I have the Pentax FA20-35/4 but not the Tamron. No way to compare
them, but I have to say the Pentax FA20-35 competes well against
primes in this focal length range. I used and tested an FA20/2.8 as
well ... it is inevitably a better performer than the zoom, but by
only a relatively small increment of wide open sharpness and
rectilinear correction. Most of the time you would be hard pressed to
tell the difference.
The Tamron's gotten good marks from a couple of reviewers, including
Mike Johnston's column at Luminous Landscape.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/columns/sm-nov-04.shtml
I expect it's a very good lens ... better than the FA20-35 is hard to
say. Current rebates price it at $50 less than the Pentax. The
downside to me is that it's an inch longer, half and inch larger in
diameter, and nearly twice as heavy. Toss up...
I use the FA20-35 quite often instead of a prime in this focal length
range. I like the extra versatility and the 1 stop speed reduction
from the 20 and 28mm lenses is. I do have the FA35/2 as well ... that
two stop advantage can be very important sometimes.
Godfrey
Patrick Genovese wrote:
Hi what's the general consensus regarding the quality/performance of
Tamron's 17-35 or as it is officially known:
SPAF17-35MM F/2.8-4 Di LD Asph (IF)
http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/17_35mm.asp
how would it compare to say a Pentax 20-35 f/4
or a pentax fa20 f/2.8
I know that's not comparing like with like but the thing is I was
about to buy a 20 2.8 and got thinking whether the Tamron would be a
wiser choice ?
