Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-04-2008, 08:33 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 193
lens combination or just one for all

Newbie question here ?Combination lenses set 18-55/55-200
will be same as 0ne 18-250./pentax or tamron
thank you for feed back dstar

01-04-2008, 08:37 AM   #2
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: North Brunswick, NJ
Posts: 473
I can tell you that the DA 18-250mm has better quality than the two kit lenses you listed. It all depends on your preference. Do you like zooms or primes? Primes are generally sharper and faster than zoom lenses. So, that's something to think about.
01-04-2008, 08:50 AM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,563
QuoteOriginally posted by dstar Quote
Newbie question here ?Combination lenses set 18-55/55-200
will be same as 0ne 18-250./pentax or tamron
thank you for feed back dstar
Hi Dstar,

This discussion has been on this forum a number of times the last 6 months.
More often the discussion was: (super)zoom versus multiple primes.
What I got out of it is: it depends.
It's almost a religous thing for some to avoid zoom lenses.

A few general observations: (still depending upon individual lens qualities) are:
- Less zoom range gives better image quality. Primes are better than zoom lenses.
- More zoom range gives better comfort, less weight.
- Less lens changes is less chance of getting dust on the sensor.
- The right focal length attached to your camera means instant shooting.

I have never seen a comparison of the 55-200 and the 18-250 IQ, however I expect it to be not very different.
The 18-55 is a very good lens for a very cheap price.
The 18-250 is not bad at all either.

The only reason for me to use my 18-55 over my 18-250 is when I use flash with at 18mm. Since I don't have a seperate flash, the 250 is somewhat longer and gives shadows at 18mm at the bottom of the picture. It is in the way of the flash.
When I get a 540 flash, the 18-55 will be sitting in the closet for ever I guess.

For outdoors photography I'd go for the 18-250. No need to change lenses (you are always prepared) and the longer range.

Hope this helps.

- Bert
01-04-2008, 10:44 AM   #4
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Folsom, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 322
Keep in mind the price difference as well - you pay for the convienience of the 1 lens. I don't have first hand experience witht the 18-250 - but if I recall, its around $500 - where everybody has the kit lens, and the 50-200 can be had under $200 after rebate. There is a lot of stuff you could get for the $300 difference...

01-04-2008, 11:56 AM   #5
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,401
no insult intended to all those who want a single lens solution, but I do have a question.

Why are you getting an SLR?

In my mind, if you want an 18-250mm as your only lens, (this is equivelent to something like 29-375mm on film) you should get one of the advanced Electronic View Finder (EVF) cameras.

Most of these have better than 6 MP, 10:1 or 12:1 zooms, are smaller lighter, and generally the lens is faster than the equivelant DSLR one lens solution.

Am I missing something here, or are people getting an SLR for the wrong reasons?

If you start with the advanced EVF camera, and then decide to move forward to an SLR the EVF becomes your back up.
01-04-2008, 12:33 PM   #6
Veteran Member
gokenin's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: lowell,ma
Posts: 1,890
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
no insult intended to all those who want a single lens solution, but I do have a question.

Why are you getting an SLR?

In my mind, if you want an 18-250mm as your only lens, (this is equivelent to something like 29-375mm on film) you should get one of the advanced Electronic View Finder (EVF) cameras.

Most of these have better than 6 MP, 10:1 or 12:1 zooms, are smaller lighter, and generally the lens is faster than the equivelant DSLR one lens solution.

Am I missing something here, or are people getting an SLR for the wrong reasons?

If you start with the advanced EVF camera, and then decide to move forward to an SLR the EVF becomes your back up.
I agree with you about this I am looking into the 18-250 but only as a travel lens when its somewhere that i do not want to carry my lens collection to but for every day use I still plan on using my multiple lenses because I bought an SLR for that reason multiple focal length lenses with better IQ.
01-04-2008, 12:56 PM   #7
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: BC, Canada
Posts: 302
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
no insult intended to all those who want a single lens solution, but I do have a question.

Why are you getting an SLR?

In my mind, if you want an 18-250mm as your only lens, (this is equivelent to something like 29-375mm on film) you should get one of the advanced Electronic View Finder (EVF) cameras.

Most of these have better than 6 MP, 10:1 or 12:1 zooms, are smaller lighter, and generally the lens is faster than the equivelant DSLR one lens solution.

Am I missing something here, or are people getting an SLR for the wrong reasons?

If you start with the advanced EVF camera, and then decide to move forward to an SLR the EVF becomes your back up.
I'm new to the dSLR world. I came from having a Panasonic FZ18 which is equal to 28 to 504mm, F2.8 to 4.2. Noise is the main reason I moved to the dSLR range; 400 ISO and up, indoor shots and a tiny 1/2.5 sensor. Sure the camera was smaller but, I'm not the type to complain about size if quality is exceedingly better.
01-04-2008, 03:00 PM   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Mallee Boy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hindmarsh Isl. Sth Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,492
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
no insult intended to all those who want a single lens solution, but I do have a question.

Why are you getting an SLR?

In my mind, if you want an 18-250mm as your only lens, (this is equivelent to something like 29-375mm on film) you should get one of the advanced Electronic View Finder (EVF) cameras.

Most of these have better than 6 MP, 10:1 or 12:1 zooms, are smaller lighter, and generally the lens is faster than the equivelant DSLR one lens solution.

Am I missing something here, or are people getting an SLR for the wrong reasons?

If you start with the advanced EVF camera, and then decide to move forward to an SLR the EVF becomes your back up.
Hi Lowell,
Choice perhaps? It is a good question.
It is very easy to get caught up in the lens buying frenzy that goes on from time to time, and no sooner do you think you have got your kit 'just right' when something new comes a la the 18-250.

If I was buying a new dslr TODAY and was just an enthusiastic amateur (my category) I think the 18-250 would be a very good choice. When I bought my DS the 18-125 was the all the go, but I have since got myself in a bit of a muddle above the 125mm focal length.

The 18-250 as a travel lens would be very, very good. It all comes back to horses for courses.
Cheers.

01-04-2008, 03:40 PM   #9
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,401
It seems I got a lot of comments, and this is good.

One more thing to chew on, with respect to travel and travel cameras, and note this is my personal view.

When I travel on vacation, I generally take about 1/2 my kit with me, and the parts I take are a function of where I am going and what I am doing. (note I have primes of 24, 50, 100, 135, 300, and 400) and 7 zooms from 10-200mm plus 1.4x and 2x TCs and a 1.7x AF TC plus 2 flashes.

Taking photos with my prime cameras is part of my vacation,

BUT I also own a Kodak easy share DX7590 which has a 38-380 equivelent f2.8-f3.7 lens. I use this camera for buisness travel.

While I agree that 400 ISO is a little grainy compared to my *istD or K10D at 400 ISO, what you need to consider is that my lens is about twice the speed of the 18-300 which comes in at something like f 5.6 to f6.7.

As a result, the all in one lens will be causing you to select 1600 ISO for the same shot I would take 400 ISO in the P&S. This gets us back to a equal setting and the lens is not that bad.

This camera is now 3 years old, and the later versions come with built in stabalization, and better noise at each ISO, so my point still holds for many people. Some of the really good P&S cameras would better suite people getting a 1 lens does it all solution for an DSLR
I just wish pentax made one of these, I would have bought it as opposed to Kodak
01-04-2008, 04:16 PM   #10
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: London
Posts: 1,067
Hi Lowell

You raise a fair point when you said:

QuoteQuote:
In my mind, if you want an 18-250mm as your only lens, (this is equivalent to something like 28-375mm on film) you should get one of the advanced Electronic View Finder (EVF) cameras.
However, I am going to play 'devil's advocate' for a minute and will explain why I beg to differ somewhat with your opinion. As it happens, I still own a treasured Olympus OM1 35mm & Mamiya 6 x 4.5 medium format film camera. Inevitably over the years I acquired an expensive collection of suitable lenses, but like many others a few years back, I found the price point required to enter the world of dslr's WAY too high for the quality that was then available. The nearest equivalent involved some inevitable compromises whilst I waited for an affordable alternative to arrive on the market. Thus I initially dipped my toe in the
'digital waters' and purchased a Panasonic FZ20 'bridge' camera (whose lens covers 36-504mm in 35mm 'film' terms).
I found this model ideal for the majority of circumstances, but was never entirely happy with it's electronic viewfinder, as these gizmo's are virtually useless for focussing accurately. Oh for a genuine pentaprism & bright matte screen ! Despite it's many advantages the FZ20 suffered from a number of deficiencies, some of which Metalfab highlighted:

QuoteQuote:
Noise is the main reason I moved to the dSLR range; 400 ISO and up, indoor shots and a tiny 1/2.5 sensor.
So having carted my entire camera systems around numerous continents for many years, I was determined to 'downsize' if at all possible whilst ensuring that the quality of the digital sensor capturing my images should improve substantially. Hence I acquired my K10D when it's price had fallen to what I regarded as an acceptable level and the subsequent acquisition of Tamron's excellent 18-250mm Di II and Sigma's superb 10-20mm HSM lenses fitted the bill admirably. I have since captured many wonderful images without the hassle of humping bags full of heavy equipment around. However, all my options still remain wide open should I decide or need to add to the K10D lens tally. In other words, I can enjoy the best of both worlds ! To be honest, I have seen very little evidence of matters such as C A, wide-angle distortion/pincushioning etc raising their head in my photographs and these problems are so easily correctable anyway with modern editing software that I am no longer bothered in this respect.
Therefore I find your premise that individuals who buy an SLR only to use one superzoom lens on it are better suited to an all-in-one 'bridge' camera rather akin to suggesting that I should never use the 'manual overide' option which is fitted to the automatic transmission of my BMW 5-series ! Surely you should concentrate on obtaining the very best images from your camera rather than worrying about how other photographers do or don't use their DSLR's ?

Best regards (with tongue firmly in cheek !)
Richard

Last edited by Confused; 01-04-2008 at 04:31 PM.
01-04-2008, 04:16 PM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Wales, UK
Posts: 645
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
no insult intended to all those who want a single lens solution, but I do have a question.

Why are you getting an SLR?

In my mind, if you want an 18-250mm as your only lens, (this is equivelent to something like 29-375mm on film) you should get one of the advanced Electronic View Finder (EVF) cameras.

Most of these have better than 6 MP, 10:1 or 12:1 zooms, are smaller lighter, and generally the lens is faster than the equivelant DSLR one lens solution.

Am I missing something here, or are people getting an SLR for the wrong reasons?

If you start with the advanced EVF camera, and then decide to move forward to an SLR the EVF becomes your back up.
For one thing the manufacturers are trying to push everyone the DSLR route.

Also with the exception of a few, the "bridge" cameras of old are in decline & those available don't offer the functionality/flexibility & ultimately image quality (especially high iso) of a DSLR.

I followed the route you recommend, I'm an ex Konica Minolta A200 owner - to be honest, as good as the KM is/was I wished I had gone straight to DSLR !!

The K10D with an 18-250 attached is the best of both worlds !!

Simon
01-04-2008, 06:02 PM   #12
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Sailor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Coastal Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,878
In response to the OP . . . .

Neither the DA 18-55 or DA 16-45 in combination with the DA 50-200 offer a meaningful speed advantage over the new 18-250 "super" zoom, nor - based on my recent experience with a new DA 18-250 - does my 16-45/50-200 combination offer a significant image quality advantage over the new zoom. Also, the 18-250 is not appreciably larger than a DA 16-45. Consequently, cost issues aside, I see no reason to carry the the two zooms when the new one will cover the same range; after all, changing lenses simply for the sake of doing so is . . . . well . . . . kind of perverse.

However, as I opined on another thread, the 18-250 is not an all purpose lens. It's relatively slow, can't do macro and offers no ultrawide or fisheye function. Nor does the 18-250 - based on initial comparisons with my prime lenses - match the image quality of the current Pentax primes. Even with this impressive new zoom, you'll probably find other lenses to be useful for various situations.

So, buying and using an 18-250 does not preclude (as some seem to suggest) utilizing the interchangable lens characteristics of an SLR. It simply gives you another option. Also, remember you can mix and match - I'm guessing my "standard" kit (which I use about half the time) will contain my DA 10-17, FA 35 and DA 18-250. The other half of my shooting time will - as it always has - center on my prime lenses.

Jer
01-04-2008, 11:24 PM   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,948
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
no insult intended to all those who want a single lens solution, but I do have a question.

Why are you getting an SLR?

In my mind, if you want an 18-250mm as your only lens, (this is equivelent to something like 29-375mm on film) you should get one of the advanced Electronic View Finder (EVF) cameras.

Most of these have better than 6 MP, 10:1 or 12:1 zooms, are smaller lighter, and generally the lens is faster than the equivelant DSLR one lens solution.

Am I missing something here, or are people getting an SLR for the wrong reasons?

If you start with the advanced EVF camera, and then decide to move forward to an SLR the EVF becomes your back up.
It is tough getting a shallow depth of focus with a P&S due to the smaller sensor. And the shutter lag can still be an issue in some situations. Low light/high ISO...?

The interchangeable lens is the third big reason for a DSLR, though. If you are not planning on using specialized lenses (like a fisheye) it may make more sense to get a compact UZ.
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, lens combination, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The K-7 with a Prime or Standard Lens is the best combination for minimal VR brosen Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 10-26-2009 09:15 PM
Does DA*50-135 with K200D is a good combination? Idanz0r Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 01-04-2009 11:37 AM
Which would be a better lens + TC combination? woodworm Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 10-10-2008 02:06 AM
Good lens Combination? WhiteComet Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 09-13-2008 12:54 PM
Best lens combination for travel. Ardy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 11-03-2007 12:41 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:54 AM. | 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