[NRM7000]

Browsing around for a 18-200 travel zoom, I have been looking a offerings from Sigma and Tamron.

Q1: Why when I price compare do the lenses cost much more for Pentax than any other fit..?

Simply Electronics - Search Results for Tamron 18-250mm

Q1: Is the cost premium between 18-200 v 18-250 worth it..?

A Sigma 18-200 = £180 where as the 18-250 is mor e in line with £350 - almost £200 more to justify.

The 18-250's have a longer reach and are newer models but..

Any thoughts.

[Lowell Goudge]

For me, 18mm is not wide enough, and really for general travel, I never need more than 100mm,

at present if I go light it is with a sigma 10-20 and tamron 28-75.

If you really want 200mm plus reach, these lenses will disapoint.

additionally, the 200mm focal length is measured at infinity, these zooms have a tendancy (due to focusing mechanism) to actually become shorter as you focus in,

[LRaven]

You can compare both superzoom Tamron and Sigma here, also Pentax 18-250:
Tamron AF 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II LD Aspherical [IF] macro (Canon) - Review / Test Report

[SpecialK]

The Pentax 55-300 has a good bang-for-the buck for the long end, and much better than the cheaper Sigma and Tamron 70-300's. You'd still want to get something on the short end, though. That can get a bit pricey, but you might be able to find a used Pentax 12-24 (one of the handier focal lengths for travel) or older 10-20 Sigmas in the market place.

[Marc Sabatella]

Q1: Why when I price compare do the lenses cost much more for Pentax than any other fit..?

Supply and demand.

Q1: Is the cost premium between 18-200 v 18-250 worth it..?

See the dozens of previous threads, the reviews in the lens database on this site, and the many posted samples, and decide for yourself. All anyone can say with any objectivity is that the 18-250 *is* better, but *is* more expensive. Whether it's "worth it" or not depends entirely on you.

[abmj]

My Pentax 18-250mm has been my "single-lens", light travel solution for some time and I couldn't be happier. Very sharp for what it is and relatively compact and light. Of course, if I feel like I can carry more gear, a fast, wide-angle gets added to the kit but for those "carry-on only" ultra-light weight trips, the 18-250 works great.

Now, the problem. The Pentax 18-250 is discontinued. If you can find it used and in good shape, I'd grab it. FWIW, I understand the Tamron 18-250 is the same lens with perhaps the omission of the special Pentax coatings.

[NRM7000]

I have a Sigma 10-20 (very happy with this lens) + the usual kit bundles. So the ranges is covered. I also have a Panasonic TZ7 - brilliant little camera but with its 27-300 zoom it made me think more about having the TZ 18-200 so that I have the DSLR with a good walking around lens.

Thanks for all the feedback

[bymy141]

Supply and demand.



See the dozens of previous threads, the reviews in the lens database on this site, and the many posted samples, and decide for yourself. All anyone can say with any objectivity is that the 18-250 *is* better, but *is* more expensive. Whether it's "worth it" or not depends entirely on you.

Better, yes. But it is all relative and depends on your standard.
I started my Pentax DSLR config with a kit lens and a Tamron 18-250mm.
Took the Tammy on safari to Tanzania, loved it.
However, now I realise that it is very soft at the long end and it does show strong vignetting at the short end. But that is all compared to the newer and better lenses that I own now.
Compared to my Panasonic TZ5 then, it was a giant step foreward.

- Bert