Pentax vs Tamron

Bronco77 · 01-29-2013, 05:33 PM

Hi Pentax People,
As some of you know, I have just entered the digital world of photography, my wife's camera is the K30 and mine is the
K-5 iis, both cameras came with the pentax da wr lenses; one was the 18-55mm and the second was the 55-300mm,
since we kept trying to steal each other lenses, we decided to purchase a couple of lenses off of ebay.
I picked up (new) AF 17-50mm F2.8 Tamron, AF 28-80mm F3.5-5.6 Tamron, AF 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 Tamron, AF 70-200 F2.8 Tamron, I am also waiting for a couple of higher telephoto lenses from Sigma.
After experimenting a little with these lenses, and far from being an expert, really really far, I have found that the Tamron lenses seem to be equal or better than the pentax "kit" lenses, except at their absolute minimum and maximum ranges.
I know that pentax has a higher end lens DA (star), but being on a macaroni diet, (some idiot spent their savings on new cameras and lenses), I feel that the Tamron and hopefully the Sigma lenses are a good substitution. Does anyone else agree or am I standing out in left field, or is that out standing in left field? Never could figure that out.
I apologize if I have broken forum protocol, still learning. Thanks for listening!
BMcN

**Lowell Goudge** · 01-29-2013, 05:53 PM

The 17-50 and 70-200 are both a big step up from the Pentax kit lenses, better to compare to the 16-50 and 50-135

**jatrax** · 01-29-2013, 05:57 PM

All manufacturers have a range of lenses, some good and some bad. The best Tamron or Sigma are generally very close and sometimes better than comparable quality Pentax (or Nikon or Canon) lenses. The cheaper ones are well, cheaper. So you really cannot say that Pentax is better or worse than Tamron, you can say this particular lens is better or worse.

In your list you have two good ones (17-50 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8) and a couple that are likely so-so (28-80 and 28-300).

Get in the habit of checking the lens database on this forum, at the top under "lenses" before you spend money. Practically any lens you will find in k-mount will be listed there.

Also the Pentax 55-300 you have is NOT WR.

Also, be careful when buying third party (Sigma, Tamron) lenses on ebay as they come in many different mounts. Make sure you get one in k-mount as anything else will not work. Not all ebay sellers are knowledgeable about cameras and they do make mistakes.

Docrwm · 01-29-2013, 05:58 PM

All I can say is that they also cost a good bit more in most instances. I like Tamron lenses - I have 3 K-mount lenses and each is a solid part of my lineup. The one you do not have is the 10-24 and its a very nice lens too. The 70-200 is an f2.8 and is a steal IMHO compared to the other options. The 28-300 - why? The 55-300 you have from Pentax is superior IMHO.

As for Pentax lenses, remember that the Maximum Assured Pricing is not the real pricing if you call B&H or Adorama.

Saxplayer1004 · 01-29-2013, 05:59 PM

Like said above, those 2.8 lenses are worlds ahead of the kit lenses. You should not see much of a difference in IQ with the other two lenses. Those two 2.8's you got really are top quality lenses and should be compared to the DA* line, although they lack the build quality of the DA*'s the image quality is on par. Which sigma are you looking at for long reach?

normhead · 01-29-2013, 06:38 PM

Every lens is different. The 17-50 is a better landscape lens and sharper over all than any zoom other lens in it's class. It's one drawback is it's not water sealed. But way better edges than the 16-50 Pentax.

The Tamron 70-200 2.8 is about equal to Sigma and Pentax offerings, but a lot less money. Definitely a keeper.

For the others, type the name of the lens with "photozone" into your google window and you'll probably get a decent rating on it. Not tested on a Pentax, but it will give you an idea of what a rough comparison might be like.

post_eos · 01-29-2013, 07:24 PM

I had an older version of the tamron 28-300 in EOS mount. Worked good on film. It was just OK on digital.

01-29-2013, 05:33 PM	#1
Bronco77 New Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 4	Pentax vs Tamron Hi Pentax People, As some of you know, I have just entered the digital world of photography, my wife's camera is the K30 and mine is the K-5 iis, both cameras came with the pentax da wr lenses; one was the 18-55mm and the second was the 55-300mm, since we kept trying to steal each other lenses, we decided to purchase a couple of lenses off of ebay. I picked up (new) AF 17-50mm F2.8 Tamron, AF 28-80mm F3.5-5.6 Tamron, AF 28-300mm F3.5-6.3 Tamron, AF 70-200 F2.8 Tamron, I am also waiting for a couple of higher telephoto lenses from Sigma. After experimenting a little with these lenses, and far from being an expert, really really far, I have found that the Tamron lenses seem to be equal or better than the pentax "kit" lenses, except at their absolute minimum and maximum ranges. I know that pentax has a higher end lens DA (star), but being on a macaroni diet, (some idiot spent their savings on new cameras and lenses), I feel that the Tamron and hopefully the Sigma lenses are a good substitution. Does anyone else agree or am I standing out in left field, or is that out standing in left field? Never could figure that out. I apologize if I have broken forum protocol, still learning. Thanks for listening! BMcN

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax/tamron 18-250 vs new Pentax/ Tamron 18-270	yygomez	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	16	07-16-2013 10:40 AM
Pentax 17-70 vs. Tamron 28-75 vs. Flash	mikemike	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	30	03-03-2013 09:13 AM
Pentax 18-135mm vs Pentax 55-300mm vs Tamron 18-200mm	anquire	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	09-22-2012 07:00 PM
Tamron 28-75 vs. Pentax 16-50 DA* vs. Pentax 50mm FA 1.4	jeremy_c	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	12-09-2008 09:47 AM
Tamron Di II 18-200mm vs. Tamron or Pentax 18-250mm vs. ???	PaddyB	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	08-23-2008 09:33 AM

01-29-2013, 05:53 PM	#2
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	The 17-50 and 70-200 are both a big step up from the Pentax kit lenses, better to compare to the 16-50 and 50-135

01-29-2013, 05:57 PM	#3
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	All manufacturers have a range of lenses, some good and some bad. The best Tamron or Sigma are generally very close and sometimes better than comparable quality Pentax (or Nikon or Canon) lenses. The cheaper ones are well, cheaper. So you really cannot say that Pentax is better or worse than Tamron, you can say this particular lens is better or worse. In your list you have two good ones (17-50 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8) and a couple that are likely so-so (28-80 and 28-300). Get in the habit of checking the lens database on this forum, at the top under "lenses" before you spend money. Practically any lens you will find in k-mount will be listed there. Also the Pentax 55-300 you have is NOT WR. Also, be careful when buying third party (Sigma, Tamron) lenses on ebay as they come in many different mounts. Make sure you get one in k-mount as anything else will not work. Not all ebay sellers are knowledgeable about cameras and they do make mistakes.

01-29-2013, 05:58 PM	#4
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	All I can say is that they also cost a good bit more in most instances. I like Tamron lenses - I have 3 K-mount lenses and each is a solid part of my lineup. The one you do not have is the 10-24 and its a very nice lens too. The 70-200 is an f2.8 and is a steal IMHO compared to the other options. The 28-300 - why? The 55-300 you have from Pentax is superior IMHO. As for Pentax lenses, remember that the Maximum Assured Pricing is not the real pricing if you call B&H or Adorama.

01-29-2013, 05:59 PM	#5
Saxplayer1004 Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Greenville SC Posts: 179	Like said above, those 2.8 lenses are worlds ahead of the kit lenses. You should not see much of a difference in IQ with the other two lenses. Those two 2.8's you got really are top quality lenses and should be compared to the DA* line, although they lack the build quality of the DA*'s the image quality is on par. Which sigma are you looking at for long reach?

01-29-2013, 06:38 PM	#6
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Every lens is different. The 17-50 is a better landscape lens and sharper over all than any zoom other lens in it's class. It's one drawback is it's not water sealed. But way better edges than the 16-50 Pentax. The Tamron 70-200 2.8 is about equal to Sigma and Pentax offerings, but a lot less money. Definitely a keeper. For the others, type the name of the lens with "photozone" into your google window and you'll probably get a decent rating on it. Not tested on a Pentax, but it will give you an idea of what a rough comparison might be like.

01-29-2013, 07:24 PM	#7
post_eos Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Riverside CA Photos: Albums Posts: 269	I had an older version of the tamron 28-300 in EOS mount. Worked good on film. It was just OK on digital.