----- Original Message ----- From: "Jens Bladt" Subject: RE: Tokina AT-X 165 PRO DX 16-50mm and AT-X 535PRODXlenses50-135mmf2.8
> Well, nevertheless - over the years I have owned some very good Tokina > lenses. > In fact I use a 28-70mm 2.6-2.8 as my standard lens. And I recently had a > 2.5 90mm with extender that was absolutely excellent (I sold it abecause > it's very similar to my Tamron SP 2.5 90mm). So, to me Tokina lenses can > be > excellent alternatives to Pentax lenses. My Tokina 80-200/2.8 is a very good lens indeed, though my 17mm Tokina is only OK at best. They are capable of making very good lenses, though they also were capable of making some real bow-wows. I had a Tokina 24-40 that had so much barrel distortion that it was useless for anything other than horizonless scenics. I also own a few Pentax lenses, > that are quite bad. Nice house or not, keep that up and you'll be voted off the island. > > How ever it seems odd that I cant find any info on the Tokina AT-X 16-50mm > f2.8 with KAF mount. Does this not exist? And why is it priced much lower > than the Pentax 2.8 16-50mm? It wouldn't surprise me to find that there is an agreement between the two companies that on co-produced lenses, they don't get to market lenses for the manufacturer they are co-producing with. Historically Tokina has made a pretty good lens, but they aren't as mechanically solid as first party lenses, and their coatings are definitely not as good as Pentax coatings. Don't discount this, SMC is a pretty expensive way to coat lenses, and adds significantly to the cost of production. I'm satisfied that the results are worth the extra money. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
