Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-01-2010, 06:39 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Adelaide, SA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 273
Superzoom comparison? Tamron 28-200 vs Pentax 18-250 vs Sigma 28-300 etc

So ive been happy enough with my not-so-amazing year 2000 bought Tamron 28-200mm zoom from my film days as an easy all-in-one travel zoom lens. Now that ive finally come back and gone digital, obviously the 28-200 is more like 42-300

Id consider upgrading for something fairly similar if I thought it would be worth the effort/expense/quality upgrade, but not 100% sure whether its worth the cost difference (and would still perhaps prefer the option of being full frame for the film cameras i have, possible FF future upgrade etc)

Are the Pentax/Sigma 18-250s better? Are they full frame and/or therefore 28-425 equivalent?
Tamron/Sigma 28-300? etc etc

Any other long range zoom for recommendation?

Yes, i know theyre never going to be amazing lenses (im in the middle of a prime lens hunting frenzy i dont dare tell my partner about) but for convenience, theyre not too shabby.

thanks in advance for advice

03-01-2010, 06:59 AM   #2
New Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Istanbul / Turkey
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 21
I've 18-250...and I'm frequently using its wide end (18). I'd hate it if I were stuck with 28 only.
03-01-2010, 09:28 AM   #3
hcc
Pentaxian
hcc's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,533
With the dSLR (K-7, K-x), the typical all-in-one zoom lens is the 18-200 or 18-250. These lenses are all-rounders that covers a wide range from 18 mm (wide angle) to 250mm.

There has been some recent pertinent discussions at DPReview as well as Pentaxforums.com that I summarise herein. There are basically 3 generations of all-in-one zoom lenses for Pentax (K-mount): (a) the Sigma and Pentax 18-200mm, (b) the Tamron/Pentax 18-250mm, and (c) the Sigma 18-250mm OS HSM.

The Sigma and Pentax 18-200mm lenses are older lenses that were superseeded by the Tamron/Pentax 18-250mm. The Tamron 18-250mm and the re-badged Pentax 18-250mm are definitely better lenses than the older Sigma 18-200mm or Pentax 18-200mm.

A few recent threads discussed some comparison between the Tamron 18-250mm and Pentax 18-250mm: eg, http://forums.dpreview.com/...forums...ssage=33945288. For the latter (Pentax 18-250mm), the Pentax K-7 and K-x have the lens correction implemented and you can select some distortion correction to this lens : http://forums.dpreview.com/...forums...ssage=34042860. A lot of pentaxians would recommend the Pentax/Tamron 18-250mm lens. The DA 18-250mm is an excellent walk-around lens and one of the best in its category. Full stop; it is not a fast prime and should not be compared with prime lenses.

There is less information on the newer and more expensive Sigma 18-250mm DC OS HSM. The reviews are positive but (a) there have been some forum discussion on reliability & maintenance issues of the HSM technology and (b) the optical stabilisation OS is redundant with the Pentax image stabilisation IS.

I use a Pentax 18-250mm with my Pentax K-7. I am happy with the Pentax 18-250mm in terms of practicality and ease to use in the field (no need to change lens), as well its image quality. I would recommend it. I like the compact shape and I am able to get the K-7 with the 18-250mm in a small top-loading bag (Lowepro Top load zoom 1) that is handy to carry.

Hope that the advice will help...

Last edited by hcc; 03-01-2010 at 09:29 AM. Reason: Typos
03-01-2010, 09:48 AM   #4
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by JayR Quote
Are the Pentax/Sigma 18-250s better? Are they full frame and/or therefore 28-425 equivalent?
Whether or not they are FF has *nothing* to do with how they behave on APS-C. All lenses of a given focal behave *exactly* the same on APS-C, regardless of whether they cover FF or not: they *all* produce the same FOV as a lens whose focal length is 1.5X longer would on film.

Anyhow, most will say that the modern 18-XXX superzooms are all noticeably better than the old 28-XXX superzooms, just because zoom technology has come a long ways since those 28-XXX superzooms were designed.

03-01-2010, 10:07 AM   #5
Veteran Member
farfisa's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Toronto, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,274
QuoteOriginally posted by JayR Quote
... (and would still perhaps prefer the option of being full frame for the film cameras i have, possible FF future upgrade etc) ...
The wide end (18-24mm or so) will definitely not cover the full film frame. But it's still valuable to have. If you have an 18-55mm kit lens, you could just pair it up with your old Tamron for the extra wide end.
03-01-2010, 01:05 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Owego, NY
Posts: 976
I really like my Sigma 18-250.

You have to be careful to disable in-body stabilization if using the lens OS though. I may have killed a whole bunch of images Saturday by forgetting this...

OS in the lens has the benefit of stabilizing your viewfinder, and also helping the AF mechanism get a better lock (since it's locking on a more stable point).
03-01-2010, 01:47 PM   #7
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,549
I have the DA 18-250 and mainly used the wide end & will most likely keep it, as it's a little faster than the 16-45/f4.

You should be swift with your decision though, as the DA 18-250 has been discontinued. It is quite an expensive lens as it is. Upwards of 700 bucks.
03-01-2010, 03:41 PM   #8
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Madison, Wis., USA
Posts: 1,510
Better/faster focus lock?

QuoteOriginally posted by Entropy Quote
I really like mhttps://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/clear.gify Sigma 18-250.

You have to be careful to disable in-body stabilization if using the lens OS though. I may have killed a whole bunch of images Saturday by forgetting this...

OS in the lens has the benefit of stabilizing your viewfinder, and also helping the AF mechanism get a better lock (since it's locking on a more stable point).
Did you move up from the Pentax/Tamron 18-250?

Mine copy of that really struggles to focus at 250mm and I've always assumed that F/6.3 simply isn't meant for AF (not enough light). If I can improve my AF success rate with a stabilized Sigma, I feel LBA whispering in my ear again ....

03-01-2010, 05:39 PM   #9
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Adelaide, SA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 273
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by farfisa Quote
The wide end (18-24mm or so) will definitely not cover the full film frame. But it's still valuable to have. If you have an 18-55mm kit lens, you could just pair it up with your old Tamron for the extra wide end.
OK so it was as i assumed, not full frame.

Im still a little nervous about buying DA lenses, partly because i have a couple of film bodies and like to muck around with film occasionally, also investing in good FF primes for future proofing. Who knows, maybe its ridiculous to do this, but i cant help but feel the DA lens have some kind of built-in obselecence if and when FF sensors come in...?


And nup, i didnt get the kit lens with my K-7. It mightve been cheap but i really couldnt imagine using it... Might just hang on to the 28-200 until im a little more awash with funds again, besides, probably wouldnt get much for it anyway. Perhaps i just have to force myself to consider them different cameras altogether (though owning a little pentax mount glass was one of the leading factors in me rejoining the digital world under the pentax banner! )
03-02-2010, 09:05 PM   #10
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by JayR Quote
Im still a little nervous about buying DA lenses, partly because i have a couple of film bodies and like to muck around with film occasionally, also investing in good FF primes for future proofing. Who knows, maybe its ridiculous to do this, but i cant help but feel the DA lens have some kind of built-in obselecence if and when FF sensors come in...?
If. Although presumably Pentax would do like Nikon and allow use of DA lenses on FF, in an auto-cropping mode.

QuoteQuote:
And nup, i didnt get the kit lens with my K-7. It mightve been cheap but i really couldnt imagine using it...
Do you never see yourself ever wanting to take wide angle pictures? With the crop factor, that 28-200 just isn't wide at all. You kind of missed out on the cheapest way to get wide angle capability - although adding one later isn't that much more expensive.
03-06-2010, 08:42 PM   #11
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Adelaide, SA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 273
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
If. Although presumably Pentax would do like Nikon and allow use of DA lenses on FF, in an auto-cropping mode.



Do you never see yourself ever wanting to take wide angle pictures? With the crop factor, that 28-200 just isn't wide at all. You kind of missed out on the cheapest way to get wide angle capability - although adding one later isn't that much more expensive.
i did pick up the sigma 10-20 though
03-09-2010, 01:53 PM   #12
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,689
QuoteOriginally posted by fractal Quote
I have the DA 18-250 and mainly used the wide end & will most likely keep it, as it's a little faster than the 16-45/f4.
That doesn't make sense. The 18-250 is 1/3 stop faster below 23mm, but it has serious distortion at the wide and horrendous vignetting unless you stop down twice. The f3.5 setting is virtually useless. I could see preferring an 18-250 for its long end, but the 16-45 kills it at the wide end (lower distortion, sharper, wider, less flare, better colour and contrast).
03-10-2010, 12:40 PM   #13
rkt
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Germany
Posts: 154
I have a Pentax 18-250 and am very satisfied with it...

I would also agree with prev posters, 18mm (on the same lens that takes you to 250) is a lot of flexibility... when you are walking around with a single lens...

While you could substitute the entire zoom range with "better" lenses, that whole combination would not fit the "all-in-one travel zoom" definition...
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!
film, frame, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, slr lens, tamron, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sigma 70-200 & 100-300 for DA 60-250 OrenMc Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 01-05-2010 06:17 PM
Pentax 55-300 vs sigma/tamron 70-200 f2.8 raider Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 11-12-2008 12:18 AM
Pentax 50-200 vs. Sigma 28-200 (vs. Tamron 70-300) shefaet Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 11-24-2007 10:44 PM
Tamron 18-250 vs Sigma/Tamron 70-300 ? simonkit Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 09-04-2007 07:12 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:25 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