Boris Liberman wrote:
Hi!
I realize that this has been discussed to dust (if there is such a
term)... So let's make it brief, shall we. :-)
How good/bad performs SMC FA 28-105/4-5.6 (not power zoom, but Tamron
rebadged lens) compared to 28-70/4 AL. I do realize that it is going to
be 35 mm longer. I am however interested in the rest of the differences.
The "rebadged tamron" does use Pentax SMC glass. Of the three
incarnations of the Pentax 28-105, the rebadged Tamron is the softest at
the long end, and has the most barrol distortion at the short end. I
say this purely based on antecdotal evidence. I've owned the PZ version
and the f/3.2-4.5 version, and my brother owns the rebadged tamron
version, so I've had the opportunity to test all three side by side.
That said, the 'tamron' version isn't BAD, it's just not quite as good,
if that makes sense.
