Tamron 28-200

Just got my Tamron 28-200 3.8/5.6 super II lens in the mail.
This should be the same lens as pentax allso sold as a 28-200 allthough I do not know if the Pentax version was the Super-II edition which has a minimum focus distance of 49cm.
The lens looks great, I bought it for less then half the new price and the lens is new, it is from the new old stock from a camera shop.
The only downside is that it looks slightly intimidating when you walk around with this lens with the hood on. The filter diameter for this lens is 72mm so it has a HUGE front element.

For it's zoom range, it's an admirable performer and won numerous awards.
I'm sure you'll be pleased with it and it'll look like a big pro lens....even if it doesn't quite perform like one!

Sounds like you bagged a bargain, let us know how you get on - digital, film or both?

I'm going to use it on my DS.
I bought it as a replacement for my Pentax 80-200 4.5-5.6 lens which will join the MZ-10 on Ebay shortly together with a Pentax 35-80 lens. Selling a 'complete' kit with two zoom lenses will be a little easier.
Allthough a 28 lacks wideangle range on a DSLR but for most days it will be more then adequate for a walking-about-lens. This will primarily be on my camera with the 18-55 for the shots which need a wider angle. So my kit is pretty complete now for my taste. I closed the gap between the 18-55 range of the kit lens and the 80-200 range of my old zoom.
Together with my Pentax-A 50mm 1.7 and a Sigma 50mm 2.8 Macro I can do most things I want to do. (allthough I'll probably start drooling over some other lens very shortly but I have to keep my girlfriend happy as well )

It was the Tamron I'd originally considered when I was looking for a 28-200 lens for use on family days out etc. I went with the Pentax one in the end mainly because the costs were similar and it was reputed to have a better multi-coating, however the Tamron was getting good reviews at the time.

If I recall correctly the close focus on the Pentax is something like 52cm so there might well be a later model of Tamron than the one the Pentax was based on.

My Pentax 28-200 was a better performer than the other consumer lenses I had at the time (FA 28-80 and FA 100-300 - both powerzooms) and still performs quite well on digital, although the 1.5x multiplier does limit the usefulness of the wide end considerably. On the plus side the ability to vary the ISO setting makes the long end easier to hand-hold.

This thing about the different coating on the Pentax and Tamron version. I have never seen any real proof on this.
From what I have seen it has mostly been rebranding. And why not, why develop your own things when you can buy them somewhere else. As long as it on the same level of quality.
Just that Tamron hasn't the letters SMC printed on the lens it doesn't mean that the coating is exactly the same.

I don't really agree with that, but I guess it's easy to test, just take a any pentax lens and any third party one, shoot the sun and see what happens...

If Pentax write "SMC" on a lens, it will be super-multi-coated.

I think it is highly unlikely that Pentax would supply SMC glass to Tamron for use in their own lenses. If they did that, there would be no point in buying Pentax, and no justification for the higher prices.

If Pentax WERE to allow Tamron to use SMC glass, you can bet that they would make Tamron write SMC on the lens, and pay extra for the privilege.

G

What difference should I see then? When I look at the elements of the lenses I see no difference in colour of the coating between SMC lenses and the Tamron.

I would find it strange to believe that Tamron would produce a lens which then is moved to pentax just for coating. On the other hand if the the production is large enough they could make a special pentax run for which pentax supplies the coating.

Or pentax supplied/coated the glass that tamron used for the production run.

less flare

So?


Agree
I Agree with Don

As far as I know SMC is more than marketing gimmick and it's been Pentax's signature for years; is easy to test, I don't have a Pentax vs Tamron same lens version, but maybe some other member can help us with that; Otherwise we can keep discussing the topic forever

In case someone wants to test it for us:
http://www.prime-junta.net/pont/How_to/ha_Testing_lenses/a_How_to_test_a_lens.html?page=9

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/lens-flare.htm

I do own a Sigma zoom, but I don't think comparing that with a total different Pentax lens would be fair; that's why it would be great to have the same lens by Pentax and Tamron for this.

We could even bet some money

SMC (Super Multi-Coating) is, as we all know, absolutely superb and one of Pentax's strengths.

If the Tamron does not have SMC (and I believe that it doesn't), then it will have Tamron's own BBAR (Broad-Band Anti-Reflection) coating, which is also highly regarded.
From a Tamron product brochure; "....as many as 7 coating layers are deposited on each glass-to-air surface. The result: significantly increased light transmission, virtual elimination of flare and internal reflections, and a beautifully crisp and accurate rendition of even the most subtle colours in your pictures."

SMC might be the best but I doubt there'll be much, if any noticeable difference in performance.

I must admit that Tamron don't claim that you can stub a cigarette out on it though

Interestingly, Photodo give the Pentax a poor score of 1.7, while the Tamron scores a more respectable 2.7

That's why I thought I would like to know how much difference does this make nowadays, among other things I tend to give an extra point to pentax when deciding for a lens because of the coatings; How much difference does it make? I don't know, but I'd like to see it (although another aspect not easy to test is how much time will they last, are they going to start peeling after a couple of years, etc)

Having found another Tamron brochure, I can now confirm that the 28-200 does indeed feature BBAR multi-coating.

I assume the Pentax has SMC and I agree with George's reasoning as to why, but my FA lens brochure circa 1995 does not list the 28-200 (first produced around '98 I think) - can anyone confirm one way or the other?

Fernando, I have a number of 15-20 year old Tamron Adaptall 2 lenses and there's no sign of the BBAR coating deteriorating on any of them.

Well, that sounds like enough to me

I have a Pentax-FA 28-200 f3.8-5.6 IF&AL, acquired 2nd hand a few months ago and it has SMC printed on it. Mine feels a bit ancient, is a bit sloppy and therefore suffers a little from creep. Is there any way of working out its age from the serial number (3762835)?

Details in the usual place confirm SMC but you can't quite read the SMC print in the picture which is just above the print of "1:3.8-5.6":

http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/lenses/zooms/short/FA28-200f3.8-5.6.html

Glyn