Which lens?

KevinR · 03-20-2010, 07:03 AM

Originally posted by NecroticSoldier

Oh, if I bought the Tamron brand new it'd cost about half the price!

NecroticSoldier, then buy Tamron second hand and save lots. As Tokyoso indicates, you can do a lots with this lens and not have many PF problems (style/lighting dependent). It is a very good value lens. I just believe the Pentax is better, but more expensive. We all lust after more... I lust after a Sigma/Tamron 70-200 f/2.8, but probably would do it justice. LBA get you easily...

Originally posted by tokyoso

FYI, there is a new tamron 70-300 in the works. comes with vibration control, ultrasonic drive, etc. I'm loving tamrons all around at the moment.
Tamron 70-300 Bob Atkins Photography

but I should really keep this a secret...

Looks like they are designing a masterpiece... If it's as good as the marketing speech. Did you notice Sony model without VC. Interesting how SR customers all get the same lens with VC removed. I doubt the price is reduced much. So the juggernauts can-nik set the pricing for the rest of the after-market lens. But I suppose the increased sale volumes reduce the price for everyone.

Blue · 03-20-2010, 09:15 AM

I think caution should be used when looking at lens reviews that shows purple fringing as in the Fa 35mm above. There is review of the FA 77mm ltd at photozone and they forced it to PF and compared it to the DA 70mm ltd but didn't force the latter to PF.

That's a lot like running your car into a concrete wall and writing about it getting all bent up.

Pentaxor · 03-20-2010, 09:40 AM

Originally posted by Blue

I think caution should be used when looking at lens reviews that shows purple fringing as in the Fa 35mm above. There is review of the FA 77mm ltd at photozone and they forced it to PF and compared it to the DA 70mm ltd but didn't force the latter to PF.

That's a lot like running your car into a concrete wall and writing about it getting all bent up.

I strongly agree.

NecroticSoldier · 03-20-2010, 06:49 PM

Whaddaya guys think about the 50-200mm? Why has no one voted for it? (that's really strange...) It has shorter range sure... but it costs just about the same as a Tamron and has the IQ of a Pentax. That's what I've been wondering... but so far in my head it's the Tamron versus DA 55-300mm.

Blue · 03-20-2010, 06:59 PM

Originally posted by NecroticSoldier

Whaddaya guys think about the 50-200mm? Why has no one voted for it? (that's really strange...) It has shorter range sure... but it costs just about the same as a Tamron and has the IQ of a Pentax. That's what I've been wondering... but so far in my head it's the Tamron versus DA 55-300mm.

Go back and look at my first post again. I will give compactness to the 50-200mm but the 55-300mm is not bad in its most compact form and got it into some Division I NCAA college football games. If I were to go with the 50-200mm, I would go with the WR version because it was updated with the SP as well. Non the less, I still pick the 55-300mm as far as anything off of that list.

ajuett · 03-20-2010, 07:00 PM

Originally posted by NecroticSoldier

Whaddaya guys think about the 50-200mm? Why has no one voted for it? (that's really strange...) It has shorter range sure... but it costs just about the same as a Tamron and has the IQ of a Pentax. That's what I've been wondering... but so far in my head it's the Tamron versus DA 55-300mm.

I'll vote for the 50-200

I used it exclusively today on a family trip; Bowen Island, BC, Canada Photo Gallery by ajuett at pbase.com from the 8th photo onward and all the 3rd page as well. See what you think. Some were using a B+W CP. A plus is the filter thread is 52mm on both the kit DA-L 18-55 and DA 50-200.

JeffJS · 03-20-2010, 07:43 PM

Purple Fringing: I can make ANY of my lenses do it, from my least expensive to the Most expensive. I can make it happen on Any of my cameras. Here's my K7 wearing the DA12-24

Pretty bad, right? I think we can all agree that this is the most likely situation. Blackish objects against a White background. The focal point of the photo is actually my dog standing up at the back fence. Zoomed in on the menagerie on the line poles:

After playing around with this a little bit I discovered that it's a function mostly of White balance, and Exposure.

From there a little bit of correction (note the 300% zoom so I can Really see what I have:

The corrected version (click for peeper version)

From there, some of my layer masking to bring the sky detail out:

and the Final image (click for peeper version)..

Last edited by JeffJS; 03-20-2010 at 08:45 PM.

NecroticSoldier · 03-21-2010, 06:16 PM

Thanks Jeff, That really helped. It is true about what you said... it can happen to any lens on any camera. So yeah... the purple fringing on the Tamron isn't that bad,but I guess it boils down to the price and IQ.

tokyoso · 03-22-2010, 08:49 PM

Originally posted by JeffJS

Purple Fringing: I can make ANY of my lenses do it, from my least expensive to the Most expensive. I can make it happen on Any of my cameras. Here's my K7 wearing the DA12-24

that's quite some handy PF work there with the lenses.

View Poll Results: Which one?
Tamron 70-300mm	8	16.00%
Pentax DA 50-200mm	3	6.00%
Pentax DA 55-300mm	39	78.00%
Voters: 50. You may not vote on this poll

03-20-2010, 07:43 PM	#52
JeffJS Inactive Account Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Michigan, USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,484	RE Purple Fringing Purple Fringing: I can make ANY of my lenses do it, from my least expensive to the Most expensive. I can make it happen on Any of my cameras. Here's my K7 wearing the DA12-24 Pretty bad, right? I think we can all agree that this is the most likely situation. Blackish objects against a White background. The focal point of the photo is actually my dog standing up at the back fence. Zoomed in on the menagerie on the line poles: After playing around with this a little bit I discovered that it's a function mostly of White balance, and Exposure. From there a little bit of correction (note the 300% zoom so I can Really see what I have: The corrected version (click for peeper version) From there, some of my layer masking to bring the sky detail out: and the Final image (click for peeper version).. Last edited by JeffJS; 03-20-2010 at 08:45 PM.

03-20-2010, 07:03 AM	#46
KevinR Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Cape Town, South Africa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 653	Originally posted by NecroticSoldier Oh, if I bought the Tamron brand new it'd cost about half the price! NecroticSoldier, then buy Tamron second hand and save lots. As Tokyoso indicates, you can do a lots with this lens and not have many PF problems (style/lighting dependent). It is a very good value lens. I just believe the Pentax is better, but more expensive. We all lust after more... I lust after a Sigma/Tamron 70-200 f/2.8, but probably would do it justice. LBA get you easily... Originally posted by tokyoso FYI, there is a new tamron 70-300 in the works. comes with vibration control, ultrasonic drive, etc. I'm loving tamrons all around at the moment. Tamron 70-300 Bob Atkins Photography but I should really keep this a secret... Looks like they are designing a masterpiece... If it's as good as the marketing speech. Did you notice Sony model without VC. Interesting how SR customers all get the same lens with VC removed. I doubt the price is reduced much. So the juggernauts can-nik set the pricing for the rest of the after-market lens. But I suppose the increased sale volumes reduce the price for everyone.

03-20-2010, 09:15 AM	#47
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	I think caution should be used when looking at lens reviews that shows purple fringing as in the Fa 35mm above. There is review of the FA 77mm ltd at photozone and they forced it to PF and compared it to the DA 70mm ltd but didn't force the latter to PF. That's a lot like running your car into a concrete wall and writing about it getting all bent up.

03-20-2010, 09:40 AM	#48
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Blue I think caution should be used when looking at lens reviews that shows purple fringing as in the Fa 35mm above. There is review of the FA 77mm ltd at photozone and they forced it to PF and compared it to the DA 70mm ltd but didn't force the latter to PF. That's a lot like running your car into a concrete wall and writing about it getting all bent up. I strongly agree.

03-20-2010, 06:49 PM	#49
NecroticSoldier Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Scarborough, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 488 Original Poster	Whaddaya guys think about the 50-200mm? Why has no one voted for it? (that's really strange...) It has shorter range sure... but it costs just about the same as a Tamron and has the IQ of a Pentax. That's what I've been wondering... but so far in my head it's the Tamron versus DA 55-300mm.

03-20-2010, 06:59 PM	#50
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by NecroticSoldier Whaddaya guys think about the 50-200mm? Why has no one voted for it? (that's really strange...) It has shorter range sure... but it costs just about the same as a Tamron and has the IQ of a Pentax. That's what I've been wondering... but so far in my head it's the Tamron versus DA 55-300mm. Go back and look at my first post again. I will give compactness to the 50-200mm but the 55-300mm is not bad in its most compact form and got it into some Division I NCAA college football games. If I were to go with the 50-200mm, I would go with the WR version because it was updated with the SP as well. Non the less, I still pick the 55-300mm as far as anything off of that list.

03-20-2010, 07:00 PM	#51
ajuett Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Posts: 1,100	Originally posted by NecroticSoldier Whaddaya guys think about the 50-200mm? Why has no one voted for it? (that's really strange...) It has shorter range sure... but it costs just about the same as a Tamron and has the IQ of a Pentax. That's what I've been wondering... but so far in my head it's the Tamron versus DA 55-300mm. I'll vote for the 50-200 I used it exclusively today on a family trip; Bowen Island, BC, Canada Photo Gallery by ajuett at pbase.com from the 8th photo onward and all the 3rd page as well. See what you think. Some were using a B+W CP. A plus is the filter thread is 52mm on both the kit DA-L 18-55 and DA 50-200.

03-21-2010, 06:16 PM	#53
NecroticSoldier Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Scarborough, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 488 Original Poster	Thanks Jeff, That really helped. It is true about what you said... it can happen to any lens on any camera. So yeah... the purple fringing on the Tamron isn't that bad,but I guess it boils down to the price and IQ.

03-22-2010, 08:49 PM	#54
tokyoso Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Tokyo Photos: Albums Posts: 723	Originally posted by JeffJS Purple Fringing: I can make ANY of my lenses do it, from my least expensive to the Most expensive. I can make it happen on Any of my cameras. Here's my K7 wearing the DA12-24 that's quite some handy PF work there with the lenses.