[yygomez]

I would love to hear the opinion of some owner of the new 18-270, how it compares in terms of IQ on the same range versus the old Pentax/Tamron 18-250?

[Adam]

I would love to hear the opinion of some owner of the new 18-270, how it compares in terms of IQ on the same range versus the old Pentax/Tamron 18-250?

From an IQ perspective you're probably not going to see much of a change. The nice thing about the 18-270mm, IMO, is the HSM. Pentax finally has a modern superzoom!

[Docrwm]

Plus you can get a nicely used 18-250 from National Camera Exchange for $249 right now, as opposed to what $799?

[DSims]

The review of the 18-270 on this site also suggests that the 18-250 is a much better value, if that's what you're after.

Anyhow, I presume you already know the IQ on any such superzoom lens is only so-so. But some people really love them for travel, for example. Personally, I found that even the superior DA55-300 never gave me a truly compelling photo over 135mm, which was when I went after the DA*50-135.


If you like the results, then great. I found I was better off sticking to primes over 135mm. In any case, I'd drop any part of the zoom range where you don't like the results. You might consider the DA18-135 instead.

[Docrwm]

The review of the 18-270 on this site also suggests that the 18-250 is a much better value, if that's what you're after.

Anyhow, I presume you already know the IQ on any such superzoom lens is only so-so. But some people really love them for travel, for example. Personally, I found that even the superior DA55-300 never gave me a truly compelling photo over 135mm, which was when I went after the DA*50-135.


If you like the results, then great. I found I was better off sticking to primes over 135mm. In any case, I'd drop any part of the zoom range where you don't like the results. You might consider the DA18-135 instead.

Apples and Oranges - Primes and Zooms. It's not one or the other. A zoom can be an excellent Zoom but not as good as a Prime at its specific focal length. There are tons of advantages to superzooms, its why they outsell primes. The 18-250 is not a bad zoom, its just not great at some focal lengths - but it's often better than not having a long enough lens and having to try to crop your 15mm Most Excellent Prime Limited when you actually needed 200mm but didn't have it.

[DSims]

Apples and Oranges - Primes and Zooms. It's not one or the other. A zoom can be an excellent Zoom but not as good as a Prime at its specific focal length. There are tons of advantages to superzooms, its why they outsell primes. The 18-250 is not a bad zoom, its just not great at some focal lengths - but it's often better than not having a long enough lens and having to try to crop your 15mm Most Excellent Prime Limited when you actually needed 200mm but didn't have it.

I thought I was being clear - I'm saying it might be better to crop a 135mm shot than using a lens with mediocre quality at 250mm.

The mention of primes was only to point out that as you go longer, there comes a point where a quality zoom can become both too heavy and too expensive. For me that point was above 135mm.

Between ~18-135mm, one has many choices, and can choose medium priced zooms with above average quality, along with various cheap or expensive options. Longer than that (and to some extent, wider than that) the options become more limited - i.e. you have to choose between cheap, expensive, and really expensive!

[ihasa]

I have just been looking at an ephotozine review including samples of the 18-135 and the 18-270, and the latter seems to be a much better lens - at least, the reviewer's sample was better!

[DSims]

I have just been looking at an ephotozine review including samples of the 18-135 and the 18-270, and the latter seems to be a much better lens - at least, the reviewer's sample was better!

Interesting ... I find this easy to believe - the main part I'd question is the image quality of (and therefore the value of even having) the 135-270mm range. For example, looking at the images, I wondered if the 190mm image cropped would be better than the 270mm result. But of course, if it's good out to 200mm this still gives you much more range than 135mm. In any case, the use of the K-5 IIs certainly didn't hurt performance at all!

However, I found it takes a bit of time with real-world use until you discover that - for example - you get no compelling images from the long end of your zoom. This review was interesting (thanks for sharing it), but it showed no images that could even begin to reveal this possible trait.

[koper]

[koper]

[koper]

[koper]

[koper]

i have pentax 18-250 and pentax18-270
The nice thing about the 18-270mm, IMO, + HSM
the pictures are taken with pentax18-270mm
it is a good upgrade

[yygomez]

Thanks all for the comment.
I own the Tamron 18-250, the Pentax DA 12-24, and the DA*50-135, I was just looking for something with slightly better IQ for travel photography, as you know when you are traveling sometimes is not easy to change lenses. Ideally I would like something on the 18-200 range with slightly better IQ, that's why I was asking about the new 18-270 but it seems that is not better than the tamron 18-250 in terms of IQ.
You can see my work here My Google+ photos
90% of all the pictures were taken with the Tamron 18-250 and a Pentax K7.
Thanks again.
Jorge.

[123jippo]

new DA 18-270 is made in china. This pic is from lens review found this site. Much money to pay for china lens (and quality)...