Thinking out loud... (re: which zoom to buy)

lapeen · 01-27-2008, 04:00 PM

It's tax refund time

My plan WAS to get the Pentax 18-250 and the 50mm 1.4. Now that the time is coming to take the plunge I am not really wanting to spend all that money. Also, I read on another board about people who got the 18-250 with the plan of it being their new 'walk-around' and finding that it was too heavy and bulky to leave on all the time. (All this would be MUCH easier if I was anywhere near a store that carried these things!)

So... then I got hooked on the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro, nice long range, a lot of folks very happy with it, and macro could be fun And I could get that and the 50mm for less $$ than just the 18-250!!

But then this morning I got thinking about my life and the way I shoot. I often am shooting kids and pets who are far away one second... and then all up in your face the next. ...and I got thinking about sitting on the dock at the lake and being able to take great photos across the lake... but not of the kids right beside me.

I HAVE a 50mm 1.7A... so I guess I could wait on the 50 1.4 for now... but I really want that AF.

What to do... what to do....

TomInJax · 01-27-2008, 04:14 PM

I have the Tamron 18-250, and it isn't heavy. Especially compared to my new "Bigma" (Sigma 50-500mm). It is a perfect all around lens. And - the results are absoultely amazing! It isn't one of those "compromise" lenses. It is a truly great travel lens. It doesn't have the resolution of a fixed lens, but it is very, very good!

I think that you will love the 18-250 lens. You won't regret it!

Buschmaster · 01-27-2008, 04:27 PM

Normally tax return time would make me happy to be alive and I'd be lens shopping but it won't work out this year since I just don't make enough money.

Hopefully if I'm careful with my money eventually my tax return will turn into a lens.

For your situation you said it yourself, you need a ton of range. The 18-250 may be good, otherwise you could get the Sigma 17-70 and Tamron 70-300 Di LD (I'd recommend it over the Sigma having used both)

Then you have some macro capabilities.

Just another thing to make you think.

Romoman · 01-27-2008, 04:36 PM

I'm not sure what you have now, but I'm guessing a 50mm manual focus and the kit lens. The 70-300 is a good lens for the money. I have an older Tamron 28-200 that is a better lens that I bought off ebay for around $200. It's a very good all around lens.

However, after buying a Tamron 28-75 2.8, I would recommend taking a different approach. Good glass is probably one of the most important things if you want to get really great photos. I would suggest getting something like the Tamron 28-75 and waiting on the others.

Although, it would have made more sense to ask - What kind of photos do you usually take? What kind of conditions? What's your end goal for the photos?

Confused · 01-27-2008, 05:01 PM

Hi Colleen

Quite frankly I was utterly amazed to view your statement that:

Quote:

I read about people who got the 18-250.........finding that it was too heavy and bulky to leave on all the time.

If you'll forgive the parlance, I have never heard such a load of utter 'hogwash' in my life and can only imagine that this contribution was probably written by 6-stone weakling ! It's a real pity that there isn't a photographic store in your local neighbourhood who have the Tamron/Pentax version of this lens that you could try out first !

Nevertheless, I utterly agree with TomInJax's sentiments when he said:

Quote:

I have the Tamron 18-250, and it isn't heavy.......it's a perfect all around lens. And - the results are absolutely amazing ! It isn't one of those "compromise" lenses. It is a truly great travel lens. It doesn't have t he resolution of a fixed lens, but it is very, very good ! I think that you will love the 18-250 lens. You won't regret it !

You said yourself:

Quote:

I often am shooting kids and pets who are far away one second... and then all up in your face the next. ...and I got thinking about sitting on the dock at the lake and being able to take great photos across the lake... but not of the kids right beside me.

That's what zoom lenses are all about.....capturing those special moments, not constantly swapping lenses over all the time !
Do the maths and simply factor in the additional cost of purchasing and then carting around all those heavy individual lenses you would need to cover the optical range that the Tamron/Pentax 18-250mm zoom does !! In my humble opinion, the 18-250mm really is a 'no-brainer' decision for many photographers and even my wife is happy to use my K10D/Tamron on occasion.......
case proven ! For what it's worth, I think you're worrying about nothing at all......just my 0.2 cents worth !

Best regards
Richard

lapeen · 01-27-2008, 05:26 PM

Originally posted by Romoman

I'm not sure what you have now, but I'm guessing a 50mm manual focus and the kit lens. The 70-300 is a good lens for the money. I have an older Tamron 28-200 that is a better lens that I bought off ebay for around $200. It's a very good all around lens.

However, after buying a Tamron 28-75 2.8, I would recommend taking a different approach. Good glass is probably one of the most important things if you want to get really great photos. I would suggest getting something like the Tamron 28-75 and waiting on the others.

Although, it would have made more sense to ask - What kind of photos do you usually take? What kind of conditions? What's your end goal for the photos?

I have thought about that Tamron before... and now you have me thinking about it again

I shoot a lot of stuff indoors, and that lens would be a great replacement to my kit.... and it has more range outdoors than my kit.

What kind of photos do I usually take... hmm... kids and pets mostly. Lots of indoor photos (especially in the winter) of parties and events and the kids playing, and in the warmer months lots of outdoor photos at the beach, road trips, etc. I also enjoy just going out in the yard to take photos of flowers and bugs n' stuff.

You can see lots here if you are so inclined... the 'winter' folder are my favorites that I have taken recently!!

lapeen · 01-27-2008, 05:29 PM

Though I am pondering that Tamron now... I am definitely leaning towards the 18-250 thanks you all of your great responses! It's good to hear that it is not too bulky. I too was wondering about that comment as when I went to Amazon.com it lists the Sigma 70-300 at 1.5 pounds, and the 18-250 at only 1 pound... plus it doesn't look that big in photos.

I would love to see a photo of it beside the kit lens.

I would also love to open a camera store around here and stock only Pentax stuff

Romoman · 01-27-2008, 06:18 PM

I took a look through your album (great shots by the way!) and noticed that you didn't have many shots from far away or types of shots where it looked helpful. You did have a ton of close range and indoor shots where the 2.8 would be great.

I would suggest getting the 28-75 and look for a used 70-300 (they get down around $100 I think) when you have the money. That seems like it would fit your style and photos the best.

antman · 01-27-2008, 09:03 PM

I am in a very similar situation ATM, having changed over from Minolta MF, and needing new lenses. Previously I had 28-105 and 70-210 both 2.8, but the cost of replacing these in AF was too much. I was looking at 17-70, Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 macro, or the Tamron SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 ( when it comes), and I wasn't decided at all in the longer zooms given my budget. I had planned to buy the 18-50 at Xmas via amazon but given so many reports of bad QC I put it off. .. However lately I have been leaning to the 18-250's as I've seen some lovely sharp pix taken with them, and despite not being a very fast lens it would be a very useful upgrade on the kit lens. Perhaps like you I will settle for this and some fast MF primes for my low light work in clubs etc.

Confused · 01-28-2008, 01:19 PM

Hi Colleen

I was pleased to read your comment that:

Quote:

I am definitely leaning towards the 18-250 thanks you all of your great responses!

I remember that there were numerous disparaging comments originating mainly from the 'prime-lens' brigade when Pentax first announced last year that they would be producing what is effectively a 'licensed' version of Tamron's 18-250mm Di II superzoom. There seemed to be an unspoken consensus that because the new version was not an original Pentax design, it should be regarded as slightly 'inferior' in some respects. However, the well-worn phrase about "imitation being the sincerest form of flattery" springs to mind !
It is my belief that Pentax's management team came to the sobering conclusion that Tamron's 18-250mm lens was turning out to be a massive sales success, due to it's reputed quality and excellent pricing. The prospect of seeing all that profitable revenue stream disappearing into Tamron's coffers rather than their own must have resulted in the strategic decision to purchase the manufacturing rights as quickly as possible, because this simply made sound commercial sense for Pentax. Their situation wasn't exactly helped by their apparent inability to produce sufficient quantities of Pentax lenses whilst having nothing equivalent in their line-up to compete with Tamron's offering. Anyhow, that's the way I see matters but I feel confident in recommending the Tamron 18-250mm to anyone who is in the market for such an excellent all-round zoom-lens. If I were you, I'd simply GO FOR IT !

Best regards
Richard

tux08902 · 01-28-2008, 01:58 PM

lapeen, I know what you mean about the AF. MF is fine, but AF is more convenient. I paid for my F 50/1.7 yesterday, after selling my A 28/2.8 and my M 50/1.7. I just had to.

MSM · 01-29-2008, 05:34 PM

I have had a similar quandry. On another thread, Cajuncutter noted that Circuit City was selling the Pentax 50-200 mm for $159. I just picked up one and was going to buy a 50 mm /1.4 too. But, I decided that I wanted to wait and see how the upcoming 35mm macro performed. For the price the 50-200 and the 50 mm /1.4 would be less than the Pentax/Tamron 18-250 mm. This assumes that you have the kit and 18-55 mm covered. The 50-200 is also lighter if that is still a concern. Just a thought...

mark

lapeen · 01-30-2008, 08:13 PM

Originally posted by MSM

I have had a similar quandry. On another thread, Cajuncutter noted that Circuit City was selling the Pentax 50-200 mm for $159. I just picked up one and was going to buy a 50 mm /1.4 too. But, I decided that I wanted to wait and see how the upcoming 35mm macro performed. For the price the 50-200 and the 50 mm /1.4 would be less than the Pentax/Tamron 18-250 mm. This assumes that you have the kit and 18-55 mm covered. The 50-200 is also lighter if that is still a concern. Just a thought...

mark

hmmmm..... $159 may be too good to pass up. I may go that route... thank you for letting me know!!! Our CC doesn't carry pentax, but I checked and they do have it online.

MSM · 01-31-2008, 09:55 PM

Originally posted by lapeen

hmmmm..... $159 may be too good to pass up. I may go that route... thank you for letting me know!!! Our CC doesn't carry pentax, but I checked and they do have it online.

Just received the 50-200 mm today. Only got to shoot a few snapshots. Really nice lens for the money. I have used the 70-200 f4L from Canon in the past but I really didn't want to go for such a heavy, long and conspicous lens this go around. I knew this lens was going to be small but wow it is about the same size as the kit. I also got a chance to really see the benefit of the shake reduction at a longer focal length (200mm). I got some sharp shots at 1/25 s at 200.

Now just looking for a low light indoor lens possibly the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or I may go the 35mm limited depending on the price. ( I justify it by the money I saved not buying the 50-135 or soon to be released 60-250

)

mark

lapeen · 02-01-2008, 04:46 AM

Well.....

After hemming and hawing about it all week...

This morning I took the plunge and just went ahead and bought the 18-250. I know that if I got something else, I would still always *wish* I got the 18-250... especially when I am out with the kids and miss a shot or not even bother with a shot because they are out of the range of whatever lens I had on. I could hear myself grumbling now... [I]"If I had gotten that 18-250 I could have gotten that shot, but nooooooo....."

I also ordered my 50 1.4 ...can't WAIT for that one to arrive!!!!

01-27-2008, 04:00 PM	#1
lapeen Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: bangor, maine Posts: 380	Thinking out loud... (re: which zoom to buy) It's tax refund time My plan WAS to get the Pentax 18-250 and the 50mm 1.4. Now that the time is coming to take the plunge I am not really wanting to spend all that money. Also, I read on another board about people who got the 18-250 with the plan of it being their new 'walk-around' and finding that it was too heavy and bulky to leave on all the time. (All this would be MUCH easier if I was anywhere near a store that carried these things!) So... then I got hooked on the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro, nice long range, a lot of folks very happy with it, and macro could be fun And I could get that and the 50mm for less $$ than just the 18-250!! But then this morning I got thinking about my life and the way I shoot. I often am shooting kids and pets who are far away one second... and then all up in your face the next. ...and I got thinking about sitting on the dock at the lake and being able to take great photos across the lake... but not of the kids right beside me. I HAVE a 50mm 1.7A... so I guess I could wait on the 50 1.4 for now... but I really want that AF. What to do... what to do....

01-27-2008, 05:01 PM	#5
Confused Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: London Posts: 1,067	Hi Colleen Quite frankly I was utterly amazed to view your statement that: Quote: I read about people who got the 18-250.........finding that it was too heavy and bulky to leave on all the time. If you'll forgive the parlance, I have never heard such a load of utter 'hogwash' in my life and can only imagine that this contribution was probably written by 6-stone weakling ! It's a real pity that there isn't a photographic store in your local neighbourhood who have the Tamron/Pentax version of this lens that you could try out first ! Nevertheless, I utterly agree with TomInJax's sentiments when he said: Quote: I have the Tamron 18-250, and it isn't heavy.......it's a perfect all around lens. And - the results are absolutely amazing ! It isn't one of those "compromise" lenses. It is a truly great travel lens. It doesn't have t he resolution of a fixed lens, but it is very, very good ! I think that you will love the 18-250 lens. You won't regret it ! You said yourself: Quote: I often am shooting kids and pets who are far away one second... and then all up in your face the next. ...and I got thinking about sitting on the dock at the lake and being able to take great photos across the lake... but not of the kids right beside me. That's what zoom lenses are all about.....capturing those special moments, not constantly swapping lenses over all the time ! Do the maths and simply factor in the additional cost of purchasing and then carting around all those heavy individual lenses you would need to cover the optical range that the Tamron/Pentax 18-250mm zoom does !! In my humble opinion, the 18-250mm really is a 'no-brainer' decision for many photographers and even my wife is happy to use my K10D/Tamron on occasion....... case proven ! For what it's worth, I think you're worrying about nothing at all......just my 0.2 cents worth ! Best regards Richard Last edited by Confused; 01-27-2008 at 05:18 PM.

01-31-2008, 09:55 PM	#14
MSM Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Alabama Photos: Gallery Posts: 994	50-200 mm just arrived today Originally posted by lapeen hmmmm..... $159 may be too good to pass up. I may go that route... thank you for letting me know!!! Our CC doesn't carry pentax, but I checked and they do have it online. Just received the 50-200 mm today. Only got to shoot a few snapshots. Really nice lens for the money. I have used the 70-200 f4L from Canon in the past but I really didn't want to go for such a heavy, long and conspicous lens this go around. I knew this lens was going to be small but wow it is about the same size as the kit. I also got a chance to really see the benefit of the shake reduction at a longer focal length (200mm). I got some sharp shots at 1/25 s at 200. Now just looking for a low light indoor lens possibly the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 or I may go the 35mm limited depending on the price. ( I justify it by the money I saved not buying the 50-135 or soon to be released 60-250 ) mark

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
pentax kx shaking noise loud loud ?	ritualart	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	15	08-12-2010 08:41 AM
How reliable is the P645N, been thinking to buy a 2nd hand or a new old stock	nevin	Pentax Medium Format	7	09-16-2009 01:43 PM
What the hell is Hoya thinking?! Europeans buy your lenses NOW!	Edvinas	Pentax News and Rumors	107	07-29-2009 06:03 PM
I'm thinking of getting a K10D body only, but what lens to buy?	columbus	Pentax DSLR Discussion	17	03-25-2008 08:22 PM
Just thinking out loud here.	jbrowning	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	1	09-08-2007 05:05 AM

01-27-2008, 04:14 PM	#2
TomInJax Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Jacksonville, FL Photos: Gallery Posts: 531	I have the Tamron 18-250, and it isn't heavy. Especially compared to my new "Bigma" (Sigma 50-500mm). It is a perfect all around lens. And - the results are absoultely amazing! It isn't one of those "compromise" lenses. It is a truly great travel lens. It doesn't have the resolution of a fixed lens, but it is very, very good! I think that you will love the 18-250 lens. You won't regret it!

01-27-2008, 04:27 PM	#3
Buschmaster Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 806	Normally tax return time would make me happy to be alive and I'd be lens shopping but it won't work out this year since I just don't make enough money. Hopefully if I'm careful with my money eventually my tax return will turn into a lens. For your situation you said it yourself, you need a ton of range. The 18-250 may be good, otherwise you could get the Sigma 17-70 and Tamron 70-300 Di LD (I'd recommend it over the Sigma having used both) Then you have some macro capabilities. Just another thing to make you think.

01-27-2008, 04:36 PM	#4
Romoman Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Manchester, NH Posts: 126	I'm not sure what you have now, but I'm guessing a 50mm manual focus and the kit lens. The 70-300 is a good lens for the money. I have an older Tamron 28-200 that is a better lens that I bought off ebay for around $200. It's a very good all around lens. However, after buying a Tamron 28-75 2.8, I would recommend taking a different approach. Good glass is probably one of the most important things if you want to get really great photos. I would suggest getting something like the Tamron 28-75 and waiting on the others. Although, it would have made more sense to ask - What kind of photos do you usually take? What kind of conditions? What's your end goal for the photos?

01-27-2008, 05:26 PM	#6
lapeen Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: bangor, maine Posts: 380 Original Poster	Originally posted by Romoman I'm not sure what you have now, but I'm guessing a 50mm manual focus and the kit lens. The 70-300 is a good lens for the money. I have an older Tamron 28-200 that is a better lens that I bought off ebay for around $200. It's a very good all around lens. However, after buying a Tamron 28-75 2.8, I would recommend taking a different approach. Good glass is probably one of the most important things if you want to get really great photos. I would suggest getting something like the Tamron 28-75 and waiting on the others. Although, it would have made more sense to ask - What kind of photos do you usually take? What kind of conditions? What's your end goal for the photos? I have thought about that Tamron before... and now you have me thinking about it again I shoot a lot of stuff indoors, and that lens would be a great replacement to my kit.... and it has more range outdoors than my kit. What kind of photos do I usually take... hmm... kids and pets mostly. Lots of indoor photos (especially in the winter) of parties and events and the kids playing, and in the warmer months lots of outdoor photos at the beach, road trips, etc. I also enjoy just going out in the yard to take photos of flowers and bugs n' stuff. You can see lots here if you are so inclined... the 'winter' folder are my favorites that I have taken recently!!

01-27-2008, 05:29 PM	#7
lapeen Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: bangor, maine Posts: 380 Original Poster	Though I am pondering that Tamron now... I am definitely leaning towards the 18-250 thanks you all of your great responses! It's good to hear that it is not too bulky. I too was wondering about that comment as when I went to Amazon.com it lists the Sigma 70-300 at 1.5 pounds, and the 18-250 at only 1 pound... plus it doesn't look that big in photos. I would love to see a photo of it beside the kit lens. I would also love to open a camera store around here and stock only Pentax stuff

01-27-2008, 06:18 PM	#8
Romoman Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Manchester, NH Posts: 126	I took a look through your album (great shots by the way!) and noticed that you didn't have many shots from far away or types of shots where it looked helpful. You did have a ton of close range and indoor shots where the 2.8 would be great. I would suggest getting the 28-75 and look for a used 70-300 (they get down around $100 I think) when you have the money. That seems like it would fit your style and photos the best.

01-27-2008, 09:03 PM	#9
antman New Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: melbourne Posts: 11	I am in a very similar situation ATM, having changed over from Minolta MF, and needing new lenses. Previously I had 28-105 and 70-210 both 2.8, but the cost of replacing these in AF was too much. I was looking at 17-70, Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 macro, or the Tamron SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 ( when it comes), and I wasn't decided at all in the longer zooms given my budget. I had planned to buy the 18-50 at Xmas via amazon but given so many reports of bad QC I put it off. .. However lately I have been leaning to the 18-250's as I've seen some lovely sharp pix taken with them, and despite not being a very fast lens it would be a very useful upgrade on the kit lens. Perhaps like you I will settle for this and some fast MF primes for my low light work in clubs etc.

01-28-2008, 01:19 PM	#10
Confused Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: London Posts: 1,067	Hi Colleen I was pleased to read your comment that: Quote: I am definitely leaning towards the 18-250 thanks you all of your great responses! I remember that there were numerous disparaging comments originating mainly from the 'prime-lens' brigade when Pentax first announced last year that they would be producing what is effectively a 'licensed' version of Tamron's 18-250mm Di II superzoom. There seemed to be an unspoken consensus that because the new version was not an original Pentax design, it should be regarded as slightly 'inferior' in some respects. However, the well-worn phrase about "imitation being the sincerest form of flattery" springs to mind ! It is my belief that Pentax's management team came to the sobering conclusion that Tamron's 18-250mm lens was turning out to be a massive sales success, due to it's reputed quality and excellent pricing. The prospect of seeing all that profitable revenue stream disappearing into Tamron's coffers rather than their own must have resulted in the strategic decision to purchase the manufacturing rights as quickly as possible, because this simply made sound commercial sense for Pentax. Their situation wasn't exactly helped by their apparent inability to produce sufficient quantities of Pentax lenses whilst having nothing equivalent in their line-up to compete with Tamron's offering. Anyhow, that's the way I see matters but I feel confident in recommending the Tamron 18-250mm to anyone who is in the market for such an excellent all-round zoom-lens. If I were you, I'd simply GO FOR IT ! Best regards Richard

01-28-2008, 01:58 PM	#11
tux08902 Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: North Brunswick, NJ Posts: 473	lapeen, I know what you mean about the AF. MF is fine, but AF is more convenient. I paid for my F 50/1.7 yesterday, after selling my A 28/2.8 and my M 50/1.7. I just had to.

01-29-2008, 05:34 PM	#12
MSM Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Alabama Photos: Gallery Posts: 994	I have had a similar quandry. On another thread, Cajuncutter noted that Circuit City was selling the Pentax 50-200 mm for $159. I just picked up one and was going to buy a 50 mm /1.4 too. But, I decided that I wanted to wait and see how the upcoming 35mm macro performed. For the price the 50-200 and the 50 mm /1.4 would be less than the Pentax/Tamron 18-250 mm. This assumes that you have the kit and 18-55 mm covered. The 50-200 is also lighter if that is still a concern. Just a thought... mark

01-30-2008, 08:13 PM	#13
lapeen Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: bangor, maine Posts: 380 Original Poster	Originally posted by MSM I have had a similar quandry. On another thread, Cajuncutter noted that Circuit City was selling the Pentax 50-200 mm for $159. I just picked up one and was going to buy a 50 mm /1.4 too. But, I decided that I wanted to wait and see how the upcoming 35mm macro performed. For the price the 50-200 and the 50 mm /1.4 would be less than the Pentax/Tamron 18-250 mm. This assumes that you have the kit and 18-55 mm covered. The 50-200 is also lighter if that is still a concern. Just a thought... mark hmmmm..... $159 may be too good to pass up. I may go that route... thank you for letting me know!!! Our CC doesn't carry pentax, but I checked and they do have it online.

02-01-2008, 04:46 AM	#15
lapeen Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: bangor, maine Posts: 380 Original Poster	Well..... After hemming and hawing about it all week... This morning I took the plunge and just went ahead and bought the 18-250. I know that if I got something else, I would still always wish I got the 18-250... especially when I am out with the kids and miss a shot or not even bother with a shot because they are out of the range of whatever lens I had on. I could hear myself grumbling now... [I]"If I had gotten that 18-250 I could have gotten that shot, but nooooooo....." I also ordered my 50 1.4 ...can't WAIT for that one to arrive!!!!