[zeanonjenkins]

They already take amazing photos - what more do you need? There's actually one higher level of "amazing," but it requires * and Ltd prime lenses (and lots of $). But I don't think this suits your current shooting style at all.

Unless the Vivitar 400/22 takes fantastic photos I'd leave it home. I've never even heard of a 400mm lens that slow (f/22) before, so it's hard to imagine it would be better than 270mm at f/6.3.

Thats true, im trying to save as much spending money for my trip as possible as im going for my girlfriends birthday and want to treat her. so splashing out on limited and * lenses isnt really an option for me.
Sorry my bad, it is actually a Vivitar MC Telephoto f=400mm 1:5.6, not an f22 (no idea where that came from), some of the wildlife pictures i have taken with it are an "okay" standard, pictures i take with prime lenses (especially this 400mm) just seem sort of... dull. like theres hardly any colour, its just dark and gloomy. But as i said, theres not really an option for me to take it on holiday with me due to its weight and size.

---------- Post added 06-16-14 at 09:22 PM ----------

No, you are looking at it backwards, the overlap allows far fewer lens changes than if there was no overlap. But it's just another option, one that works very well for my wife. I carry three lenses when I'm using zooms, 12-24, 16-50 and 60-250 she prefers to carry less glass.

It sounds to me as if your overriding concern is not changing lenses, in that case the 18-270 sounds perfect!

Yes my main concern is not changing lenses, ive missed countless opportunities for a good shot all because I had the wrong lens on my camera at the time. Thats why im looking for a lens that can cover alot of distance and still give a decent amount of image quality, especially at a distance. Not to mention i want to reduce the risk of dust getting into my camera when changing lenses etc, im just looking for a general all-rounder pentax lens that will be useful when travelling, which is why i was asking for peoples opinions in trading in my 18-55 and 50-200 for the 18-270mm.

how would you guys rate the 18-270 on quality? compared to my current lenses?

[paraben]

I would recommend the Sigma 18-250 DC Macro HSM. I prefer not to change lenses when I'm on a citytrip, at the beach in the wind etc., and I find the use of this "superzoom" very convenient. IQ is of course not the same as a bunch of primes, but still very acceptable (I'm not a pixel-peeper). Compared to the Pentax 18-270 it's slightly sharper, specially at the tele end, has a bit faster AF, and you'll even save some money. I am using it for 1.5 year now and am very happy with it.

[OregonJim]

I'm not picking on the OP - he has a valid query and deserves good advice. But, it begs the question:

Why do people buy an interchangeable lens camera and then try to get all their bases covered with one lens?

It's like buying a car with a stick shift and then trying to drive it like an automatic.

We know why superzoom lenses are marketed. They're for people coming from the point-and-shoot world who think buying an SLR will improve their pictures, without any additional effort on their part. All they end up with is a more expensive point-and-shoot. Eventually, the realization comes that they're not getting the same kind of pictures that others (with the same camera, better lens, and lots more experience) can get, so they either give up or move to another brand. Some of the lucky ones end up at places like this forum, and they get (usually) good advice to steer them in the right direction.

So, my advice: get the best lenses you can afford, not the most convenient. Learn to change lenses quickly. Learn to predict the focal length you'll need for the situation. Honestly, 99% of the time you'll be using one, maybe two focal lengths for any given environment. Nobody needs to cover every single millimeter of focal length range. That is nothing more than LBA. Creatively speaking, it is actually counter-productive to have such a range avaiable, especially in a single lens. You pay for that perceived convenience in terms of image clarity, sharpness, contrast, speed, and a whole lot of things. Most of all, you pay in the area of personal growth. Narrow zooms can truly be convenient, but wide zooms make us lazy. We don't think about where we are, the framing and composition, because we assume that a twist of the zoom ring will get us there, no matter where we happen to be standing. It doesn't. Most of the great shots are missed by standing just inches away from the right spot.

P.S. - don't take me too seriously. It's just a rant.

[hcc]

Back to the OP, there are a number all-around (or all-in-one) zoom lenses, incl. DA18-135mm, DA18-270mm.....

I would not discard the older DA18-250mm. The Da18-250mm was regarded as one of the best all-in-one zoom lenses, across all brands incl. Canikon. It is very sturdy and its track record is impressive. The lens is relatively compact and light (almost same size as DA18-135mm when locked).The DA18-250mm/Tamron 18-250mm is no longer manufactured but it can be found second hand at reasonable prices.

In a few words, the Da18-250mm might be a cheaper long-distance all-in-one alternative to the pricy Pentax DA18-270mm and the heavy Sigma 18-250mm.

[zeanonjenkins]

I'm not picking on the OP - he has a valid query and deserves good advice. But, it begs the question:

Why do people buy an interchangeable lens camera and then try to get all their bases covered with one lens?

It's like buying a car with a stick shift and then trying to drive it like an automatic.

We know why superzoom lenses are marketed. They're for people coming from the point-and-shoot world who think buying an SLR will improve their pictures, without any additional effort on their part. All they end up with is a more expensive point-and-shoot. Eventually, the realization comes that they're not getting the same kind of pictures that others (with the same camera, better lens, and lots more experience) can get, so they either give up or move to another brand. Some of the lucky ones end up at places like this forum, and they get (usually) good advice to steer them in the right direction.

So, my advice: get the best lenses you can afford, not the most convenient. Learn to change lenses quickly. Learn to predict the focal length you'll need for the situation. Honestly, 99% of the time you'll be using one, maybe two focal lengths for any given environment. Nobody needs to cover every single millimeter of focal length range. That is nothing more than LBA. Creatively speaking, it is actually counter-productive to have such a range avaiable, especially in a single lens. You pay for that perceived convenience in terms of image clarity, sharpness, contrast, speed, and a whole lot of things. Most of all, you pay in the area of personal growth. Narrow zooms can truly be convenient, but wide zooms make us lazy. We don't think about where we are, the framing and composition, because we assume that a twist of the zoom ring will get us there, no matter where we happen to be standing. It doesn't. Most of the great shots are missed by standing just inches away from the right spot.

P.S. - don't take me too seriously. It's just a rant.

I completely understand where you're coming from, the only reason I say about replacing my 18-55 and 50-200 lenses with 1 lens (such as the 18-270) is to reduce luggage weight for travelling, to reduce the amount I'm going to be carrying around with me (as I'm going to be doing a lot of walking and shopping :P ) and also because this Isn't just a holiday for me.
I'm going out there to spend 3 weeks with my girlfriend for her birthday so I want to focus on her as much as possible (by that I don't mean with a camera) and to take her places, I don't want to have to make her wait for me to change lenses etc to get a decent picture, when this time is supposed to be for her (we only get to see each other 5 weeks a year, sometimes not even that).
I just thought having most of my lenses in 1 lens instead would save some space for me to get her some things, and will reduce the weight on my shoulders as no doubt she'll be doing more shopping than me (and I'll probably be the one carrying it all) :P and would hopefully reduce time that I'd be spending changing lenses and such.

I know it must sound like some stupid reasons, but I'm only an amateur photographer, its just a hobby for me and as I'm still learning I feel I may learn better with a general all-rounder lens such as the Pentax 18-270 or the sigma 18-250 macro (as paraben mentioned) as a starter, then once I get used to it maybe expanding my range of lenses.

I have previously said I have a number of prime lenses which I do tinker about with, trying different settings, learning what helps make a picture better, I just don't want to be fiddling around with settings etc too much while on holiday.

I know I seem pathetic and such as most of you are professional photographers, who know exactly what you're talking about and can spot an opportunity for a great photo and know exactly what gear etc to use, but I'm still learning and really appreciate all of the help and advice you guys have gave me, I just like to see peoples opinions before splashing out on something that might not be right for me without looking at and understanding all of the variables, such as different lenses of the same focal length that give better IQ in different ways.

So thanks for your help guys, I've been looking at pictures taken with the 18-270 and some of them seem to have really high contrast? could that be due to the lens or user error? there is several pictures taken with both the Pentax 18-270 and the Sigma 18-250 and although the quality of the picture seems lower for the pentax, the extra 20mm focal length seems to give alot more distance than I originally thought.

Pentax SMC DA 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 SDM Lens Review
Sigma 18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Macro OS HSM Lens Review

Here's the reviews for each on ephotozine, they seem to give similar sample photos, check out the quality of the first 2 pictures for both, I think there is a huge difference between the qualities?

[Driline]

Sell both of your mediocre kit lenses for a used Pentax DA 18-250. It's slightly better quality than your kit lenses and also better quality than the Pentax DA 18-270. And best of all you can pick up a used one for $300. More money to spend on vacation! It's a Win Win!

[EarlVonTapia]

I'm not picking on the OP - he has a valid query and deserves good advice. But, it begs the question:

Why do people buy an interchangeable lens camera and then try to get all their bases covered with one lens?

It's like buying a car with a stick shift and then trying to drive it like an automatic.

We know why superzoom lenses are marketed. They're for people coming from the point-and-shoot world who think buying an SLR will improve their pictures, without any additional effort on their part. All they end up with is a more expensive point-and-shoot. Eventually, the realization comes that they're not getting the same kind of pictures that others (with the same camera, better lens, and lots more experience) can get, so they either give up or move to another brand. Some of the lucky ones end up at places like this forum, and they get (usually) good advice to steer them in the right direction.

So, my advice: get the best lenses you can afford, not the most convenient. Learn to change lenses quickly. Learn to predict the focal length you'll need for the situation. Honestly, 99% of the time you'll be using one, maybe two focal lengths for any given environment. Nobody needs to cover every single millimeter of focal length range. That is nothing more than LBA. Creatively speaking, it is actually counter-productive to have such a range avaiable, especially in a single lens. You pay for that perceived convenience in terms of image clarity, sharpness, contrast, speed, and a whole lot of things. Most of all, you pay in the area of personal growth. Narrow zooms can truly be convenient, but wide zooms make us lazy. We don't think about where we are, the framing and composition, because we assume that a twist of the zoom ring will get us there, no matter where we happen to be standing. It doesn't. Most of the great shots are missed by standing just inches away from the right spot.

A DSLR with a superzoom will slaughter any camera with a smaller sensor.

Also, there's something to be said for not worrying about transporting a bag of lenses and constantly having to switch them, especially when on vacation.

Lastly, a superzoom doesn't mean you can't have other lenses. For the times when quality is what's needed, using another lens is the way to go. Tastes may differ here, but I'd rather have a bunch of lenses than a bunch of cameras.

In my mind a DSLR body with a superzoom is the best of all worlds.

As for lens suggestions, I'm with Driline. Get the DA 18-250 used. Save money, take great shots!

Alternatively, the new Sigma 18-200 Contemporary seems really appealing to me. It's the newest superzoom available in K Mount. It's a great price, and even though the range isn't as ultimate as the 18-270, I bet its IQ is way better.

[zeanonjenkins]

i think i would get more for part exchange against a new lens rather than selling them elsewhere, but unfortunately they dont sell the pentax DA 18-250. its better quality than the 18-270? some of the reviews i have read say differently, but maybe that could be due to manufacturing processes. personally im stuck between the sigma 18-250 (because it has the macro function) or the pentax 18-270 (for its larger focal length, and how its talked about being a all-rounder lens). I just still cant make up my mind, does anyone know someone on this forum who actually owns and uses the pentax 18-270 that could give more information from a users point of view?

[Driline]

Just take a look online. There are a lot of DA 18-270's for sale that just aren't selling. The price is too high for what it's worth. The DA 18-250 is a better lens Image Quality wise. Get the DA 18-250. There's one on ebay right now for $300. Sell your other lenses on ebay or the marketplace right here. Better yet find a DA 18-250 on the marketplace. I like purchasing from members because 9 times out of 10 they sell a good product and are trustworthy.

[zeanonjenkins]

i can pick up a brand new 18-270 for £419 (im in england) but i'll be trading my 18-55, 50-200, 200mm hoya prime, pentax MX film slr and a vivitar 285 zoom thyristor (all of which im never going to use, apart from the 18-55 and 50-200, but they'll be replaced by the 18-270 anyway) all in as part exchange off of the £419 18-270 lens, so hopefully that would knock the price down abit

[OregonJim]

For the times when quality is what's needed, using another lens is the way to go.

And when is quality not needed? You just said, in effect, "if you don't care about quality, use a superzoom".

In my mind a DSLR body with a superzoom is the best of all worlds.

In my mind, it is the worst of all worlds. But, we can agree to disagree.

If all you want is a record of where you were, go for a superzoom. Nothing wrong with that.

[zeanonjenkins]

i think now all im looking for is a basic answer, would you say the 18-270 would give less, equal or greater quality than the 18-55mm kit lens and the 50-200mm lens?

[OregonJim]

i think now all im looking for is a basic answer, would you say the 18-270 would give less, equal or greater quality than the 18-55mm kit lens and the 50-200mm lens?

Those lenses are all in the same class. You will see more variance at this level, copy to copy, so it depends on the copy you get.

The best thing to do is visit the Lens Club postings. Look at the images that others have posted using the lens you're interested in. Keep in mind, however, that the consumer level lenses vary more from copy to copy - you're not guaranteed to get the same results.

[zeanonjenkins]

Those lenses are all in the same class. You will see more variance at this level, copy to copy, so it depends on the copy you get.

What do you mean more variance? i assume by you saying they're all in the same class you mean DA 's?

[OregonJim]

What do you mean more variance? i assume by you saying they're all in the same class you mean DA 's?

By variance I mean that you will see more differences from one copy to the next of the same lens. The cheaper lenses are cheaper because they use parts with looser tolerances, don't go through exhausive testing, and aren't subjected to the same level of quality control as more expensive lenses.