the other hand, the DA 12-24 was designed by Tokina and Pentax licensed the optical formula from them. This has all been litigated numerous times on the Forum. I would comment further that the 50-135 is an excellent lens optically, the only issue in the past has been the SDM which is both slow and prone to failure. I'm sure they can (and will) tweak the design -- in particular if they are planning to release it with PLM, but the issues with this lens are not optical. @Rondec, MIstral75* - thanks for clarification, this piece of information was missing from my knowledge base. I considered this lens few years ago and performed some research, but mostly focused on reviews and samples, and in few occasions a form of cooperation between Pentax and Tokina with development of this lens was mentioned.

03-20-2022, 04:49 AM - 1 Like	#64
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Every single time there is at least one troll claiming that a Pentax lens must be a Sigma or Tamron or Tokina. Once, some dude said a Pentax prime resembles a Tamron perfectly, then exemplified... with the picture of a Tamron zoom. We need something stronger than someone saying something on the internet (articles included)

03-20-2022, 10:21 AM - 2 Likes	#65
bladerunner6 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 2,080	Originally posted by Kunzite Every single time there is at least one troll claiming that a Pentax lens must be a Sigma or Tamron or Tokina. Once, some dude said a Pentax prime resembles a Tamron perfectly, then exemplified... with the picture of a Tamron zoom. We need something stronger than someone saying something on the internet (articles included) Unfortunately we live in a world where someone can just say anything on the Internet and they feel it becomes a fact.

03-20-2022, 11:09 AM	#66
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	You all forgot the 35 Limited macro, also licensed to Tokina.

03-20-2022, 11:34 AM - 4 Likes	#67
texandrews Moderator Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Baltimore Photos: Albums Posts: 3,397	It is exceptionally important to know whether a lens is designed by Pentax and then licensed on to Tokina, or vice versa, or it's a Tamron design...& etc. Probably this is more important than any other possible knowledge one could have. I will spend much more time thinking about this from now on.

03-20-2022, 11:41 AM	#68
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by thibs You all forgot the 35 Limited macro, also licensed to Tokina. Nope. Although I'd like to forget about it, as Tokina took the beautiful Limited and transformed it into such an ugly thing!

03-20-2022, 11:50 AM - 1 Like	#69
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by texandrews It is exceptionally important to know whether a lens is designed by Pentax and then licensed on to Tokina, or vice versa, or it's a Tamron design...& etc. Probably this is more important than any other possible knowledge one could have. I will spend much more time thinking about this from now on. The reason we are discussing this to an exaggerated extent is because of these well intended gentlemen always willing to educate us how Pentax cannot possibly design a lens, thus every Pentax lens must be a Tamron, Sigma, or whatever.

03-20-2022, 12:12 PM	#70
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by Kunzite Nope. Although I'd like to forget about it, as Tokina took the beautiful Limited and transformed it into such an ugly thing! Hahahaha yep, that one really is ugly.

03-20-2022, 12:20 PM - 1 Like	#71
StiffLegged Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2018 Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,633	Well, whoever designs, makes or markets a new 70-300 for Pentax, I’d like to think I’ll be able to retire the FA 80-320 I still occasionally use.

03-20-2022, 06:07 PM	#72
TwoUptons Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,223	I will admit, after finding out the 70-200 f4 wasn't a native Pentax design, I was a tiny bit hesitant... The price, on the other hand, made me a lot more hesitant... it just hasn't broken that value equation for me... if it was a $700 lens, maybe... but at $1,000? my F 70-210 still works... I hope the 70-300 (regardless of who designed, tweaked, or whatever) hits the right spots on the performance/value curve... And I'll admit to being very happy with the 55-300 (not PLM) I have now for the KP. Pentax did that one right... and like everyone else, I am hoping the do the same quality in a DFA without breaking the bank... -Eric

03-21-2022, 05:42 AM	#73
jersey Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2017 Location: 3City agglomeration Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,058	^^^^ Not gonna happen, 55-300 PLM is a budget lens. If new lenses will be on pair IQ wise with all other new lenses (be it perfection of 16-50 DA* or pixie dust of 21 FAL) then the price will be similarly high. I would be surprised if it was lower then 1500$.

03-21-2022, 05:47 AM	#74
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	The D FA 28-105 is surprisingly good for its price; I expect the 70-300 will be quite good (though obviously not a high-end lens).

03-21-2022, 06:25 AM	#75
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Originally posted by Kunzite The D FA 28-105 is surprisingly good for its price; I expect the 70-300 will be quite good (though obviously not a high-end lens). I agree. The 55-300 PLM is a well thought of lens -- fast focusing. It still isn't an f4 or f2.8 constant aperture lens. If you need one of those, there are options out there that will be better. I own the DFA *70-200 f2.8 and I wouldn't get rid of it just because I bought a 70-300 variable aperture zoom, but there would certainly be times that due to weight, etc I chose the cheaper lens. My experience is that Pentax consumer zooms often punch above their weight, even though they still have their flaws -- among which are relatively slow apertures.