Originally posted by StDevious Anybody who has used these two lenses, is there a noticeable difference between the size/weight with these lenses while walking around ?
I'm thinking of selling the Tamron and getting the Pentax since I'll be moving to the wet NW soon
I have both. DA* 16-50/2.8 is considerably bigger and heavier. Here are couple of pics that shows the difference:
Tamron is smaller and lighter. Also it is better wide open, especially at long end. Here you have to make choise: Do you want to pay premium for the DA* build quality over the Tamron (especially WR)? If WR is not absolute necessity, get Tamron if you are buying new. Put the money saved for extra lens, buy a trip or buy something nice to your wife/girlfriend. Tamron can produce very nice images.
That said I tend to prefer DA* over the Tamron even Tamron is better optically. DA* seems to produce more naturally looking images out-of-the-box (Tamron has warm cast) and DA* colors look better to my eyes. Also I like the feel and build quality of the DA* very much, that much that I haven't used Tamron since I got DA*. Most of the optical flaws are correctable in post processing (ie. in Lightroom with lens profiles) so I don't care much it being optically worse. DA* can get soft on the corners especially at wide end, which is the only real downside it has IMO (other being maybe failure prone SDM of the earlier versions of this lens which can be countered by converting lens to srewdrive).
I would say that DA* is worth twice the price of Tamron AT MOST. Nothing more.
And with DA* you can take posing pictures like this, if it's worth anything to you