Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-10-2011, 04:14 PM   #1
Junior Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 44
Pentax 50-200 or Tamron 18-200

Which one is better in term of iq and sharpness? I hv 18-55 which is not long enough.
Personally I like 18-200 for coverage.
Any advice? Thanks.

02-10-2011, 04:20 PM   #2
Veteran Member
KxBlaze's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,594
I had the Tamron 18-200 and it is a good lens but not great. Exact can be said about the IQ, good but not great and the AF is kinda slow. The biggest advantage is the versatility. As for the 50-200, I have never owned or used one but have read that the IQ is sub-par. Having said that I would assume the 18-200 to have at least the same IQ if not much better, you get the extra 32mm at the wide end and it's not that much more $. Seems like an easy choice to me. Good Luck!
02-10-2011, 04:22 PM   #3
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
I like my 50-200, best bang for buck lens, has ED glass. I dislike superzooms such as 18-200, waste of money, IMHO. I have never used 18-200, but usually zooms with over 3x zoom ratio are pretty average.
02-10-2011, 04:27 PM   #4
Veteran Member
selar's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,035
QuoteOriginally posted by KxBlaze Quote
As for the 50-200, I have never owned or used one but have read that the IQ is sub-par.
I have no complaints with my 50-200, but its the Samsung variant. We had a long discussion ages ago about this, the outcome was that the general feeling was that the Samsung variants of two kit lenses, were superior to the Pentax variants, if only on the quality control.

02-10-2011, 05:14 PM   #5
Veteran Member
liukaitc's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,008
if has money get 18-250. otherwise rather buy 50-200.
02-10-2011, 05:17 PM   #6
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,903
My 50-200 was OK but nothing special on the K100D, less so after getting the K20D. It was a hair sharper and contrastier than the Sigma 70-300, but not much. The Pentax 55-300 turned out to be a step up.

So, I'd go for the 18-whatever and do without the kit lens, too.
02-10-2011, 06:07 PM   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: SW Washington
Posts: 820
The 55-300 is consistently regarded as better than either, and not that much more expensive. Any 18-250 (Tamron/Pentax/Sigma) is also regarded as better than any 18-200, but significantly more expensive.
02-10-2011, 06:10 PM   #8
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
If you want a super zoom then buy a 18-250 or 18-135.

If you want a tele zoom get the 55-300.

02-11-2011, 01:52 AM   #9
Junior Member
nextimelah's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 48
I had the 50-200 and the tamron 18-200. the Tammy is more versatile and is now dirt cheap. Quality wise i feel it is better than kit lens and 50-200. Focusing can be slow, but so is the 50-200. The tammy's color redition is also quite nice imho.

i propose u just get a used Tammy. Price is not far from the 50-200.
02-11-2011, 03:48 AM   #10
Junior Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 44
Original Poster
Hi all, thanks for your inputs.
I think I will go with Tammy if the IQ is on par with 50-200.
Is Tammy AF very slow?
I will be shooting street candid at longer end.. If af is slow, I gonna miss the shot..
02-11-2011, 03:55 AM   #11
Veteran Member
fikkser's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Borlänge, Sweden
Posts: 373
the 50-200 is not a very good lens, IMO, sorry. It's not good at 200mm. I haven't used it much because it lacks sharpness at distance. It's better close up imo. I'd go for the 18-200. The 50-200 got very slow af Ryan, it travels very far.
02-11-2011, 07:10 AM   #12
Veteran Member
liukaitc's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New York
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,008
Actually there is another one can be considered , the sigma 18-125. poor man's pentax 18-135
The IQ of it is euqually good as the pentax 18-250 based on photozone review (both get 2and half star).
02-20-2011, 06:58 AM   #13
Site Supporter
joebob's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 168
I just picked up this lens a month ago as a possible replacement to the kit lens. It does have a couple of issues such as a bit of sharpness dropoff at the extremes and some AF hunt in low light. But the IQ overall is pretty good. This has replaced the kit lens.
02-20-2011, 07:39 AM   #14
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
I like my 50-200 for what it is (IMHO)--a worthy extension to the kit lens for travel. It is not much bigger than the kit, and not expensive. You will actually carry it with you. Both the kit lens and the DA50-200 are useable at wider apertures and quite nice at F8-F11, and the smaller apertures are where most travel shots end up. The Tamron is very cheap because not many really want it.

Neither the 50-200 nor the 18-200 would be my choice for critical portrait work, especially if one wants a shallow depth of field. Both the 18-200 and 50-200 are their weakest at 200mm. On the other hand, my "better" zoom, the DA 55-300, is twice as big as its little brother, and it doesn't seems to end up in my bag as often. In fact, my M200/4 still comes along more than the 55-300. Go figure.
02-20-2011, 05:13 PM   #15
Senior Member
geezer52's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: High Desert, California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 231
At the time, the Tamron 18-200 was considered pretty good, but the Tamron 18-250 was considered much better and is basically the same lens as the Pentax 18-250. The 18-250 is also much more expensive. I recently bought the 18-200 for $200 from prodigital. To me is my tourist lens, easy and versatile, and IMO a bit better than the 2 kit lenses it replaces and decidedly more convenient. If optimum IQ is your concern none of these lenses are your best choice. But when a shot presents itself, the camera and lens you have in hand is better than any combo you left at home. I find the shots it takes more often acceptable or better. I have mine on my K2000 and the AF is pretty good. I wouldn't fool myself too much about low light shots and would go with the flash. The lens is a compromise, accept and appreciate it for what it is or save your cash for better. The 55-300 is a better lens than the 55-200 in any case and the DA-L version is perfectly sound optically. The lighter construction is mostly relevant only if you change lenses often or subject your gear to rough treatment.
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!
k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Tokina 80-200/2.8 KA; K 135/2.5; M 200/4; Tamron 70-150/2.8 soft thomasxie Sold Items 6 02-26-2010 11:08 AM
Pentax/Samsung 50-200 Vs Tamron 55-200... alexramos Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 04-08-2009 11:49 AM
Pentax 50-200 vs. Sigma 28-200 (vs. Tamron 70-300) shefaet Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 11-24-2007 10:44 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:26 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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