Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-06-2010, 04:25 PM   #16
Site Supporter
jackassp's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 795
Hi.
I have both the Tamron 17-50 and the Pentax DA* 16-50, and both are exceptional, professional standard lenses.

The Pentax lens is silent during focussing, it is weather proof, it is a very solid construction, but it suffers from a little more CA.

The Tamron doesn't feel as solid, there are focussing problems, and it isn't 100% reliable at getting the AF correct, but most of the time it gives excellent images. I got a good one first up, but your mileage may vary...

I would lean towards the Pentax lens.


Cheers, John.

08-06-2010, 04:59 PM   #17
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,437
With a constant f2.8, the Tamron has a 2-stop advantage at the long end. That is worth a lot.

I would buy new to get the warranty, unless used was an incredible deal. Even if "bad" it can be exchanged - unlike used ones.
08-06-2010, 11:29 PM   #18
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 79
one simple word - yes.
08-07-2010, 12:46 AM   #19
Veteran Member
fractal's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,549
It's a good lens but it's built like shit. I broke the lens mount of mine accidentally. It didn't take much either. In saying that, I don't think i'd be forking out for the DA*16-50. Just have to be careful with it.

I took this street portrait with the Tammy 17-50 & K200D. It is a great walk-around lens. Bokeh is reasonable.




Last edited by fractal; 08-07-2010 at 04:38 AM.
08-07-2010, 01:28 AM   #20
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: WinterLand
Posts: 19
Original Poster
Ok, I'll give you a point of reference

I appreciate all the comments/advise. I do however have a request.

I have a F 50mm 1.7 prime. It is obviously resolves better than my kit lens. Using the above mentioned prime ... how would the Tammy 17-50 compare to it?

While I'm at it .... are the older M primes sharper than the F series?
08-07-2010, 01:32 AM   #21
Veteran Member
Jasvox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,110
QuoteOriginally posted by fractal Quote
It's a good lens but it's built like shit. I broke the lens mount of mine accidentally. It didn't take much either. In saying that, I don't think i'd be forking out for the DA*16-50. Just have to be careful with it.

I took with this street portrait with the Tammy 17-50 & K200D. It is a great walk-around lens. Bokeh is reasonable.
Is this HST in this photo?

Jason
08-07-2010, 03:19 AM   #22
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: SF Bay
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 211
QuoteOriginally posted by deadwolfbones Quote
The Tamron focuses quite close, though it doesn't advertise itself as a macro lens. 10in for the Tamron vs. 8in for the Sigma.
For the record, how close does the K-x 18-55mm kit lens focus? I have searched the specs in the manual and couldn't find it.

Also, as long as the question has come up about the F series vs. M series lenses and comparison of the primes with these zooms, may I ask:

How does the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 compare with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8?

Last edited by Muse; 08-07-2010 at 03:27 AM.
08-07-2010, 04:49 AM   #23
Veteran Member
fractal's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,549
QuoteOriginally posted by Jasvox Quote
Is this HST in this photo?

Jason
Almost man

Just an eccentric bloke from the street.

QuoteOriginally posted by Muse Quote
How does the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 compare with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8?
It would make sense for them to be identical in IQ.

If I was to do it again, i'd probably go the Sigma 18-50/2.8 for the close focus.

08-07-2010, 07:38 AM   #24
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,480
Just to toss more into the hat: I owned a 17-70 Sigma (older f/2.8-4.5) in my Alpha days and really liked it. The close focus at all FLs was ideal for me, and IQ was great. I now have a 16-45DA and am equally satisfied, similar features like close focus, a bit less range, but quick-shift focus is very nice. Sharp as I need worry about with my K-7.

I've seldom heard bad things about the 17-50 Tamron, but I've always have a fast 50 so that part of its allure never struck me, and my budget has always stopped just short of its price range. Good luck with your choice!
08-07-2010, 07:46 AM   #25
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,599
I got a bad copy

QuoteOriginally posted by jimH Quote
I have the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 on my K10 and it's my primary lens, and I love it. The IQ is great and color rendition is also very good. In the U.S. the Tamron lenses have a six year warranty, that is one of the reasons I bought it instead of the Sigma.

I don't know What shang is referring to about bad copies. Mine is perfect. I haven't heard of anyone getting a bad copy, however any lens from any manufacture can come out with an issue now and again.
I got a bad copy of this lens. It was quite soft at F2.8, by F4.0 it sharpened up considerably, F2.8 was barely useable. And it wasn't a DOF/Focus issue, it wasn't front or back focusing, just soft wide open.
To be truthful, I've never heard of anyone else with this problem, but I can document the issue.

NaCl(there are ALWAYS bad copies out there somewhere)H2O
08-07-2010, 08:57 AM   #26
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 120
QuoteOriginally posted by Muse Quote

Also, as long as the question has come up about the F series vs. M series lenses and comparison of the primes with these zooms, may I ask:

How does the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 compare with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8?
I have both Tamrons...not much difference between the two; the biggest difference is the heavy vignetting on the 17-50 at wide open apertures at 17mm and 50mm settings. If I were to nitpick, the bokeh on the 28-75 is slightly better than the 17-50 and the 17-50 is a bit sharper wide open and better built (mine has not broke yet).
08-07-2010, 09:48 AM   #27
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by Nightwings Quote
HOWEVER .... I was awstruck as to how the kit lens (18-55) blew my K-X out of the water......and into the next state .
Are you sure the Canon was equipped with the kit lens and not a higher end lens? The Canon kit lens is supposed to be inferior to the Pentax one (dpreview, photozone).

The Tamron 17-50 should be better than either kit lens.
08-07-2010, 11:15 AM   #28
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: WinterLand
Posts: 19
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
Are you sure the Canon was equipped with the kit lens and not a higher end lens? The Canon kit lens is supposed to be inferior to the Pentax one (dpreview, photozone).
The Tamron 17-50 should be better than either kit lens.
Positive ..... and if it's supposed to be inferior to the Pentax, it certainly wasn't under the catagory of IQ. The Canon kit lens CRUSHS the Pentax Kit.

CANON

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS - Review / Test Report - Analysis

PENTAX

Pentax SMC-DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 AL - Review / Test Report - Analysis
08-07-2010, 12:45 PM   #29
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: long island
Posts: 135
it's canon's newer version of kit lens, which is very impressive.
08-07-2010, 01:27 PM   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 7,411
And that photozone link is for the older Pentax kit lens,.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
canon, k-mount, k-x, kit, lens, pentax lens, range, slr lens, tamron 17-50mm
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: [US] K20D, Metz 58 AF-1 Flash, FA 50mm 1.4, Tamron 17-50mm 2.8, Tamron 18-250m jasonfen Sold Items 11 06-20-2010 06:32 AM
The K 55mm 1:1.8 - worth having with the M 50mm 1:1.7? Jonathan Mac Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 06-01-2010 10:30 AM
Is the A 50mm 1.4 worth keeping? Mickgriddle Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 04-08-2010 04:42 AM
Tamron Adaptall-1 70-350mm f4.5 worth? rmtschanz Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 10-10-2009 10:43 AM
Upgrade to Tamron 17-50mm from kit 18-55mm: worth the investment? virgilr Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 09-04-2009 07:33 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:11 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top