Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-22-2011, 10:59 AM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Wales, UK
Posts: 645
Is an 18-250 more useable on K5?

I'm just in the process of deciding between my DA17-70 and a Tamron 18-250 I've just acquired. I know that the Tamron has limitations in low-ish light but wondered if any K5 owners have found it more useable with the new bodies high-iso capabilities?

Thanks

Simon

02-22-2011, 12:24 PM   #2
Veteran Member
alexeyga's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
Posts: 838
18-135?
02-22-2011, 12:41 PM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,236
QuoteOriginally posted by simonkit Quote
I'm just in the process of deciding between my DA17-70 and a Tamron 18-250 I've just acquired. I know that the Tamron has limitations in low-ish light but wondered if any K5 owners have found it more useable with the new bodies high-iso capabilities?
Thanks
Simon
While not specifically related, I've been using my slow DA 50-200mm WR with the K-5 and have gotten decent results when taking photos of an event in a large dark room with a lighted stage setup. Most of the time I was using ISO 12800. It cleans up pretty well with something like Noise Ninja and it also helps if you keep the image darker overall. Blur was never an issue, although oddly I was fighting with overexposure. I'll just attribute that to me not knowing the K-5 too well (bought it last week) and having really extreme lighting conditions (strong directional lights in a large dark room). I don't think I could have managed as well with the K-7 and 50-200mm lens.

So when talking about avoiding slow shutter speed camera blur, the K-5 does make a difference.
02-22-2011, 10:25 PM   #4
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,442
I imagine any slowish lens would gain some benefit from higher-ISO bodies.

02-22-2011, 10:33 PM   #5
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
The relative difference between the lenses are unchanged despite a new body. All lens are "more usable" on a K-5 compared to a K-7 for example; including both the 17-70 and the 18-250.
02-22-2011, 11:14 PM   #6
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
I find my DA18-250 (twin to the Tammy) quite usable on my old slow K20D, even in low light. Pick the right aperture and shutter, and let the ISO float. Worry about noise later. Any shot y'all get is better than any shot y'all DON'T get. On newer bodies better at high ISO, even better. But long ago, Back In The Day, we pushed ASA 400 Tri-X to 2400 and shot as we needed, and fock the grain -- it's the content that matters. The K20D @ISO2400 has better detail than that pushed Tri-X.

Oh yeah, we had noise reduction strategies then, mainly in the developing soup. I seem to recall a mix of Acufine (for speed) and Kodalith (for grain reduction). Hay, are there any shooping filters that replicate developer chemistry? Such would be sweet.
02-23-2011, 02:44 AM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Wales, UK
Posts: 645
Original Poster
Thanks for the replies - I know my thread question seems a bit of a statement of the obvious. One issue I have with the DA 17-70 is it doesn't always lock focus at 70mm in low contrast scenes, the Tamron so far doesn't seem to have shown this trait, although I'm still in the early days of evaluating the two.

Simon
02-23-2011, 03:46 AM   #8
Senior Member
Metalwizards's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Santa Cruz
Photos: Albums
Posts: 124
Use the tamaron and get Topaz denoise 5. I shot at up to 6400 iso on my k-r and topaz makes the grain go away with out a major hit on details. I with those 18-250's were easier to get I really envy you.

02-23-2011, 07:21 AM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chicago suburbs
Photos: Albums
Posts: 848
I have a K200D and a K-R. I like my DA 18-250mm. I find the K-R allows higher shutter speeds than the K200, in the same light. So, yes the zoom is more useful with the K-R because I can hand hold down into lower light levels. I don't have a 17-70, but I can recommend the DA 18-250 for a travel zoom.
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, tamron
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DA 40 Ltd.-how useable in low light/interior photography? planedriver Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 27 11-25-2016 02:33 AM
Sigma 18-250 or Pentax/Tamron 18-250? mjbens01 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 07-08-2010 09:10 PM
People ISO 3200. DA 40mm, K20D, Useable? skyoftexas Post Your Photos! 13 06-15-2010 09:54 PM
ANY FLASH USEABLE WITH k7 grouse Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 2 03-22-2010 09:13 AM
Why DA18-250 is double the price of Tamron 18-250? raider Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 12-13-2008 05:40 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:29 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