Tamron 28-75mm vs Pentax DFA 24-70mm

<p>I would like to hear from anyone who has had experiences with both lenses as to their pros and cons, especially if used on a K-1</p>

<p>I shoot landscapes, macro, weddings, functions, families and other things.<br /> I’m currently using a K-3II as my main body. I’ve gotten by for a number of years with the best lenses I could afford at the time; Tamron 28-75 2.8, Sigma 70-200 2.8, Tamron 17-35 2.8-4. My 28-75 is around 10 years old and has served me well and has seen lots of use plus some knocks and drops. I sent it to be serviced but was advised that it had resolution and focus issues as well as a loose barrel (not surprised about these and confirm some suspicions) and would cost about $AUD300 and need to be sent to Japan (from Australia) taking around 4 weeks.</p>

<p>I want to take my photography more seriously and earn more of my income from it so, my plans are to eventually upgrade to a K-1 (and possibly the Pentax 15-30mm 2.8 and DFA 70-200 2.8). Right now I need to decide about replacing my 28-75 with the same lens for around $AUD500 or go all out for the Pentax DFA 24-70 for $AUD2000. I’m not interested if it is a rebadged Tamron unless someone can confirm that it is totally Tamron – Maybe it is a Tamron barrel with Pentax glass? And even then, the real question is: is it better than the 28-75 in performance and handling and actual use?</p>

<p>I had the 24-70 f4 FA (if that is the same lens) which I used on film. What I didn't like about it was that, with a regular (non-slim) polarizer, there was serious vigenetting. Other than that it was a nice light film lens. Sorry, that may not be very helpful for you.</p>

 

<p>The Pentax DFA 24-70 is the Tamron without VR, since the K-1 has VR.<br>

Think about weight. The K-1 is a heavy camera, and the DFA is a heavy lens.</p>

<p>The zoom range is actually greater with the Pentax 24-70mm, which is why it is somewhat larger with a filter size of 82mm. It is full-frame for the K-1 and film bodies, and also nicer for alternate use on your K-3, since 24mm still provides a wide-angle view. Although it is essentially the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8, it is an upgraded version of that model, since you get WR construction and the Pentax coatings, which many have said offer superior performance for clarity and in dealing with flare. The Tamron version has received excellent reviews. The Pentax version should fare even better with its upgraded coatings and WR. The Tamron version, however, costs less. Sigma also makes a 24-70mm f/2.8, but again without WR construction, etc.</p>

<p>The Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 remains a very good value with very good performance, if it satisfies all your needs. </p>

 

<p>Douglas, I assume he's talking about the new DFA<em><strong>24</strong></em>-70/2.8, not the old FA<em><strong>28</strong></em>-70/4.</p>

<p>Dave, Another likely difference between the modern Tamron/Pentax 24-70/2.8 vs. the old Tamron 28-75/2.8 -- am I correct in my assumption that the old Tamron used body-screw-driven AF, probably without quickshift (handling difference), while the new DFA24-70 probably offers both? I'd also guess that in-body corrections (CA, distortion, etc.) for the new lens are supported, probably not for the old Tamron. I'm also assuming that the new lens is sealed, the old lens, not. There are probably other handling differences, I believe on the newer lens the focus ring is closer to the body and likely doesn't turn when focusing (this you should confirm if it matters to you).</p>

<p>You might want to look for comparison of the Tamron-badged 24-70/2.8 for other mounts. Presumably the Pentax-badged version isn't too different, even if there are some differences in physical construction WR/SR, coatings etc. As decent as the venerable 28-75 is, I would be surprised if the newer lens didn't offer improved CA and border performance. For example, for Canon 5D FF - <a href="http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/418-tamron_2875_28_5d">28-75</a> vs. <a href="http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/741-tamron2470f28eosff">24-70</a>. I wouldn't be surprised if the better resolving lens better takes advantage of the K-1's higher-pixel-count sensor as well.</p>

<p>Adam, you raise some interesting points that had been in the background for me. <br>

1) You are correct about the Quick-Shift focussing - none on the 28-75 and yes on the new D FA24-70 2.8. This would probably be very handy especially covering weddings and events. Also having SDM - I've never had it before, which I guess would be much quicker, surer and quieter than the old screwdrive.<br>

2) You are probably right re in body corrections: http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/k-1/feature/index.html<br>

3) Yes, new lens sealed, old not<br>

4) Will look into the comparison you offered.</p>

<p>I'm also thinking that the new body would be more advanced &/or matched to newer bodies better with overall improved image quality.</p>

<p>Thanks for your thoughts,<br>

Dave</p>

<dl><dd></dd><dt>Quick-Shift Focus system</dt></dl>

<p>Though I responded to Dave on the other site, I'll put some thoughts here for the record. The other day I took advantage of some free time to spend several hours shooting with the K-1 and the DFA 24-70mm. Going in I was pretty skeptical and even had put the lens up for sale, figuring that it was too big and heavy and just not worthy of the cost (I got it as part of a package deal).</p>

<p>Well so much for assumptions. I found the DFA 24-70mm a joy to use. It balances quite well on the K-1 (I don't have the grip). Quiet with very good optics. The AF was spot on, really a non-issue. The lens has a wide band near the front element that is used for zooming, whereas the focusing band is closer to the camera body. This layout works really well, as my left hand could then help support the lens in a natural way.</p>

<p>This is a professional lens and was required to give the K-1 some cred out of the chute. While I do wish it was lighter, the big negative for some is the ridiculous markup Pentax applies to offset the bargain price of the K-1. In the Canon world the cost of the Tamron is substantially less, which also reflects the general perception of the lens as being good but not Canon L Mark II great. I'm seeing gently used versions of the Tamron lens (which only differs in minor ways to me) going for $600.</p>

<p>That all said, I'm keeping the lens as a convenient high-quality event and landscape tool. Down the road I can see the allure of brand new fast Pentax primes released in 24mm, 35mm, and 50mm focal lengths, but the key words for the zoom are <em>now</em> and <em>convenient</em>.</p>

<p>ME</p>

<p>Here in the US, B&H offers this Pentax lens for about $1.300. Nikon's equivalent AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8 is offered for about $1,800. It does have some convenience advantage in its 77mm filter design, a common size with other pro type fast lenses, but my impression from test results I've seen is no better for IQ than the Pentax/Tamron lens. Speaking of size and weight, the Nikon lens is about 4oz. heavier and nearly 1" longer! It is also not a VR lens, so no shake reduction is to be had when using their lens, while with Pentax SR in the camera body is available with any lens.</p>

<p>As others have said above, the Pentax upgrades are real. The SDM and quick-shift are very nice to have, WR sealing is a definite advantage, and the special Pentax coatings include scratch and smudge resistance, and an HD coating. After my original DA 55-300mm suffered an accident slightly damaging the front filter threads, I decided to replace it with a new one, the same lens but now with the HD coating. I was surprised to find I have been getting noticeably better results than with the old lens!</p>

<p><strong>While I do not have expieriance with the other lenses mentioned, I do with the </strong></p>

<h1><strong>Tamron 28-75mm. I think this lens is one of the very best lenses one can ever own for the money. It is light and quite sharp, especially stopped down by 1/3 of a stop. With my Pentax gear, this was always one of my favorite lenses. Now with my Nikon gear, it is again a favorite. It especially shines with a full frame sensor. If I were to ever purchase a K-1, This would be the first lens I would buy. Truth be told, to this day, I hold firm that Pentax produces the best Jpegs out of the camera. I miss that. But I digress. </strong></h1>

<p>I agree Javier, I'm using one of those on my K-1 and it's a great combo and a much better FL on FF than crop. The only complaints I have are it flares easily and not usually in a pleasing way and it's not sealed. I can usually work around those. </p>

<p>I just discovered that the Tamron version does have "moisture resistant" construction. I believe this is a first for 3rd party offerings. For Nikon and Canon mounts it also includes shake reduction, unusual for this focal length, and definitely attractive for those using these brands. B&H has it for about the same price as the Pentax brand version, however, although now Tamron is offering Canikon owners a temporary $200 rebate. </p>

<p>From what I read, the Tamron 28-75mm wasn't so hot on a full frame camera. The APS-C cropped sensor hid the soft corners and edges but full frame shows the weakness. Here's a review on photozone.de that shows the failings on a full frame Canon 5D (not a Pentax K-1). Read especially page two and the Resolution evaluations....</p>

<p>Let's try again...<br>

From what I read, the Tamron 28-75mm wasn't so hot on a full frame camera. The APS-C cropped sensor hid the soft corners and edges but full frame shows the weakness. Here's a review on photozone.de that shows the failings on a full frame Canon 5D (not a Pentax K-1). Read especially page two and the Resolution evaluations....</p>

<p>http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/418-tamron_2875_28_5d?start=1</p>

<p>I read that too but for general use including landscapes where sharp edges matter I'm not seeing it in any significant way. Maybe I just have a really good copy?</p>

<p>Thank you to those that gave informative comparisons and thoughtful replies. My apologies for taking so long to reply. A significant change in family circumstances recently has me with much less time than my already busy life had (I am now caring for my two year old daughter full time, plus working my day job).</p>

<p>I ended up buying a Pentax 24-70 from the Australian Pentax webstore at a 10% discount (AUD$1800). Why? On paper it would seem to be the best full frame normal zoom available with a 2.8 aperture.</p>

<p>Initial impressions are that although it is not a light weight, it feels perfectly at home on my K-3II with grip. It feels good in the hand with the zoom and focus rings well placed. It didn’t take much to get used to the zoom being out the front and now feels natural.</p>

<p>I was not impressed with the sharpness of images initially, but I did some focus accuracy checks and found it was back focussing. This info:</p>

<p>

<p> about Dot Tuning was quite helpful. Using this Focus Pyramid:</p>

<p><a href="

<p>seemed to confirm what I was seeing with dot tuning. I calibrated the lens to +5.</p>

<p>I shot a wedding two weeks ago in a dimly lit chapel using ISO 1600 (mostly), f2.8 @ 1/60. Initial results seem quite good. I will post something when time permits.</p>

<p>Thanks again,</p>

<p>Dave</p>