Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-30-2008, 05:28 AM   #16
Veteran Member
cupic's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia-NSW
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,737
QuoteOriginally posted by beaumont Quote
Just left a long winded reply and then by computer shut down before it was sent...bummer. I'll try again.
I bought the 18-250 a month ago prior to going on vacation. Couldn't find much in the way of reviews, but there was one thread I found that did a very thorough tech analysis, and came up with favorable reviews. (Good news as I'm a newby and know nothing this indepth.) Having said this, looking back I went through the full 18-250 range everyday so this proved to be a perfect fit. I love the utility of this lens. I will attempt to attach a number of resized photos (which of course reduce the quality) to give you an idea...Hope this helps in some way. (One further note, the lens has a lock on it for the idle state which is necessary as it will creep when dangling from the neck.)

Is the first one Movie world @ gold coast Queensland


Watch out for Rodney hes a laugh

cheers

04-30-2008, 05:50 AM   #17
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 270
QuoteOriginally posted by hwblanks Quote
I had the Tamron version for a short while and the main reason that I got rid of it was the vigenetting at the wide end when I used both a UV and polarizer at the same time. Ironically, I've noticed the same thing with the 17-70 that I now have. Would replacing my standard UV and polarizer with the more expensive thin UV and polarizer filters help any?

I almost regret getting rid of the 18-250 now.

Thanks!
Heather.
My local camera store advised me to take the UV filter off to avoid the vinyetting.
04-30-2008, 09:47 AM   #18
Inactive Account




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

There's vinyetting and then there's vignetting. Care to explain the difference (he said pedantically)......lol !

Best regards
Richard
04-30-2008, 10:58 AM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: India
Posts: 162
Many of the Images in this thread of mine are done with Pentax 18-250mm lens.
Random Portraits with my New K20D: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

04-30-2008, 06:25 PM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 506
QuoteOriginally posted by cupic Quote
Is the first one Movie world @ gold coast Queensland


Watch out for Rodney hes a laugh

cheers
Nope, actually Disneyworld Florida. I think they call Hollywood Studios? Also St Pete's and NASA...
05-05-2008, 07:17 PM   #21
New Member




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 19
QuoteOriginally posted by hwblanks Quote
I had the Tamron version for a short while and the main reason that I got rid of it was the vigenetting at the wide end when I used both a UV and polarizer at the same time. Ironically, I've noticed the same thing with the 17-70 that I now have. Would replacing my standard UV and polarizer with the more expensive thin UV and polarizer filters help any?

I almost regret getting rid of the 18-250 now.

Thanks!
Heather.
This will be common to pretty much any wide angle lens with 2 filters fitted. Once you have a polariser fitted you don't need the UV anymore. Its good practice to use filters one at a time even on longer lenses, otherwise there are too many glass surfaces to collect dirt, cause reflections etc.

Some ultrawides may need the thin filters - even if you are only using one filter at a time.
05-06-2008, 07:39 AM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: nyc
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 564
Just my thoughts....

I had this lens briefly. Purchased thru Amazon for a trip and intended as a try-and-buy. I returned that, kept the 10-20 sigma...but-

I think if I had spent more time using the lens it may not have gone back. It's always floating around as a "to get again" lens, I think.

I was not overly knocked out by my own images, but what I shot was extremely limited and pedestrian, nothing worth the effort really. I didn't give it a fair workout.

Had that lens been out when I went for the 50-200, or even the 50-135, I may only own the 18-250. Am I saying it's as good as a star lens? No. But bang for the buck its a pretty good deal, and from a travel perspective, if I can cut it to 4 lenses (18-250, 40 ltd, 10-17 and 10-20), thats a pretty small package with the sigma being the biggest of the group.

I just did a lot of walking around and shooting over the weekend, and it was either the 10-20 or 50-135, but there were times when I wished I didnt need to swap lenses (no spare body, not going that route). The only gripe I would then have about the 18-250 would be the wide end of things, but I could easily carry just the fisheye and the 18-250 and have a nice range.

I will probably rent one for my family's summer vacation. Traveling with three 2 year olds and a 4 year old, packing light is the only way to go, which means my current bag needs to go on a diet
05-06-2008, 08:25 AM   #23
Veteran Member
rfortson's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Houston TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,129
I've had this lens (the Tamron) for exactly a year. I bought it last year when it came out at a Tamron photo class, and I'm going to the same class this weekend, so it's the one year anniversary!

Anyhoo...this is a very versatile lens and a great travel lens. I took it to Peru and Machu Picchu as my only lens and got some wonderful shots. Check the shots here.

One thing to keep in mind is that it's actually slightly faster than the 18-55 kit lens since the kit lens is f/5.6 at 55mm and the 18-250 is f/4.5 at 55mm. I think it goes to f/5.6 around 70mm. Not a huge difference, but still faster.

Here's a recent shot I took with the Tamron 18-250, 250mm, f/6.3 (wide open), ISO 1600, 1/125s. This was taken at around 18" which is the "macro" function (it's really a close focusing ability).



Get this lens. It's great for travel and general photography, with minimal drawbacks.

05-13-2008, 08:22 AM   #24
Veteran Member
DanLoc78's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Philadelphia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 915
Original Poster
that's a fantastic shot, and at ISO 1600 it looks really really nice. Did you use post-processing to eliminate some noise??
05-13-2008, 08:51 AM   #25
Site Supporter
Fl_Gulfer's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Florida Gulfer
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,051
I have the Tamron mainly because of the 6 year warrenty and it stays on my camera most of the time. I just love this lens.
05-14-2008, 08:22 PM   #26
Veteran Member
rfortson's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Houston TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,129
QuoteOriginally posted by DanLoc78 Quote
that's a fantastic shot, and at ISO 1600 it looks really really nice. Did you use post-processing to eliminate some noise??
Hi Dan,

Yes, I did remove a bit of PF using the Pentax software from this shot. However, I usually don't notice PF in my shots. I didn't need to do any noise reduction as I was using the K20D on this shot.

I noticed in the Tamron class I took this past weekend that Don Gale (the pro teaching the course) used the 18-250 the entire time. He said he always had a body with the 18-250 on it, and a wide zoom on another body. He also showed shots from a friend's wedding he shot the previous weekend as a favor. Which lens did he use for the entire wedding (for his friend's wedding)? Yep, the 18-250. Of course, he did have an assistant holding off camera flashes for him. Still, that's a powerful endorsement in my book.
05-19-2008, 06:23 PM   #27
Inactive Account




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

Blimey, surely I can't be reading that right ? This is truly SHOCKING news, it must be some kind of a sick mistake ? I think I'd better hold the front page, to avoid the possibility of serious public disorder....

QuoteQuote:
Don Gale (the pro teaching the course) used the 18-250 the entire time.
Bl**dy Hell, a genuine 'Pro' actually using a 18-250mm zoom-lens ? In front of witnesses ? Well, this sort of blasphemy is VIRTUALLY guaranteed to p**s-off the 'died-in-the-wool' prime lens brigade ! Talk about 'putting the cat amongst the pigeons', I think the heretics among us should all just stand back for a moment, tentatively light the blue touchpaper and then wait for the inevitable sparks to fly.........Hunker down folks.........INCOMING !!!!!!! Kabooooommm.............LOL !

Best regards
Richard

Last edited by Confused; 05-19-2008 at 08:33 PM.
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, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sigma 18-250 or Pentax/Tamron 18-250? mjbens01 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 07-08-2010 09:10 PM
Pentax 18-250 always same as Tamron 18-250? kitkat Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 07-08-2010 08:30 AM
Which 18-250? kyteflyer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 07-04-2009 03:06 PM
DA* 60-250 First Look Wheatfield Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 0 06-22-2009 04:26 PM
Why DA18-250 is double the price of Tamron 18-250? raider Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 12-13-2008 05:40 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:13 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