Tamron 28 - 200

rockyram · 10-27-2009, 09:57 PM

I have a Tamron 28 - 200 mm aspherical IF 371D lens that was on a MZ-7.I'm looking for a Dslr to upgrade from a point and shoot and just learned of the KX.How would this lens perform on this camera?If this lens is no good anymore or dated technology wise I was going to go with a Nikonn D90.I would prefer to try and use what I have but if the images will be lose quality it's probably not worth it.Thanks in advance.

**Ash** · 10-27-2009, 10:03 PM

The lens (if it mounted without any problem on your MZ-7) should fit just fine on any Pentax dSLR, including the K-x.
The K-x rivals any other camera in its class and should perform remarkably well with the lens. AF speed will be faster than with your MZ-7 and quality should be as you expected it to be on the MZ-7 also.

It's not the world's finest lens, but it should do fine on the K-x. Bear in mind the K-x is a digital crop camera, which makes the effective focal length longer than you did have on your MZ-7. You'll feel this at the wide end, where the 28mm doesn't quite fit everything in the frame that you would have expected it to.

rockyram · 10-27-2009, 10:28 PM

Thanks for the reply.I would get the 18-55 with the body,i jusy wasn't sure if the optics of photography have kept up with the electronic side ,if that is correct.

Eruditass · 10-27-2009, 10:32 PM

Not a bad lens - very conveneint superzoom, better than the first version, not as good as the newer XR or the Di 18-200 or 18-250:

Tamron 28-200 differences

The one in the lens review database is the newer XR version but many people have commented on the other versions on the forum. Basically, probably not great at 28 or 200mm and wide open, decent otherwise. I had been looking to buy a cheap superzoom like this for travel and tours where I don't want to be changing lenses.

You'll be pleasantly surprised with in-body SR with that lens, so you can actually use the long FL where it is slower. Also, you can learn which focal lengths you like taking pictures with once you use that lens for a while - you can even use programs to scan all your pictures and figure out what FLs you take pictures with most. Then you can buy a good zoom or prime in that range. Nowdays, zooms are much better than they were in the past, but old primes are still quite good, check the review database.

For better IQ, the 18-55 will be notably better, as with most smaller range zoom lenses.

10-27-2009, 09:57 PM	#1
rockyram Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 49	Tamron 28 - 200 I have a Tamron 28 - 200 mm aspherical IF 371D lens that was on a MZ-7.I'm looking for a Dslr to upgrade from a point and shoot and just learned of the KX.How would this lens perform on this camera?If this lens is no good anymore or dated technology wise I was going to go with a Nikonn D90.I would prefer to try and use what I have but if the images will be lose quality it's probably not worth it.Thanks in advance.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Tokina 80-200/2.8 KA; K 135/2.5; M 200/4; Tamron 70-150/2.8 soft	thomasxie	Sold Items	6	02-26-2010 11:08 AM
Tamron 70-200 f2.8 vs Sigma 70-200 f2.8 In Low Light	Christopher M.W.T	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	11-23-2009 03:57 PM
Pentax 50-200 vs. Sigma 28-200 (vs. Tamron 70-300)	shefaet	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	11-24-2007 10:44 PM

10-27-2009, 10:03 PM	#2
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	The lens (if it mounted without any problem on your MZ-7) should fit just fine on any Pentax dSLR, including the K-x. The K-x rivals any other camera in its class and should perform remarkably well with the lens. AF speed will be faster than with your MZ-7 and quality should be as you expected it to be on the MZ-7 also. It's not the world's finest lens, but it should do fine on the K-x. Bear in mind the K-x is a digital crop camera, which makes the effective focal length longer than you did have on your MZ-7. You'll feel this at the wide end, where the 28mm doesn't quite fit everything in the frame that you would have expected it to.

10-27-2009, 10:28 PM	#3
rockyram Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 49 Original Poster	Thanks for the reply.I would get the 18-55 with the body,i jusy wasn't sure if the optics of photography have kept up with the electronic side ,if that is correct.

10-27-2009, 10:32 PM	#4
Eruditass Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,207	Not a bad lens - very conveneint superzoom, better than the first version, not as good as the newer XR or the Di 18-200 or 18-250: Tamron 28-200 differences The one in the lens review database is the newer XR version but many people have commented on the other versions on the forum. Basically, probably not great at 28 or 200mm and wide open, decent otherwise. I had been looking to buy a cheap superzoom like this for travel and tours where I don't want to be changing lenses. You'll be pleasantly surprised with in-body SR with that lens, so you can actually use the long FL where it is slower. Also, you can learn which focal lengths you like taking pictures with once you use that lens for a while - you can even use programs to scan all your pictures and figure out what FLs you take pictures with most. Then you can buy a good zoom or prime in that range. Nowdays, zooms are much better than they were in the past, but old primes are still quite good, check the review database. For better IQ, the 18-55 will be notably better, as with most smaller range zoom lenses.