Which is the prime lens?

kbrede · 03-13-2011, 05:57 PM

Number 1 of the 4.

paperbag846 · 03-13-2011, 07:24 PM

I think the 2nd one is the prime.

But I'm wondering why you are making these comparisons? The price of an expensive zoom is not really comparable to the price of an expensive prime..

normhead · 03-13-2011, 08:03 PM

Personally, I want to know what my lenses are like at each focal length. It will in the future determine what lens gets used in each situation. My DA 21 ltd will defintely get used at it's focal length. Based on todays testing, my 90 Tamron is better than the DA*60-250 and it's faster.... but just barely, probably not worth changing the lenses for, unless I've already taken lots of shots with the lens on the camera. I certainly wouldn't take the 90 off to put the 60-250 on if I'm shooting between 80-100mm. I may have a very good 18-55, and a very bad 18-135, but so far, I'm having trouble finding a place for the 18-135. These are things you have to know. So, I'm using all my lenses that overlap for the same shot. I just thought we'd have a bit of fun, since I'm testing anyway.

And the way things have turned out, one of these lenses is probably going to get kicked off the island.

paperbag846 · 03-13-2011, 08:11 PM

Interesting.

I would agree with you on the prime vs. DA* similarity - the DA*s seem to be very prime-like in quality.

steve1307 · 03-14-2011, 12:56 AM

No.1 and No.2 appear to have the most detail and I like the contrast on these 2.
Its hard to tell as the light and focussing is different to this on 3 & 4.
Looking at a 1000 pixel width jpeg on a 4y.o. laptop with a dusty screen.

Guessing I would say

1) 60-250 (or maybe the 90) - i cant tell them apart
2) 90 (or maybe its the 60-250) - i cant tell them apart
3) 18-135 a bit more contrasty than 4 to my eyes
4) 70-300 the colours look duller than the others

Again, I'm using my mind's bias to label the one I like least as the Sigma.

I have none of the lenses listed and only ever owned 1 Sigma 35-80 with film some years years ago which i hated.
If the last one is the 60-250 then great, it saves me lots of money not coveting it.

normhead · 03-14-2011, 07:22 AM

Those are good guesses. The consensus around here was the 1. 60-250- and 2. Tamron 90 were both pretty good with the Tamron 90 getting the edge. #3 was the Sigma 70-300 a given the less expensive price of this lens, I'd have to say an excellent value for the money. The last one, the 18-135 I didn't get a good image first try, so I tried again an hour later after checking all the images, but the light had changed. The tripod hadn't been moved though, nor the rock, so I had the same set. It seems to have back focused a bit, compared to the other lenses. SO, all in all, not a good day for the 18-135. Still a sharp image in the end, but on a really simple task it took 6 tries to get an acceptable image. When your testing is so imprecise, it's not possible to rush to judgement after 1 test, but so far, 3 of the 4 have lived up to billing, with the Tamron and 60-250 both living up to their billing.. the Sigma living up to it's billing as a great bargain lens, but definitely not prime or DA* quality. The 18-135, the jury is still out.

Quote:

If the last one is the 60-250 then great, it saves me lots of money not coveting it.

Sorry I couldn't help you out there Steve, let the coveting begin.

reeftool · 03-14-2011, 09:23 AM

Nice little "real world" test. A little tweaking in PP and all the photos could appear almost identical. I think all lenses, no matter what the price, have their strengths and weaknesses. I have the Sigma and find it's close up ability very good and it's also quite sharp in the shorter end of the zoom. With an aperture larger than f/8, it starts to go downhill and that's the real difference between the more expensive lenses and the cheaper ones. The Limiteds and DA* are going to perform well in all conditions and light and you won't be spending as much time in PP tweaking the shots.

03-14-2011, 07:22 AM	#21
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451 Original Poster	Those are good guesses. The consensus around here was the 1. 60-250- and 2. Tamron 90 were both pretty good with the Tamron 90 getting the edge. #3 was the Sigma 70-300 a given the less expensive price of this lens, I'd have to say an excellent value for the money. The last one, the 18-135 I didn't get a good image first try, so I tried again an hour later after checking all the images, but the light had changed. The tripod hadn't been moved though, nor the rock, so I had the same set. It seems to have back focused a bit, compared to the other lenses. SO, all in all, not a good day for the 18-135. Still a sharp image in the end, but on a really simple task it took 6 tries to get an acceptable image. When your testing is so imprecise, it's not possible to rush to judgement after 1 test, but so far, 3 of the 4 have lived up to billing, with the Tamron and 60-250 both living up to their billing.. the Sigma living up to it's billing as a great bargain lens, but definitely not prime or DA* quality. The 18-135, the jury is still out. Quote: If the last one is the 60-250 then great, it saves me lots of money not coveting it. Sorry I couldn't help you out there Steve, let the coveting begin. Last edited by normhead; 03-14-2011 at 07:28 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Prime Lenses--Macro Lens--Zoom Lens for Sale (CONUS)	stl09	Sold Items	16	01-14-2011 04:53 PM
Next Prime lens?	kpfeifle	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	07-08-2010 05:30 AM
Using prime lens with Kx?	JER_OME	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	8	03-21-2010 10:49 AM
Prime lens, Help me!	pexi85	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	03-26-2009 10:33 AM
Prime lens?	PHOTOCOP	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	12-18-2008 04:40 PM

03-13-2011, 05:57 PM	#16
kbrede Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Nebraska Photos: Gallery Posts: 327	Number 1 of the 4.

03-13-2011, 07:24 PM	#17
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	I think the 2nd one is the prime. But I'm wondering why you are making these comparisons? The price of an expensive zoom is not really comparable to the price of an expensive prime..

03-13-2011, 08:03 PM	#18
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451 Original Poster	Personally, I want to know what my lenses are like at each focal length. It will in the future determine what lens gets used in each situation. My DA 21 ltd will defintely get used at it's focal length. Based on todays testing, my 90 Tamron is better than the DA*60-250 and it's faster.... but just barely, probably not worth changing the lenses for, unless I've already taken lots of shots with the lens on the camera. I certainly wouldn't take the 90 off to put the 60-250 on if I'm shooting between 80-100mm. I may have a very good 18-55, and a very bad 18-135, but so far, I'm having trouble finding a place for the 18-135. These are things you have to know. So, I'm using all my lenses that overlap for the same shot. I just thought we'd have a bit of fun, since I'm testing anyway. And the way things have turned out, one of these lenses is probably going to get kicked off the island.

03-13-2011, 08:11 PM	#19
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Interesting. I would agree with you on the prime vs. DA* similarity - the DA*s seem to be very prime-like in quality.

03-14-2011, 12:56 AM	#20
steve1307 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,130	No.1 and No.2 appear to have the most detail and I like the contrast on these 2. Its hard to tell as the light and focussing is different to this on 3 & 4. Looking at a 1000 pixel width jpeg on a 4y.o. laptop with a dusty screen. Guessing I would say 1) 60-250 (or maybe the 90) - i cant tell them apart 2) 90 (or maybe its the 60-250) - i cant tell them apart 3) 18-135 a bit more contrasty than 4 to my eyes 4) 70-300 the colours look duller than the others Again, I'm using my mind's bias to label the one I like least as the Sigma. I have none of the lenses listed and only ever owned 1 Sigma 35-80 with film some years years ago which i hated. If the last one is the 60-250 then great, it saves me lots of money not coveting it.

03-14-2011, 09:23 AM	#22
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,553	Nice little "real world" test. A little tweaking in PP and all the photos could appear almost identical. I think all lenses, no matter what the price, have their strengths and weaknesses. I have the Sigma and find it's close up ability very good and it's also quite sharp in the shorter end of the zoom. With an aperture larger than f/8, it starts to go downhill and that's the real difference between the more expensive lenses and the cheaper ones. The Limiteds and DA* are going to perform well in all conditions and light and you won't be spending as much time in PP tweaking the shots.