[Jewelltrail]

bikecoboss: That was my choice when replacing the kit 18-55. Not because there was anything wrong with the quality of the lens, it was just too slow for my style of shooting. I spend a lot of time in the dark Coastal Range forests, and wanted to be able to take shots like this, hand-held:

I downloaded this shot and exploded it to double size--amazing sharpness. I can not get any EXIF from the pic though? Can you provide EXIF data? BTW, for hiking in the forest, I bought a Tamron 17-50mm too, realizing full well how rare light often is there.

[Jewelltrail]

iankh: Are there any opinions regarding the Tamron 18-250?

In our "Tammy Club" thread, there are nice shots from this lens. I believe the owners there speak highly of this lens, but then most owners speak highly of their lens now don't they. It really is hard to go wrong when buying a lens these days, especially if you understand your needs.

[bikecoboss]

I downloaded this shot and exploded it to double size--amazing sharpness. I can not get any EXIF from the pic though? Can you provide EXIF data? BTW, for hiking in the forest, I bought a Tamron 17-50mm too, realizing full well how rare light often is there.

Thanks, I'm really happy with this lens.

Camera: Pentax K-x
Exposure: 0.04 sec (1/25)
Aperture: f/3.5
Focal Length: 50 mm
ISO Speed: 800
Exposure Bias: 0 EV
Flash: Off, Did not fire

File Size: 1421 kB
File Type: JPEG
MIME Type: image/jpeg
Image Width: 2014
Image Height: 3020
Encoding Process: Baseline DCT, Huffman coding
Bits Per Sample: 8
Color Components: 3
X-Resolution: 240 dpi
Y-Resolution: 240 dpi
Software: K-x Ver 1.01
Date and Time (Modified): 2010:04:20 20:38:24
Exposure Program: Aperture-priority AE
Date and Time (Original): 2010:04:20 17:43:51-07:00
Date and Time (Digitized): 2010:04:20 17:43:51
Metering Mode: Multi-segment
Sensing Method: One-chip color area
Custom Rendered: Normal
Exposure Mode: Auto
White Balance: Auto
Focal Length In35mm Format: 75 mm
Scene Capture Type: Standard
Contrast: High
Saturation: Normal
Sharpness: Hard
Subject Distance Range: Macro
Compression: JPEG (old-style)
Viewing Conditions Illuminant Type: D50
Measurement Observer: CIE 1931
Measurement Flare: 0.999%
Measurement Illuminant: D65
XMPToolkit: Adobe XMP Core 4.2-c020 1.124078, Tue Sep 11 2007 23:21:40
Creator Tool: K-x Ver 1.01
Rating: 0
Lens: Tamron AF 17-50mm F2.8 XR Di-II LD
Lens ID: 7 230
Color Transform: YCbCr
Flash Return: No return detection
Flash Mode: Off
Flash Function: False
Flash Red Eye Mode: False

[iankh]

There has been great feedback, thank you everyone. I think I may hold off a purchase for a while and experiment with the kit lenses some more. I'm heading off on vacation soon and will make up my mind afterwards. I'll be taking the 2 kit lenses and my f1.4 50 mm.

It has certainly given me more food for thought and options to think about than I originally had.

[Jewelltrail]

bikecoboss: Thanks, I'm really happy with this lens.

Thank you for posting the EXIF--mucho appreciate.

iankh There has been great feedback, thank you everyone. I think I may hold off a purchase for a while and experiment with the kit lenses some more. I'm heading off on vacation soon and will make up my mind afterwards. I'll be taking the 2 kit lenses and my f1.4 50 mm.

I think this is a wise decision. Best of luck.

[wedge]

An 18-250 is more convenient than the pair of kit lenses, but it's not optically any better. No lens with significantly greater zoom range is going to be "better" than the kit lenses.

I understand the "more convenient...but not optically better" point of view, but convenience is a huge factor for a lot of people. Most of the times and places that I'm taking pictures, I don't want to have to take the time to swap lenses, nor do I want to risk the potential damage to the lens or internals of the camera imposed by changing lenses. So, while the images my Tammy 18-250 captures may not be any better than the kit lenses at the same focal lengths, I'm hard pressed to notice any degradation in IQ. But, unlike many folks here, I'm more or less a casual photographer, so my eyes are not necessarily "trained" to pick up any differences.

But, back on topic, I used the kit lenses for nearly a year before shopping for a replacement. And, yes, evil as it may seem, convenience was my primary motivating factor, but minimizing the loss of IQ was a close second. The 18-250 seems to provide the ideal solution for me.

[Marc Sabatella]

I understand the "more convenient...but not optically better" point of view, but convenience is a huge factor for a lot of people.

Yes, and I didn't mean to belittle that. But in case the OP was thinking it would be optically better too, I wanted to caution him against that expectation. He did say he wanted "a better all-round zoom", not just to avoid lens changes. If he wants *better*, he needs to stick to shorter zoom ranges. But without knowing more about what he is dissatisfied with - and how much of it is due to lenses versus other factors - it's hard to say.