Advice needed - Travel zoom lens

k1000 · 07-11-2011, 12:00 AM

Hi, to whoever who is reading this.

I'm in a dilemma right now.

I will be travelling and i would like to get a all round zoom (mostly taking architecture/landscape, streetshots or portrait i guess)

I have the kit lens (18-55mm) with K-R and my options are below:

1) DA 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 ED AL [IF]
2) DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR

Am hoping you guys who have used both/either to give some kind comments on which zoom is the better one to get.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH~

PS: I do not mind the hassle of changing lens to get a shot i want.

**wizofoz** · 07-11-2011, 12:10 AM

Personally, I would take the 18-250 and add something fast and low light. A fast 50, or the Fa77 or whatever you can get your hands on. Something to use when the F3.5 just won't cut it.

k1000 · 07-11-2011, 12:16 AM

I have a DA35 f2.4 AL and M50 f1.7.
But i hardly use the 50 on the K-R. :/

twitch · 07-11-2011, 01:04 AM

Of those 2 the 18-250 is a much better option, 50mm is far too long for a general purpose lens. But then this advice is coming from someone who considers the DA12-24 as an all-in-one travel lens

hcc · 07-11-2011, 01:17 AM

The 18-250mm definitely.

I travelled a lot over the last 12 months and the 18-250mm was the perfect all-around lens. In most cases, I complemented the 18-250mm by a fast prime (Voigtlander 58mm f1.4) for low-light shooting.

k1000 · 07-11-2011, 04:23 AM

Alright! So i'll be getting the 18-250mm zoom! hopefully i can find one in good condition.
Thanks for all your help guys!

/Sidetrack - 18-250 or the 55-300 is better in this case?

GaryH · 07-11-2011, 06:07 AM

The 18-250 will offer fewer lens changes while the 55-300 will offer a little better IQ at the longer end especially when compared to the 18-250. The 55-300 is a very nice lens. Just depends on if you are willing to carry two lenses or not.

Nowhere Matt · 07-11-2011, 06:32 AM

The DA 55-300 is perhaps two inches longer than the DA 18-250. I saw no noticeable difference in image quality, though I did not study pixels at high crop percentages in depth.
With the 18-250, I have only noticed some vignetting between, say 18-20 but I would not call it too distracting. The lens hood is very frustration to remove and connect. This is my most used lens at the moment.
Both perform as they should with my K-7 but the 18-250 stutters a wee bit with my K-10 running on version 1 firmware. (Yes I am aware of updates)

I still prefer the 18-250 to a 55-300 myself. It's arguable "wide-ishness" easily makes up for the loss on the long end. But they can be a bit pricey.

DaveHolmes · 07-11-2011, 07:04 AM

What is the size difference (and filter ring sizes) of the 18-250 in comparrison to the 18-135WR?

For travelling a 135mm max would be OK with me and size/packability would be crucial...

k1000 · 07-11-2011, 08:33 AM

Originally posted by DaveHolmes

What is the size difference (and filter ring sizes) of the 18-250 in comparrison to the 18-135WR?

For travelling a 135mm max would be OK with me and size/packability would be crucial...

Size and weight are close to each other, so it doesn't matter to me. Same filter ring size. But ultimately, the price of the 18-135WR is a bit steep for me sigh :ugh:

k1000 · 07-11-2011, 08:36 AM

Once again, many thanks to those who replied my thread.

Now i'll have to start searching for a DA18-250!!!

/Just trying my luck: Anyone selling their DA18-250?

**dadipentak** · 07-11-2011, 08:48 AM

Originally posted by wizofoz

Personally, I would take the 18-250 and add something fast and low light. A fast 50, or the Fa77 or whatever you can get your hands on. Something to use when the F3.5 just won't cut it.

I agree. The 18-250mm is a travel essential (especially a fast-paced package tour) but you should have one or two (or more ;~) fast primes for low light.

GeneV · 07-11-2011, 09:30 AM

If you have the 18-250, then take it. Traveling is what it is for. However, for landscape or architecture, as well as low light, you may want some primes that offer less distortion, perhaps the DA15.

Marc Sabatella · 07-11-2011, 09:56 AM

My vote would actually be a prime for use with the DSLR for use when you want that creative control and/or need the performance, and a P&S travel zoom for the generic shots. You'll get more range and lighter weight for the dollar by far with the P&S. A DSLR with DA35/2.4 and Panasonic TZ would be the smallest, lightest, most capable combo, and the Panasonic costs no more than the 18-250, either.

Francis · 07-11-2011, 10:46 AM

I have the 18-250 and feel very comfortable with it for an all-around traveller

At the same time, I just got an Oly SZ30 which is pretty nice for a travel compact(ish). I typically use the SZ for the quick snaps my wife asks me to make. The DSLR I use for the photos I want to take and reflect over (as if I were capable)

07-11-2011, 12:00 AM	#1
k1000 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Singapore Photos: Albums Posts: 29	Advice needed - Travel zoom lens Hi, to whoever who is reading this. I'm in a dilemma right now. I will be travelling and i would like to get a all round zoom (mostly taking architecture/landscape, streetshots or portrait i guess) I have the kit lens (18-55mm) with K-R and my options are below: 1) DA 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 ED AL [IF] 2) DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR Am hoping you guys who have used both/either to give some kind comments on which zoom is the better one to get. THANK YOU VERY MUCH~ PS: I do not mind the hassle of changing lens to get a shot i want.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Advice on a 3-4 Lens-Kit for a beginner needed	Ragnar	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	10	05-30-2011 12:43 PM
Recommend a good walk-about/travel zoom lens	aaronius	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	06-18-2010 09:48 AM
advice needed from lens gurus	obxeye	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	12-06-2009 01:40 PM
ADVICE Needed re F 35-70mm lens	Flarshots	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	09-06-2009 09:06 PM
Zoom lens advice needed	Lensvision	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	02-29-2008 10:47 AM

07-11-2011, 12:10 AM	#2
wizofoz Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Melbourne, Outer east. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,695	Personally, I would take the 18-250 and add something fast and low light. A fast 50, or the Fa77 or whatever you can get your hands on. Something to use when the F3.5 just won't cut it.

07-11-2011, 12:16 AM	#3
k1000 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Singapore Photos: Albums Posts: 29 Original Poster	I have a DA35 f2.4 AL and M50 f1.7. But i hardly use the 50 on the K-R. :/

07-11-2011, 01:04 AM	#4
twitch Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 4,571	Of those 2 the 18-250 is a much better option, 50mm is far too long for a general purpose lens. But then this advice is coming from someone who considers the DA12-24 as an all-in-one travel lens

07-11-2011, 01:17 AM	#5
hcc Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,005	The 18-250mm definitely. I travelled a lot over the last 12 months and the 18-250mm was the perfect all-around lens. In most cases, I complemented the 18-250mm by a fast prime (Voigtlander 58mm f1.4) for low-light shooting.

07-11-2011, 04:23 AM	#6
k1000 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Singapore Photos: Albums Posts: 29 Original Poster	Alright! So i'll be getting the 18-250mm zoom! hopefully i can find one in good condition. Thanks for all your help guys! /Sidetrack - 18-250 or the 55-300 is better in this case?

07-11-2011, 06:07 AM	#7
GaryH Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Philadelphia, Pa Photos: Gallery Posts: 764	The 18-250 will offer fewer lens changes while the 55-300 will offer a little better IQ at the longer end especially when compared to the 18-250. The 55-300 is a very nice lens. Just depends on if you are willing to carry two lenses or not.

07-11-2011, 06:32 AM	#8
Nowhere Matt Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Nowhere Land Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,362	The DA 55-300 is perhaps two inches longer than the DA 18-250. I saw no noticeable difference in image quality, though I did not study pixels at high crop percentages in depth. With the 18-250, I have only noticed some vignetting between, say 18-20 but I would not call it too distracting. The lens hood is very frustration to remove and connect. This is my most used lens at the moment. Both perform as they should with my K-7 but the 18-250 stutters a wee bit with my K-10 running on version 1 firmware. (Yes I am aware of updates) I still prefer the 18-250 to a 55-300 myself. It's arguable "wide-ishness" easily makes up for the loss on the long end. But they can be a bit pricey.

07-11-2011, 07:04 AM	#9
DaveHolmes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 1,501	What is the size difference (and filter ring sizes) of the 18-250 in comparrison to the 18-135WR? For travelling a 135mm max would be OK with me and size/packability would be crucial...

07-11-2011, 08:33 AM	#10
k1000 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Singapore Photos: Albums Posts: 29 Original Poster	Originally posted by DaveHolmes What is the size difference (and filter ring sizes) of the 18-250 in comparrison to the 18-135WR? For travelling a 135mm max would be OK with me and size/packability would be crucial... Size and weight are close to each other, so it doesn't matter to me. Same filter ring size. But ultimately, the price of the 18-135WR is a bit steep for me sigh :ugh:

07-11-2011, 08:36 AM	#11
k1000 Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Singapore Photos: Albums Posts: 29 Original Poster	Once again, many thanks to those who replied my thread. Now i'll have to start searching for a DA18-250!!! /Just trying my luck: Anyone selling their DA18-250?

07-11-2011, 08:48 AM	#12
dadipentak Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Baltimore, Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,590	Originally posted by wizofoz Personally, I would take the 18-250 and add something fast and low light. A fast 50, or the Fa77 or whatever you can get your hands on. Something to use when the F3.5 just won't cut it. I agree. The 18-250mm is a travel essential (especially a fast-paced package tour) but you should have one or two (or more ;~) fast primes for low light.

07-11-2011, 09:30 AM	#13
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	If you have the 18-250, then take it. Traveling is what it is for. However, for landscape or architecture, as well as low light, you may want some primes that offer less distortion, perhaps the DA15.

07-11-2011, 09:56 AM	#14
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	My vote would actually be a prime for use with the DSLR for use when you want that creative control and/or need the performance, and a P&S travel zoom for the generic shots. You'll get more range and lighter weight for the dollar by far with the P&S. A DSLR with DA35/2.4 and Panasonic TZ would be the smallest, lightest, most capable combo, and the Panasonic costs no more than the 18-250, either.

07-11-2011, 10:46 AM	#15
Francis Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Hilversum Photos: Gallery Posts: 215	I have the 18-250 and feel very comfortable with it for an all-around traveller At the same time, I just got an Oly SZ30 which is pretty nice for a travel compact(ish). I typically use the SZ for the quick snaps my wife asks me to make. The DSLR I use for the photos I want to take and reflect over (as if I were capable)