Clarification on the new DFA 24-70mm f/2.8

There is a lot of confusion regarding this lens at the moment, and people are spreading misinformation like mad. So let us recap what we actually know, and what is speculation:

FACTS:

- The lens is a Tamron rebadge (obvious from the specs, confirmed by kenspo). It's a rebadge of a stabilized zoom, minus the VC.

- The original Tamron lens DOES HAVE WR, in a simplified ('crappy') form - if you check the Pentax DFA's page (the official one), you'll see that the sealing schematic for the zoom is unusually sparse and poor, so no superior Pentax ruggedness should be expected.

- The lens' focusing motor is (unbelievably) called SDM, but actually is just a ring USD motor from Tamron (voice coil).

- The lens' optics, at least for the Tamron, were designed and patented by Hirakawa Jun, father of the FA Limiteds. There are optical differences between both models, but until the optical element plan for the DFA is released, we won't know for sure. The DFA has one less anomalous dispersion element than the Tamron, and one more aspherical. Also, the Pentax version has the HD coatings, but no AeroBright surfaces, and also the SP coat on the front element.

SPECULATION:

- The small differences in the types of glass and arranging of the elements could make a big or small difference between the Tamron and Pentax versions. It's possible that Ricoh went for an additional aspherical element to further correct the design, taking advantage of the fact that there isn't a stabilization group anymore. Why they dropped one of the XR/AD elements could also be because of this, or for another reason.

- It's highly likely that the stabilization group on the Tamron lens will be effectively fixed, and not just put in "suspension". The removal of the motors to move the stabilization group could be responsible for the small reduction in weight. It could also lead to a substantial gain in performance, as the fact that most of these high-end normal zooms don't feature stabilization has been linked to inferior optical characteristics (Fujifilm even admitted to this in an interview, to explain why their 16-50mm f/2.8 lens has no OIS).

- The up and coming UWA fast zoom could be a rebadge of the Tamron 15-30mm f/2.8, considering how they adopted this design.

I personally find the rebranding of the Tamron a good decision, and the pricing reasonable. If Ricoh also rebrands the 15-30 it would make for a very good start for the FF system. I must admit that I totally expected Ricoh to license a design from some other maker, but the introduction of the Tokina 24-70mm f/2.8 had me convinced of a new partnership between THK and Ricoh, but I guess not (the fact that the Tokina has no VR pointed very much at a possible Pentax re-release).

I hope this post is useful for someone. I'll try to keep it updated with any new revelations that might happen in the near future.

Thanks so much for the useful points.
Good for pentax to begin with this affordable and capable lens.
I can't imagine how pentax could start a new system without such a lens which is essential to any ff system with 12 -24 and 70 -200.
--
pentaxian .

Conjure wrote:

http://www.lenstip.com/340.3-Lens_review-Tamron_SP_24-70_mm_f_2.8_Di_VC_USD_Build_quality_and_image_stabilization.html

http://www.ricoh-imaging.at/de/k-bajonett/beschreibung/hd-pentax-dfa-24-70mm-f2.8-ed-sdm-wr.html

Thanks a lot for the diagram comparison! Clearly, there aren't substantial differences between both lenses (put plainly, it seems like they're the same thing, Tamron probably just likes to hype glass more).

Thank you for putting this info together.

It would be a good idea to rebrand the Tamron 15-30mm which is a great lens unless Pentax can come-up with a better design !

Kharan wrote

- It's highly likely that the stabilization group on the Tamron lens will be effectively fixed, and not just put in "suspension". The removal of the motors to move the stabilization group could be responsible for the small reduction in weight. It could also lead to a substantial gain in performance, as the fact that most of these high-end normal zooms don't feature stabilization has been linked to inferior optical characteristics (Fujifilm even admitted to this in an interview, to explain why their 16-50mm f/2.8 lens has no OIS).

As a small point of correction, you are referring to the optically outstanding Fuji 16-55mm f2.8 and not the low priced 16-50 f3.5-5.6 OIS kit lens.

Thanks so much for the useful points.
Good for pentax to begin with this affordable and capable lens.
I can't imagine how pentax could start a new system without such a lens which is essential to any ff system with 12 -24 and 70 -200.
--
pentaxian .

I would hardly describe £1149 as affordable ; to my mind it is downright expensive .
--
With kind regards

Derek.

britcam wrote:

Kharan wrote

- It's highly likely that the stabilization group on the Tamron lens will be effectively fixed, and not just put in "suspension". The removal of the motors to move the stabilization group could be responsible for the small reduction in weight. It could also lead to a substantial gain in performance, as the fact that most of these high-end normal zooms don't feature stabilization has been linked to inferior optical characteristics (Fujifilm even admitted to this in an interview, to explain why their 16-50mm f/2.8 lens has no OIS).

As a small point of correction, you are referring to the optically outstanding Fuji 16-55mm f2.8 and not the low priced 16-50 f3.5-5.6 OIS kit lens.

Indeed! I was in a hurry and forgot to check the FL, thanks for the correction.

Thanks so much for the useful points.
Good for pentax to begin with this affordable and capable lens.
I can't imagine how pentax could start a new system without such a lens which is essential to any ff system with 12 -24 and 70 -200.
--
pentaxian .

I would hardly describe £1149 as affordable ; to my mind it is downright expensive .
--
With kind regards

Derek.

I am referring to the comptetions at the same range like the last version of nikon 24 -70. May be I used a wrong word. Sorry it is my not good language.
--
pentaxian .

Zvonimir Tosic wrote:

Indeed. With only small alterations, or changes to the Nikon D610, Ricoh can make a perfectly usable Pentax camera. For example, adding the SR module, and removing of the low-pass filter, will make the same effect the Tamron lens rebadge had: it creates a certain familiarity and a useful comfort zone.

Ricoh only removes certain elements and substitutes them with others, adds its own coatings instead of original coatings. And signs off with a familiar handwriting.

It is all in such little details, and Ricoh does it for the same reason: Jun Hirakawa, an ex Pentax employee, designed this Tamron lens, and perhaps a small team sacked from Pentax during the Hoya era, now works for Nikon, in the D610 team.

And that is exactly what Pentax users have been waiting for, haven't we: connect us with the 'roots' of our values, and build from there! A rebadged Tamron and a rebadged Nikon — is there a better thing to connect us with the precious past!?

So yes, we shall be the happiest through-OEM-reconnected family in the world!

-- hide signature --

Madamina, il catalogo è questo; Delle belle che amò il padron mio; un catalogo egli è che ho fatt'io; Osservate, leggete con me.

Hm, I don't think the Pentax FF will be a Nikon rebadge. For one thing, it'll be substantially smaller, and also quite likely heavier, if the mock ups hold true; also, I have this feeling that it'll be a speedy little camera, probably with a much quieter shutter, but also with the strangest omissions (same $hitty flash sync, no on board commander, low battery life, no LCD overlay in the viewfinder, no touchscreen, but also relatively sparse buttons, maybe even FluCard compatibility and no WiFi inside, etc.). When comparing the weights of the systems, I have this inkling that the Pentax might rival Sony for size and weight, when thinking of the whole setup.

But of course, it's all pure speculation:)

Thanks so much for the useful points.
Good for pentax to begin with this affordable and capable lens.
I can't imagine how pentax could start a new system without such a lens which is essential to any ff system with 12 -24 and 70 -200.
--
pentaxian .

I would hardly describe £1149 as affordable ; to my mind it is downright expensive .
--
With kind regards

Derek.

I am referring to the comptetions at the same range like the last version of nikon 24 -70. May be I used a wrong word. Sorry it is my not good language.
--
pentaxian .

I have to compare it with the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 EX I have in my Nikon kit at work - that is a very fine lens ( although too big and heavy ) which was only something like £500 when bought a few years back . The current Sigma equivalent is still a lot cheaper than the Tamron/Pentax lens , so I still think this new Pentax lens is too expensive .
--
With kind regards

Derek.

britcam wrote:

Kharan wrote

- It's highly likely that the stabilization group on the Tamron lens will be effectively fixed, and not just put in "suspension". The removal of the motors to move the stabilization group could be responsible for the small reduction in weight. It could also lead to a substantial gain in performance, as the fact that most of these high-end normal zooms don't feature stabilization has been linked to inferior optical characteristics (Fujifilm even admitted to this in an interview, to explain why their 16-50mm f/2.8 lens has no OIS).

As a small point of correction, you are referring to the optically outstanding Fuji 16-55mm f2.8 and not the low priced 16-50 f3.5-5.6 OIS kit lens.

I'm a Fuji shooter and I believe you're referring to the Fuji XF 18-55 f2.8-4.OIS kit lens which is every bit as good as the XF 16-55 f2.8 lens and a fair bit lighter.