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


DaveR

Link Posted 11/10/2016 - 12:48
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

I shoot landscapes, macro, weddings, functions, families and other things.
Iím currently using a K-3II as my main body. Iíve 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.

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.. 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. Iím not interested if it is a rebadged Tamron unless someone can confirm that it is totally Tamron Ė 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?
Last Edited by DaveR on 11/10/2016 - 13:03

Cayman

Link Posted 11/10/2016 - 18:22
i have both and have used them on the K1. Personally i prefer the Tamron because it is smaller and lighter (by quite some margin) and i get AF on my film bodies. The advantages of the Pentax are the 24mm (if you really need it but in real life the difference to me between 24 and 28 is not that much) and the WR (if you are out in the rain) but it is a seriously bulky and heavy piece of glass. I have no concerns about the image quality of either lens.

Helpful

AndrewA

Link Posted 11/10/2016 - 18:50
Have used both but only when I had the K5, and I also preferred the Tamron too.

It is an underestimated little lens, only surpassed by the Sigma 17-70 in my view.
Andrew

"I'm here because the whiskey is free" - Tyla

PPG link
Flickr link

python118

Link Posted 12/10/2016 - 09:40
I have the 28-75 and use it with the k3 am well pleased with it, cannot justify buying the24-70 as its price is a lot more pounds

Dave

stub

Link Posted 12/10/2016 - 12:17
Cant do a comparison But I love my Tamron 28-75. Never go anywhere without it. If the Pentax lens is better then it is some lens...
K-1Gripped K-1 ungripped K-5ii K7 Various lenses

Stuart..

Simonmac

Link Posted 12/10/2016 - 14:25
Cayman wrote:
i have both and have used them on the K1. Personally i prefer the Tamron because it is smaller and lighter (by quite some margin) and i get AF on my film bodies. The advantages of the Pentax are the 24mm (if you really need it but in real life the difference to me between 24 and 28 is not that much) and the WR (if you are out in the rain) but it is a seriously bulky and heavy piece of glass. I have no concerns about the image quality of either lens.

I have found that the difference at the wide angle end is far greater than that at the telephoto end. 24-28 is a big difference.
macmccreery.com
www.flickr.com/photos/simac/
www.500px.com/simac

StephenHampshire

Link Posted 12/10/2016 - 16:25
stub wrote:
Cant do a comparison But I love my Tamron 28-75. Never go anywhere without it. If the Pentax lens is better then it is some lens...

I struggle with the Tamron 28-75 on my K3, the AF is very inconsistent and prone to going off into the realm of fuzzy with seemingly no motive....my 17-50 on the other hand is an exemplar of autofocus - fast and precise, even in low light!
Everything Changes
http://www.flickr.com/photos/arleimages/

DaveR

Link Posted 14/10/2016 - 11:13
Cayman,
Have you really checked the difference in image quality for both lenses? especially wide open? ( I sometimes shoot in quite dim churches and poor lighting at various events).

Apart from being bulky and heavy, how does it handle? How does it feel to use it, to hold it (K-1 gripped or not), to use the zoom and focus rings?

Simonmac,
Have you used the D FA 24-70? and the 28-75?

Thanks guys,

Dave

Cayman

Link Posted 14/10/2016 - 19:24
I'm not in the habit of formally testing my lenses' resolution but I have rejected lenses in the past if they are not sharp. You might want to look on the US site for user reviews. I think you will find them very positive for both lenses. In terms of ergonomics the Pentax is slightly better as it has quick shift which the tamron does not, but as I said before the Pentax is very heavy and bulky. The zoom rings are very comparable.

Perhaps you do need 24mm for the insides of churches?
Last Edited by Cayman on 14/10/2016 - 19:40

DaveR

Link Posted 02/12/2016 - 09:39
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).

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.

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 didnít take much to get used to the zoom being out the front and now feels natural.

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:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zE50jCUPhM

about Dot Tuning was quite helpful. Using this Focus Pyramid:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MnywVqecJNI

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

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.

Thanks again,

Dave
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.