[davidmanze]

Here's one to cheer you up Kunzite .......

The Pentax FDA 150-450mm up against the Fuji 100-400mm !!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ig5a3W2YaLg

[Kunzite]

Here's one to cheer you up Kunzite .......

Guess again - I find that guy mildly annoying.
I don't care he's pro-Pentax at the moment. I don't trust he's doing a thorough job in his tests and comparisons.
OTOH, the D FA 150-450 is an excellent lens.

---

The glass is the same. The coatings are the same. The outer shell is the same, just different rings and script.

It is not a Tamron clone, it is a rebadged Tamron.
Luckily' I'd say, because that Tamron is a great lens and Pentax' f2.8 design does not render bachground bokeh nearly as smooth.

Actually...
The glass might not be the same (I don't quite believe this, but the Pentax version is said to have 2 anomalous dispersion elements).
The coatings might not be the same, the Pentax version is said to have HD and SP. Let's see if we can verify this.
The mechanics are not the same, the Pentax version has a focus limiter.
The inner barrel is not the same, there's at least one anti-reflexion baffle missing from the Tamron.

And the Pentax D FA* 70-200 f/2.8 is optically superior.

[Brightcolours]

Here's one to cheer you up Kunzite .......

Guess again - I find that guy mildly annoying.
I don't care he's pro-Pentax at the moment. I don't trust he's doing a thorough job in his tests and comparisons.
OTOH, the D FA 150-450 is an excellent lens.

---

The glass is the same. The coatings are the same. The outer shell is the same, just different rings and script.

It is not a Tamron clone, it is a rebadged Tamron.
Luckily' I'd say, because that Tamron is a great lens and Pentax' f2.8 design does not render bachground bokeh nearly as smooth.

Actually...
The glass might not be the same (I don't quite believe this, but the Pentax version is said to have 2 anomalous dispersion elements).
The coatings might not be the same, the Pentax version is said to have HD and SP. Let's see if we can verify this.
The mechanics are not the same, the Pentax version has a focus limiter.
The inner barrel is not the same, there's at least one anti-reflexion baffle missing from the Tamron.

And the Pentax D FA* 70-200 f/2.8 is optically superior.

The glass is the same. The coatings are the same, despite pentax marketing blurb. A rebadged Pentax.

The Tamron is better (renders quite a bit nicer, without the CA issue)

[davidmanze]

Here's one to cheer you up Kunzite .......

Guess again - I find that guy mildly annoying.
I don't care he's pro-Pentax at the moment. I don't trust he's doing a thorough job in his tests and comparisons.
OTOH, the D FA 150-450 is an excellent lens.

 I think he does great job ......... his choice of subjects such as the pylons against a bright cloudy sky shows up the weaknesses of sharpness/ contrast of the Fuji etc..  all too easy to  think because he's not shooting (boring) brick walls or test charts that his method is flawed ..... apart from the silly bear ..... and there's no doubt his on Pentax's side.
 The D FA 150-450mm is a great lens ...... however, it didn't take him long to show that the 70-200mm F2.8 is a focus breather ...... he's smart!!
 

---

The glass is the same. The coatings are the same. The outer shell is the same, just different rings and script.

Actually...
The glass might not be the same (I don't quite believe this, but the Pentax version is said to have 2 anomalous dispersion elements).
The coatings might not be the same, the Pentax version is said to have HD and SP. Let's see if we can verify this.
The mechanics are not the same, the Pentax version has a focus limiter.
The inner barrel is not the same, there's at least one anti-reflexion baffle missing from the Tamron.

And the Pentax D FA* 70-200 f/2.8 is optically superior.

That sounds like DPreview forum talk to me ....

I think Pentax meant "anonymous elements"

 Tamron sell a removable tripod foot for the lens at 120 euros ..... there's not one supplied ........

[mst]

Tamron sell a removable tripod foot for the lens at 120 euros ..... there's not one supplied ........

Most manufacturers try to make some extra money with a tripod collar for their 70-200/4 zoom: Tamron, Tokina, Canon, Nikon... only Sony supplies one with the lens.

[Kunzite]

The glass is the same. The coatings are the same, despite pentax marketing blurb. A rebadged Pentax.

The Tamron is better (renders quite a bit nicer, without the CA issue)

You're just trolling.
First, you don't have a way of knowing if lens elements or coatings are the same.
Second, the lens is not a rebadge but a customization of the Tamron. There are physical differences, besides the cosmetic outer ones, the mount and electronics/firmware.
Third, you're lying that the Tamron is better.

---

That sounds like DPreview forum talk to me ....

The DPReview forum talk is filled with non-Pentaxians and Pentaxians with old gear that have no intention of ever buying Pentax again, but are heavily criticizing the brand for all sorts of reasons. Including that Nikon dude abusing the '.' key.
Probably not negative enough for you.

[Brightcolours]

The glass is the same. The coatings are the same, despite pentax marketing blurb. A rebadged Pentax.

The Tamron is better (renders quite a bit nicer, without the CA issue)

You're just trolling.
First, you don't have a way of knowing if lens elements or coatings are the same.
Second, the lens is not a rebadge but a customization of the Tamron. There are physical differences, besides the cosmetic outer ones, the mount and electronics/firmware.
Third, you're lying that the Tamron is better.

---

Nuh, I am stating simple facts.

First, we do know the elements are the same. Pentax only decided to point out a 2nd kind of glass more than Tamron did. You can't just exchange one element of the same shape, in the same configuration, with glass that had different dispersion characteristics, and expect good results. 
We also know that the coatings are the same. Just because Pentax decides to call their coatings "HD" means nothing, except maybe for Pentax fanboys. Canon, Nikon, Tamron, Sigma, Sony, Zeiss, Pentax update their coatings as the technology in the sector advances, and this Tamron lens uses... good Tamron coatings. The "SP" Pentax nonsense reads as follows: 

"This lens features SP (Super Protect) Coating on its front surface. Applied by means of a PENTAX-exclusive fluorine deposition process, this coating is highly repellent to water, grease and dirt, making it easy to wipe off stains such as fingerprints. This frees the photographer from worries in outdoor photography.OTE:About KAF4 lens mount"

Exclusive... Right. Except that Nikon, Canon and others (including Tamron) also use such a fluorine coating for exactly the same purpose. 

Lets read what Tamron writes about this Tamron lens:

"Fluorine Coating for protection and safe cleaning

The front surface of the lens element is coated with a protective fluorine compound that is water- and oil-repellant. The lens surface is easier to wipe clean and is less vulnerable to the damaging effects of dirt, dust, moisture and fingerprints."

Oh, right.

Second, the lens is rebadged Tamron, built by Tamron just like the Canon and Nikon version are built by Tamron. There are physical differences, besides the cosmetic outer ones: the mount and electronics/firmware, between all 3 versions. Only the Canon and Nikon version, with VC, focus fast due to Canon and Nikon bodies, and the Pentax version will focus slower and more hesitant, so they felt the need to put the now VC-redundant button to use as a focus limiter.

Third, you are silly calling that a lie. The Tamron is a better lens. It renders.. better. It has... way less CA. It does not... shrink to 135mm at MFD like the Pentax does. The Tamron is objectively better.

[davidmanze]

The glass is the same. The coatings are the same, despite pentax marketing blurb. A rebadged Pentax.

The Tamron is better (renders quite a bit nicer, without the CA issue)

You're just trolling.
First, you don't have a way of knowing if lens elements or coatings are the same.
Second, the lens is not a rebadge but a customization of the Tamron. There are physical differences, besides the cosmetic outer ones, the mount and electronics/firmware.
Third, you're lying that the Tamron is better.

---

Nuh, I am stating simple facts.

First, we do know the elements are the same. Pentax only decided to point out a 2nd kind of glass more than Tamron did. You can't just exchange one element of the same shape, in the same configuration, with glass that had different dispersion characteristics, and expect good results. 
We also know that the coatings are the same. Just because Pentax decides to call their coatings "HD" means nothing, except maybe for Pentax fanboys. Canon, Nikon, Tamron, Sigma, Sony, Zeiss, Pentax update their coatings as the technology in the sector advances, and this Tamron lens uses... good Tamron coatings. The "SP" Pentax nonsense reads as follows: 

"This lens features SP (Super Protect) Coating on its front surface. Applied by means of a PENTAX-exclusive fluorine deposition process, this coating is highly repellent to water, grease and dirt, making it easy to wipe off stains such as fingerprints. This frees the photographer from worries in outdoor photography.OTE:About KAF4 lens mount"

Exclusive... Right. Except that Nikon, Canon and others (including Tamron) also use such a fluorine coating for exactly the same purpose. 

Lets read what Tamron writes about this Tamron lens:

"Fluorine Coating for protection and safe cleaning

The front surface of the lens element is coated with a protective fluorine compound that is water- and oil-repellant. The lens surface is easier to wipe clean and is less vulnerable to the damaging effects of dirt, dust, moisture and fingerprints."

Oh, right.

Second, the lens is rebadged Tamron, built by Tamron just like the Canon and Nikon version are built by Tamron. There are physical differences, besides the cosmetic outer ones: the mount and electronics/firmware, between all 3 versions. Only the Canon and Nikon version, with VC, focus fast due to Canon and Nikon bodies, and the Pentax version will focus slower and more hesitant, so they felt the need to put the now VC-redundant button to use as a focus limiter.

Third, you are silly calling that a lie. The Tamron is a better lens. It renders.. better. It has... way less CA. It does not... shrink to 135mm at MFD like the Pentax does. The Tamron is objectively better.

  HD coatings has a patent ....... I would have thought as they are advertised,  it would be a "mis-representation of the product" to not have them ..... surely the fluorine coating is the top coating ......
  Pentax have been known for using better coatings on their re-badged lenses in the past .... we will have to see !!
   Christopher Frost's review showed the Tamron was not that flare resistant.

"Use of the high-grade, "multi-layer HD Coating" to the optics optimizes the overall lens coating performance, while assuring edge-to-edge sharpness and minimizing flare and ghost images in back-lit situations."

Unless Pentax are flat out publishing falsehoods!

  Good call on the focus limiter switch !!

[Kunzite]

Nuh, I am stating simple facts.

First, we do know the elements are the same. Pentax only decided to point out a 2nd kind of glass more than Tamron did. You can't just exchange one element of the same shape, in the same configuration, with glass that had different dispersion characteristics, and expect good results. 
We also know that the coatings are the same. Just because Pentax decides to call their coatings "HD" means nothing, except maybe for Pentax fanboys. Canon, Nikon, Tamron, Sigma, Sony, Zeiss, Pentax update their coatings as the technology in the sector advances, and this Tamron lens uses... good Tamron coatings. The "SP" Pentax nonsense reads as follows: 

"This lens features SP (Super Protect) Coating on its front surface. Applied by means of a PENTAX-exclusive fluorine deposition process, this coating is highly repellent to water, grease and dirt, making it easy to wipe off stains such as fingerprints. This frees the photographer from worries in outdoor photography.OTE:About KAF4 lens mount"

Exclusive... Right. Except that Nikon, Canon and others (including Tamron) also use such a fluorine coating for exactly the same purpose. 

Lets read what Tamron writes about this Tamron lens:

"Fluorine Coating for protection and safe cleaning

The front surface of the lens element is coated with a protective fluorine compound that is water- and oil-repellant. The lens surface is easier to wipe clean and is less vulnerable to the damaging effects of dirt, dust, moisture and fingerprints."

Oh, right.

Second, the lens is rebadged Tamron, built by Tamron just like the Canon and Nikon version are built by Tamron. There are physical differences, besides the cosmetic outer ones: the mount and electronics/firmware, between all 3 versions. Only the Canon and Nikon version, with VC, focus fast due to Canon and Nikon bodies, and the Pentax version will focus slower and more hesitant, so they felt the need to put the now VC-redundant button to use as a focus limiter.

Third, you are silly calling that a lie. The Tamron is a better lens. It renders.. better. It has... way less CA. It does not... shrink to 135mm at MFD like the Pentax does. The Tamron is objectively better.

You do not know the elements are the same. You have no way of knowing; and I will not take your word for it unless you somehow are an expert in optics. And even then I will be suspicious.
Unfortunately, it's not easily to test this.

You do not know the coatings are the same; and name calling cannot substitute such knowledge. HD is designating a specific type of coating, so does SP - and they both work.
Fortunately, we might be able to test this. No, not you.

You can keep claiming it's a rebadge as much as you wish, you're still wrong. It's a customization. I already explained why.
You never tried the PLM lens, did you?

Last but not least, you are silly persisting on a lie.

[Brightcolours]

We do know that the glass is the same. Only you make up that it must have a special Penatx sauce, because "Pentax".

Like I said before, you can't just exchange an element with the same shape element with different light passing properties and expect good results. That you think one has to be "an optical expect" to know that just shows your lack of understanding of anything related to lenses.

What Pentax calls "SP" is the same as others (Canon, Tamron, Nikon for instance) use, and Tamron specifically mentions about this lens. Claiming it must be different because "Pentax" is just silly. And what Pentax' marketing department calls "HD" is their own issue. That they are happy to call Tamron's coatings of this lens "HD" is upto them.

I scaled the Tamron and rebadged "Pentax"Tamron published MTF charts so they match height and width, to make it easier for you to see that the rebadged Tamron is a rebadged Tamron:



It is a rebadge of a Tamron. Of course it is a customisation for Pentax, just like the Canon and Nikon versions can not be the same, and Pentax has no way of dealing with in lens IS, it is a bit more customised than when you compare the Canon and the Nikon versions.

And even you must be aware of that this is not a PLM lens, right?

And it certainly is not a lie that the Tamron is a better lens (does not shrink to under 135mm at MFD like the Pentax, does not have the CA issues the Pentax has https://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-hd-pentax-d-fa--70-200mm-f-2-8-ed-dc-aw-review-29351 , and renders a lot nicer).