Lens ordeal

iamweasel · 07-31-2008, 06:04 PM

If i grab the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 instead of the Tamron 18-250mm 3.5-6.3, will I end up kicking myself on the arse afterwards?

I shoot both portrait and landscape on different light situations.
My current lenses are the following:

Kit Lens
Sigma 17-70
Pentax 50-200mm
Pentax 50mm 1.4

What is a good lens for Night Club situations wherein there is extremely low-light and lot of people moving around?

Appreciate the inputs. Thanks!

heatherslightbox · 07-31-2008, 06:18 PM

That 50/1.4 you have is an excellent low-light lens. If you're looking for a zoom lens, however, the 28-75 or any other lens with a constant 2.8 aperture would be better than the 18-250 for low-light. If you need something a bit longer than the 28-75, then the DA*50-135/2.8 would be worth taking a look at.

HTH,
Heather

troywhite · 07-31-2008, 07:16 PM

You'd have to pry my 28-75 f/2.8 from my cold dead fingers :-)

You'd never kick yourself in the arse for buying it. Having said that, I always switch to my 50 1.4 for indoor/club low light shots. The 2.8 just doesn't do it.

At the wide landscape end I have filled the hole with a Sigma 10-20 EX.

iamweasel · 07-31-2008, 07:50 PM

Heather and Troy, thank you for your inputs.

If I have the 28-75, i was planning to part with my 17-70 and replace it with the Sigma 10-20mm. I don't know if that would be a wise decision considering what my 17-70 have contributed for the past few months.

Kei · 07-31-2008, 08:24 PM

I have the 18-250mm, it is good for daytime all-in-one walkaround but you definitely need something faster for shooting in night club. The f3.5 is the max aperture (which is not too fast to begin with) and starts to decrease as you zooming in. This lens is just slightly faster than your 50-200mm but I doubt it to be very helpful.

Can't comment on the 28-75mm f2.8 as I never have one in my hands. Instead I got the Sigma 24-60mm f2.8 because it is much cheaper than the 17-50mm f2.8 and the 28-75mm f2.8.

tybeck · 08-01-2008, 08:55 AM

I have the Tamron 28-75mm, excellent lens. I agree that 2.8 is not as good in low light without a flash. You need a fast prime for that and the 50mm 1.4 is about the best you're going to get for the money.

07-31-2008, 06:04 PM	#1
iamweasel Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 49	Lens ordeal If i grab the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 instead of the Tamron 18-250mm 3.5-6.3, will I end up kicking myself on the arse afterwards? I shoot both portrait and landscape on different light situations. My current lenses are the following: Kit Lens Sigma 17-70 Pentax 50-200mm Pentax 50mm 1.4 What is a good lens for Night Club situations wherein there is extremely low-light and lot of people moving around? Appreciate the inputs. Thanks!

07-31-2008, 06:18 PM	#2
heatherslightbox Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Gainesville, FL Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,599	That 50/1.4 you have is an excellent low-light lens. If you're looking for a zoom lens, however, the 28-75 or any other lens with a constant 2.8 aperture would be better than the 18-250 for low-light. If you need something a bit longer than the 28-75, then the DA*50-135/2.8 would be worth taking a look at. HTH, Heather

07-31-2008, 07:16 PM	#3
troywhite Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Canberra, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 170	You'd have to pry my 28-75 f/2.8 from my cold dead fingers :-) You'd never kick yourself in the arse for buying it. Having said that, I always switch to my 50 1.4 for indoor/club low light shots. The 2.8 just doesn't do it. At the wide landscape end I have filled the hole with a Sigma 10-20 EX.

07-31-2008, 07:50 PM	#4
iamweasel Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 49 Original Poster	Heather and Troy, thank you for your inputs. If I have the 28-75, i was planning to part with my 17-70 and replace it with the Sigma 10-20mm. I don't know if that would be a wise decision considering what my 17-70 have contributed for the past few months.

07-31-2008, 08:24 PM	#5
Kei Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Toronto, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 207	I have the 18-250mm, it is good for daytime all-in-one walkaround but you definitely need something faster for shooting in night club. The f3.5 is the max aperture (which is not too fast to begin with) and starts to decrease as you zooming in. This lens is just slightly faster than your 50-200mm but I doubt it to be very helpful. Can't comment on the 28-75mm f2.8 as I never have one in my hands. Instead I got the Sigma 24-60mm f2.8 because it is much cheaper than the 17-50mm f2.8 and the 28-75mm f2.8.

08-01-2008, 08:55 AM	#6
tybeck Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 452	I have the Tamron 28-75mm, excellent lens. I agree that 2.8 is not as good in low light without a flash. You need a fast prime for that and the 50mm 1.4 is about the best you're going to get for the money.