Tokina 50-135 f/2.8 discontinued?!

jsherman999 · 10-29-2009, 10:49 AM

.

What are the implications of this, if true?

Could it mean that Pentax has canceled all orders for the lens due to the SDM issues, and that without the Pentax channel, it doesn't make sense for Tokina to continue the model?

Anyone hear if Pentax plans to discontinue the DA* 50-135 after current stock is sold?

link --> to possible FUD.

.

RBellavance · 10-29-2009, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by jsherman999

What are the implications of this, if true?

Could it mean that Pentax has canceled all orders for the lens due to the SDM issues, and that without the Pentax channel, it doesn't make sense for Tokina to continue the model?

Do you have evidence that the DA* was/is assembled/build by Tokina ?

My understanding was that the lens (like the DA*16-50) is a joint design, but is built by each company independently.

Quicksand · 10-29-2009, 11:18 AM

I don't think the Tokina versions are SDM (or whatever they call it on those systems), are they?

Gee, I wonder what RH thinks.

Wheatfield · 10-29-2009, 11:29 AM

It more likely means that Tokina isn't selling enough of them to warrant continuing producing them.
USM issues aside, I don't think the 50-135 is going anywhere.
It wouldn't surprise me if they release a MkII that has an improved USM, or possibly a USM only that will address the reliability issues with that lens.

arpaagent · 10-29-2009, 11:43 AM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

It more likely means that Tokina isn't selling enough of them to warrant continuing producing them.
USM issues aside, I don't think the 50-135 is going anywhere.
It wouldn't surprise me if they release a MkII that has an improved USM, or possibly a USM only that will address the reliability issues with that lens.

Although I have the current version and it's a great lens, a MkII with a true ring type USM would rock.

aybee · 10-29-2009, 12:33 PM

One of the UK magazines reviewed a MK2 version this month - no major changes from the mk1 I think it said.

EricT · 10-29-2009, 12:41 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

It more likely means that Tokina isn't selling enough of them to warrant continuing producing them.
USM issues aside, I don't think the 50-135 is going anywhere.
It wouldn't surprise me if they release a MkII that has an improved USM, or possibly a USM only that will address the reliability issues with that lens.

I agree with this. For some reason, this lens doesn't seem to generate much interest among the CaNikon crowd. I can't see why, though, a 70-200 equivalent with excellent IQ (and no SDM issues in the Tokina version) in a very compact form factor should be a very attractive lens, IMO.

RaduA · 10-29-2009, 12:50 PM

Originally posted by aybee

One of the UK magazines reviewed a MK2 version this month - no major changes from the mk1 I think it said.

I think you're confuse it with the 12-24.

Radu

jsherman999 · 10-29-2009, 12:50 PM

Originally posted by EricT

I agree with this. For some reason, this lens doesn't seem to generate much interest among the CaNikon crowd. I can't see why, though, a 70-200 equivalent with excellent IQ (and no SDM issues in the Tokina version) in a very compact form factor should be a very attractive lens, IMO.

.

Part of the reason for that may be that the Sigma 50-150 2.8 HSM II is out there.

Here's a quickie shootout I did - I like the 50-135 slightly more for it's close-focus AF
accuracy and slight edge in rendering overall, but the speed of that Sigma HSM on the
D90 was something to behold --> Shootout link.

Tokina may have just had a hard time competing with that lens, and decided to either
shelve it or come out with a ring-motor version, as speculated.

.

Jodokast96 · 10-29-2009, 01:58 PM

I think people would just rather have a 70-200, not a 70-200 equivilent, especially for about the same amount of cash. It's one reason why I've never bothered, it's just not a focal range I can really justify. It just doesn't seem quite wide enough for much, nor long enough for much else. 28-105 (if possible for f/2.8 throughout) may have been a better choice. Of course, that would have competed with the 16-50. Combined, they make a great duo, but seperately, the 50-150 just seems like a lost child.

Huh, how about that post #1000.

aybee · 10-29-2009, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by RaduA

I think you're confuse it with the 12-24.

Radu

Yep maybe, I cannot find any evidence for what I posted. Is there a 12-24 mk2? If so it may have been a review of that.

EricT · 10-29-2009, 03:16 PM

Yes, but for some reason, the 100-300mm lenses were never really popular on full frame. That may be because they are f/4 instead of f/2.8, though. In fact, that may be another reason why the 50-135mm isn't that popular, people who are interested in such a "pro-grade" lens for Canon/Nikon mount may want their gear to be full-frame capable.

MikePerham · 10-29-2009, 03:47 PM

Originally posted by EricT

Yes, but for some reason, the 100-300mm lenses were never really popular on full frame. That may be because they are f/4 instead of f/2.8, though. In fact, that may be another reason why the 50-135mm isn't that popular, people who are interested in such a "pro-grade" lens for Canon/Nikon mount may want their gear to be full-frame capable.

Actually, I think the reason the 70-200 were as popular was primarily because it is such a useful focal length and essentially replaced the 135mm primes in the market place. Certainly the f2.8 vs f4.0 and the smaller size had some bearing on that, but even 70-200 f4 lenses were more popular than 100-300 f4 lenses.

I find the 50-135 an excellent range and would prefer primes for anything longer. For that fact, I like primes for anything wider than the 16-50. That normal to mid tele range is very well covered by zooms.

philbaum · 02-01-2010, 04:00 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

It more likely means that Tokina isn't selling enough of them to warrant continuing producing them.
USM issues aside, I don't think the 50-135 is going anywhere.
It wouldn't surprise me if they release a MkII that has an improved USM, or possibly a USM only that will address the reliability issues with that lens.

I think Wheatfield is right. I use my 50-135 to shoot amateur theatre plays and it excels in that. also use it for cityscapes and tripod work at night. It has the exact range that i sell prints from most often. The 70-200 from the 3rd party vendors is much heavier and is missing the 50mm range. The photographer i shoot with on the playhouse events has a Canon 70-200 and is often changing it out for a shorter range zoom.

The 50-135 has been remarkably accurate regards its AF and the images are very good. manual focus its accurate and consistent. the lengthy hood turns out to be a blessing in the rain as it keeps droplets off the outer lens.

The only problems i see with the lens are:
a. too heavy and large for a lens on a hike
b. no tripod mount for the lens. without it, i really have to tighten on my tripod head 1/4" camera fastener to keep the lens from pivoting in the portrait orientation.
c. no SDM problems in the year since i bought it. perhaps Pentax will use this opportunity to fix that problem if not fixed already.

will likely keep the lens - just too dang good.

Blue · 02-01-2010, 10:41 PM

If the Tokina 50-135mm has the equivalent to SDM, they don't mention it. They do have a coating on the front lens equivalent to the SP coating.

Tokina

Are the Tokina lenses assembled in Vietnam? (That's rhetorical)

Edit: on another note, other than the 35mm and 100mm macro lenses, Tokina has no current prime lenses.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Tokina 50-135 f/2.8	Big G	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	03-26-2010 11:49 AM
Tokina AT-X 16.5-135 DX	blende8	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	12-12-2009 02:38 PM
Sigma Zoom Telephoto 135-400mm f/4.5-5.6 APO discontinued?	montezuma	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	05-19-2008 05:24 AM
What about the Tokina 16-50/50-135 combo?	MJB DIGITAL	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	03-12-2008 02:41 AM
Tokina 16-50 and 50-135	axl	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	01-08-2008 06:11 AM

10-29-2009, 10:49 AM	#1
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Tokina 50-135 f/2.8 discontinued?! . What are the implications of this, if true? Could it mean that Pentax has canceled all orders for the lens due to the SDM issues, and that without the Pentax channel, it doesn't make sense for Tokina to continue the model? Anyone hear if Pentax plans to discontinue the DA* 50-135 after current stock is sold? link --> to possible FUD. .

10-29-2009, 10:59 AM	#2
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	Originally posted by jsherman999 What are the implications of this, if true? Could it mean that Pentax has canceled all orders for the lens due to the SDM issues, and that without the Pentax channel, it doesn't make sense for Tokina to continue the model? Do you have evidence that the DA* was/is assembled/build by Tokina ? My understanding was that the lens (like the DA*16-50) is a joint design, but is built by each company independently.

10-29-2009, 11:18 AM	#3
Quicksand Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Central Ohio (formerly SF Bay Area) Posts: 1,519	I don't think the Tokina versions are SDM (or whatever they call it on those systems), are they? Gee, I wonder what RH thinks.

10-29-2009, 11:29 AM	#4
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,986	It more likely means that Tokina isn't selling enough of them to warrant continuing producing them. USM issues aside, I don't think the 50-135 is going anywhere. It wouldn't surprise me if they release a MkII that has an improved USM, or possibly a USM only that will address the reliability issues with that lens.

10-29-2009, 11:43 AM	#5
arpaagent Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Raleigh, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 803	Originally posted by Wheatfield It more likely means that Tokina isn't selling enough of them to warrant continuing producing them. USM issues aside, I don't think the 50-135 is going anywhere. It wouldn't surprise me if they release a MkII that has an improved USM, or possibly a USM only that will address the reliability issues with that lens. Although I have the current version and it's a great lens, a MkII with a true ring type USM would rock.

10-29-2009, 12:33 PM	#6
aybee New Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Hampshire UK Posts: 15	One of the UK magazines reviewed a MK2 version this month - no major changes from the mk1 I think it said.

10-29-2009, 12:41 PM	#7
EricT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 484	Originally posted by Wheatfield It more likely means that Tokina isn't selling enough of them to warrant continuing producing them. USM issues aside, I don't think the 50-135 is going anywhere. It wouldn't surprise me if they release a MkII that has an improved USM, or possibly a USM only that will address the reliability issues with that lens. I agree with this. For some reason, this lens doesn't seem to generate much interest among the CaNikon crowd. I can't see why, though, a 70-200 equivalent with excellent IQ (and no SDM issues in the Tokina version) in a very compact form factor should be a very attractive lens, IMO.

10-29-2009, 12:50 PM	#8
RaduA Guest	Originally posted by aybee One of the UK magazines reviewed a MK2 version this month - no major changes from the mk1 I think it said. I think you're confuse it with the 12-24. Radu

10-29-2009, 12:50 PM	#9
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237 Original Poster	Originally posted by EricT I agree with this. For some reason, this lens doesn't seem to generate much interest among the CaNikon crowd. I can't see why, though, a 70-200 equivalent with excellent IQ (and no SDM issues in the Tokina version) in a very compact form factor should be a very attractive lens, IMO. . Part of the reason for that may be that the Sigma 50-150 2.8 HSM II is out there. Here's a quickie shootout I did - I like the 50-135 slightly more for it's close-focus AF accuracy and slight edge in rendering overall, but the speed of that Sigma HSM on the D90 was something to behold --> Shootout link. Tokina may have just had a hard time competing with that lens, and decided to either shelve it or come out with a ring-motor version, as speculated. .

10-29-2009, 01:58 PM	#10
Jodokast96 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Erial, NJ USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,134	I think people would just rather have a 70-200, not a 70-200 equivilent, especially for about the same amount of cash. It's one reason why I've never bothered, it's just not a focal range I can really justify. It just doesn't seem quite wide enough for much, nor long enough for much else. 28-105 (if possible for f/2.8 throughout) may have been a better choice. Of course, that would have competed with the 16-50. Combined, they make a great duo, but seperately, the 50-150 just seems like a lost child. Huh, how about that post #1000.

10-29-2009, 03:03 PM	#11
aybee New Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Hampshire UK Posts: 15	Originally posted by RaduA I think you're confuse it with the 12-24. Radu Yep maybe, I cannot find any evidence for what I posted. Is there a 12-24 mk2? If so it may have been a review of that.

10-29-2009, 03:16 PM	#12
EricT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 484	Yes, but for some reason, the 100-300mm lenses were never really popular on full frame. That may be because they are f/4 instead of f/2.8, though. In fact, that may be another reason why the 50-135mm isn't that popular, people who are interested in such a "pro-grade" lens for Canon/Nikon mount may want their gear to be full-frame capable.

10-29-2009, 03:47 PM	#13
MikePerham Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Prince George, BC Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 642	Originally posted by EricT Yes, but for some reason, the 100-300mm lenses were never really popular on full frame. That may be because they are f/4 instead of f/2.8, though. In fact, that may be another reason why the 50-135mm isn't that popular, people who are interested in such a "pro-grade" lens for Canon/Nikon mount may want their gear to be full-frame capable. Actually, I think the reason the 70-200 were as popular was primarily because it is such a useful focal length and essentially replaced the 135mm primes in the market place. Certainly the f2.8 vs f4.0 and the smaller size had some bearing on that, but even 70-200 f4 lenses were more popular than 100-300 f4 lenses. I find the 50-135 an excellent range and would prefer primes for anything longer. For that fact, I like primes for anything wider than the 16-50. That normal to mid tele range is very well covered by zooms.

02-01-2010, 04:00 PM	#14
philbaum Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA Posts: 3,659	Originally posted by Wheatfield It more likely means that Tokina isn't selling enough of them to warrant continuing producing them. USM issues aside, I don't think the 50-135 is going anywhere. It wouldn't surprise me if they release a MkII that has an improved USM, or possibly a USM only that will address the reliability issues with that lens. I think Wheatfield is right. I use my 50-135 to shoot amateur theatre plays and it excels in that. also use it for cityscapes and tripod work at night. It has the exact range that i sell prints from most often. The 70-200 from the 3rd party vendors is much heavier and is missing the 50mm range. The photographer i shoot with on the playhouse events has a Canon 70-200 and is often changing it out for a shorter range zoom. The 50-135 has been remarkably accurate regards its AF and the images are very good. manual focus its accurate and consistent. the lengthy hood turns out to be a blessing in the rain as it keeps droplets off the outer lens. The only problems i see with the lens are: a. too heavy and large for a lens on a hike b. no tripod mount for the lens. without it, i really have to tighten on my tripod head 1/4" camera fastener to keep the lens from pivoting in the portrait orientation. c. no SDM problems in the year since i bought it. perhaps Pentax will use this opportunity to fix that problem if not fixed already. will likely keep the lens - just too dang good.

02-01-2010, 10:41 PM	#15
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	If the Tokina 50-135mm has the equivalent to SDM, they don't mention it. They do have a coating on the front lens equivalent to the SP coating. Tokina Are the Tokina lenses assembled in Vietnam? (That's rhetorical) Edit: on another note, other than the 35mm and 100mm macro lenses, Tokina has no current prime lenses.