[JamesD]

It's a great shot, even given the limitations of my monitor. To be honest, I hadn't thought about old glass in the equation. Hmmmm... I still have not completely discounted the 50-200mm but given our circumstances, we're probably better served by the 18-250 for the main reason of convenience. I know that the price is a bit steep for two of these but still... traveling with just one lens and not having to change it out from wide angle to telephoto is a huge bonus.

[Confused]

Hi again James

When you said:

"We're probably better served by the 18-250 for the main reason of convenience. I know that the price is a bit steep for two of these but still... travelling with just one lens and not having to change it out from wide angle to telephoto is a huge bonus".

Bearing in mind that you have the sheer luxury of possessing TWO K10D's between you (lucky blighter's !) and assuming that you will be travelling in fairly close proximity to each other, had you considered the possibility of buying a Tamron/Pentoya 18-250mm for one body and then purchasing the excellent Sigma 10-20mm HSM for use on your second body ? In that case you could simply swap over cameras as the need arose and you really would have the best of both world's, with no unwanted dust on sensors to worry about ? Just a passing thought......

[Miserere]

Hi again James
Bearing in mind that you have the sheer luxury of possessing TWO K10D's between you (lucky blighter's !) and assuming that you will be travelling in fairly close proximity to each other, had you considered the possibility of buying a Tamron/Pentoya 18-250mm for one body and then purchasing the excellent Sigma 10-20mm HSM for use on your second body ? In that case you could simply swap over cameras as the need arose and you really would have the best of both world's, with no unwanted dust on sensors to worry about ? Just a passing thought......

This is one of those things you don't think about when you take your vows...could I let go of my K10D and hand it over to my wife so I can use her lens...? Hmmmm...

[Confused]

Hi Miserere

Possibly look at the situation this way round..............

"Would I let go of my wife on condition she'd lend me her K10D on a more-or-less permanent basis ?

No, I didn't reckon so either, but it was worth a try !

Best regards
Richard

---

Last edited by Confused; 07-22-2008 at 10:50 AM.

[Silus001]

I say you go for a prime 200mm and the kit lens it works pretty well because even though the kit lens isnt the best, it takes care of close situations quite decently might I say so and the 200 prime can definitely get you better medium "tele-photo" photo's than a zoom lens can in the same range... if that makes any sense to you but thats just me and hope your purchase works out for ya.

[JamesD]

Hey Richard

ROFL... I read aloud to my wife your suggestion regarding our sharing cameras. "Not in this lifetime" or something to that effect, was her answer. LOL... It's like my attempts to use her computer. "No way, Pal! You mess up your computer and you won't be messing up mine!" My response, "But, Honey... but..." goes to no avail.

I "like" your idea of the wide angle zoom and eventually will probably get it as a second lens we both can share. She's not really that fussy about going out into a wider range than the 18mm afforded by either the kit or this 18-250 that we're thinking about. If she wants anything else, it would likely be a prime for low light or a macro, neither of which interest me.

So, as I see it, my future lens buying will probably be the 18-250 (two of them) and the wider zoom you suggested. Period. End of accumulation. I don't really have LBA and I don't want to get it either.

Thank you, everyone, for all the great suggestions. This group is really a "find" for anyone interested in photography. Much appreciated.

[JamesD]

Hi Silus

I see you're a new member here like me. Welcome to the forum and thanks for the suggestion. I think, given my penchant for laziness, that a prime wouldn't be something I would want for the simple reason that I'm looking for a one-lens-fits-all situation due to our traveling (not wanting to carry a bunch of lenses) and my desire to not want to frequently change lenses if I can avoid it. Besides, a zoom allows you to frame your subject without you're having to move whereas a prime would require movement on the part of the person taking the picture. But I can see that for some people, your suggestion would be a good one. I appreciate the help.

[Lowell Goudge]

Just a simple observation here, but I guess the real question is, what do you use the camera for most often.

I know packing extra lenses is an issue at times, BUT, with one of these high zoom ratio lenses, I think the real problem is not either the relitively slow speed, or the image quality, but the more I travel, the more I want a wider angle than 18mm on a DSLR.

When I shot film, I had a 24mm F2.5 lens, and I found that it was marginal, especially in tight spaces, like interiors of buildings, or even when taking the exterior shots. I was always struggling to get everything in view.

When I got my *istD it came with a 18-35 lens, but this was actually a film lens and could cover a full 35mm frame. When I wanted wide angle shots, I shot film, (using a PZ-1) with the 18mm lens. All my other shots were done digitally.

This approach went on for 3 years until I got my K10D. I bought it without any lens, and then bought separately the sigma 10-20 mm.

You will need to look at an ultra wide zoom, as I found it much more useful than anything in the middle range.

[JamesD]

Hi Lowell

Most of our shooting involves our trips and our weekend jaunts. In the thirty + years I've been involved in photography as a hobby, I have to admit to never going wider than a 28mm slr lens. It seemed to satisfy me in the past although that's not to say that I wouldn't want to go wider now. For me (and definitely for my wife), I tend to go through a wide range of focal lengths from wide angle to normal to telephoto as I explore the image in front of me. For instance, when in Kauai last year we drove up to the Waimea Canyon. I found myself bouncing back and forth between wide-angle views of the canyon and telephoto shots isolating ridges as well as wild life. This was pretty much par for the course throughout the entire trip. And as I review my shooting, I would have to say that it's typical of the way in which I generally approach photography: back and forth between wide angle and telephoto. So for me, it was either... the kit and the 50-200 OR the 18-250 alone (leaving the kit in its box and at home). I'm strongly leaning in favor of this lens now. However, in the future I can see the possibility of getting the wider zoom you enjoy. It seems like something that I will need to explore more fully but only after I have resolved the above dilemma (which appears to have been more or less decided anyway... since my wife is leaning strongly in that direction as well).

All the best.

[egordon99]

Lowell - You and I must be kindred spirits! I've been totally using my 10-20mm as my "walk-around" as of late....Not so much for "far-away landscapes", but for getting interesting perspectives on close objects.

Paired with my Tamron 28-75mm, I have a very capable kit. Now I just need Tamron (or Sigma) to release those stinkin' 70-200mm f/2.8s!

[JamesD]

I appreciate the wider view but the buildings near the edges are leaning a bit too much for me. For me, I'd rather zoom in on one aspect of the scene rather than try to capture it in its entirety. I suppose it boils down to what Lowell asked: What sort of photography do you do? I find that 28mm is about all I can handle, particularly around architecture. Now, out in the woods I would probably make far greater use of a wider angled view and I've already bookmarked two sites where I can purchase this lens in the future. Man... I'm not opposed to having it in the least. It's just that it doesn't trump the 18-250 which for me would be far more useful.

All the best.

[Confused]

Hi James

This is probably entirely off subject, but my wife & I are planning a four-month round-the-world trip next year. I noticed that you reside in Oregon, so we'd like to ask your advice if you have no objections ? We expect to fly out from London to Chicago and then onwards to somewhere like Portland to pick-up a hire-car. We've always wanted to see the giant redwoods and follow the stunning coastline down to San Francisco. Do you think we are starting from the correct place and if so, roughly how many days should we allow to cover the distance at a leisurely pace ?
We know nothing whatsoever about the quality of the domestic US airlines, so which would be the best to use between Chicago & Portland ? I understand that Continental, United Airlines and US Airways cover this route, so any assistance you can offer would be gratefully received !

Best regards
Richard

[JamesD]

Hi Richard

I've e-mailed a response to you. Check your mail. I'm not sure whether or not the PM went through so I sent one (as well) to your pop e-mail account.

All the best.

[Miserere]

James, I think you've made up your mind!

I have too; all I need now are the $$$. That's the hard part...

[JamesD]

Hi Miserere

Yes, I've finally come to peace about my decision (well, I should say "our" decision). We're definitely going to go with the 18-250mm Pentax when it becomes available. In fact, I've already called the store where we bought our cameras and asked the sales associate with whom I dealt to notify us as soon as they were available. I really appreciate the assistance I was given in this thread. And while I can also appreciate the logic behind "other" options (i.e. primes, older glass, less expensive zooms, zooms that cover a different range, faster zooms and so forth), the above lens appears to do what I want it to do given our circumstances and the type of shooting we do most often.

Here's hoping you come up with the available cash soon so you can buy that one you want.

All the best.