[rvannatta]

Thanks, Richard, for all your help and suggestions. And thanks to everyone else. I don't want to belabor this and make it more difficult than it need be. Besides, I'm certain we've all faced this lens quandary at one point or another.

In all probability, we'll opt for the 18-250mm. Whether the Pentax or Tamron version we'll just have to wait and see. Thanks again. I believe my mind is made up.

well, I"ve tried the 1 lens for all solution and have an Sigma 28-300mm from the film days
for that purpose, but it was just too slow (at f/6.3 on slow end.)

Traveling with an arm load of lenses is a pain however, which is why I us the 50-200 for a rattle around in th camera bag solution when my shoot is planned for wide angle, but I want something just incase....

If I have a telephoto shoot in mind, the 50-200 doesn't even go.

[JamesD]

Hi fellow Oregonian!

I've now dismissed the 50-200mm from my decision-making although I'm not trying to say it's a bad lens by doing so. It just is something that doesn't seem to fit our needs. I want that extra reach provided by the 250mm and the fact that I don't have to change lenses very often. I realize that it's a bit on the slow side but we rarely do low-light photography anyway. Most of what we shoot is during the daylight hours and rarely do we shoot indoors. For me, I had to examine carefully the sort of shooting I do and then match that with the appropriate lens. As I mentioned to another posters, I can foresee at some future point, possibly wanting either a true macro and/or a wider zoom (12-20mm) but for the immediate future (throughout the next year) I just want that single lens which should work nicely on our next jump over to the Big Island. Woo Hoo!

All the best to you.

[rvannatta]

Hi fellow Oregonian!

I've now dismissed the 50-200mm from my decision-making although I'm not trying to say it's a bad lens by doing so. It just is something that doesn't seem to fit our needs. I want that extra reach provided by the 250mm and the fact that I don't have to change lenses very often. I realize that it's a bit on the slow side but we rarely do low-light photography anyway. Most of what we shoot is during the daylight hours and rarely do we shoot indoors. For me, I had to examine carefully the sort of shooting I do and then match that with the appropriate lens. As I mentioned to another posters, I can foresee at some future point, possibly wanting either a true macro and/or a wider zoom (12-20mm) but for the immediate future (throughout the next year) I just want that single lens which should work nicely on our next jump over to the Big Island. Woo Hoo!

All the best to you.

one lens solutions are always unhappy compromises. I've been to the big island only once, (32 years ago). Stayed in Hilo --- A much better choice for an Oregonian than the Kona Coast, 'cause it rains every afternoon for a little while, but managed to get there when there was a full eclipse of the Moon at Moon rise so naturally had to go down to the beach
and photograph the moon rise/elipise rising over the Pacific Ocean. Didn't know about the Eclipse event until I got there, and the best I had taken was a 400 mm.

Usually though for scenics, in my view, wider is better. If you are on the b each watching a pretty sunset/sunrise they don't make'em too wide, and don't be afraid to step out
into the world of low light photography. If you grew up with a cheap point and shoot
you know the only time photos 'come out' is if they are taken in the middle of the day.
However with ISO and color temperature control on your Pentax digital you can manage right through the Twilight zone and get some really exciting things.

[JamesD]

Hi again, Robert (I took a look at your home page... interesting history)

Hold onto your hat... we love Kona! LOL I know, we "should more easily acclimate to Hilo (and we've been over there to go through the gardens), but Kona is our first choice. Last year we spent time in Kauai and loved that with the exception of a particularly nasty case of seasickness during a cruise up to the northwest coast.

Anyway, I appreciate what you are saying. I was a member of a camera club for many years and actually managed to acquire a few lenses myself. It seems to me that at this stage in my life, I'm no longer desirous of lugging around a lot of extra glass in the hopes that I'll be able to get that shot that has eluded me all these years. It's just too much bother to me. I don't think it has to do with laziness on my part; at least I hope it doesn't. Thanks to my genetic pool, arthritis is beginning to become a bit of an issue. That's why I'm looking to travel as light as possible and the reason why my wife looked for a light, durable and easy-to-use bag, bless her heart. Switching gears here for just a minute, she bought the Lowe Pro 200 Sling bag. I can't adequately describe how comfortable and useful this bag is. I'm willing to add one more lens to it and I'm quite certain that it will be the 18-250mm. In the future I can envision dropping the kit lens (since that focal range will be covered by the 18-250) and perhaps acquiring something wider. That is not, however, in the immediate future. There are too many other things taking priority.

Thanks for the information. I'm always open to new ideas.

All the best.

[rvannatta]

Hi again, Robert (I took a look at your home page... interesting history)

Hold onto your hat... we love Kona! LOL I know, we "should more easily acclimate to Hilo (and we've been over there to go through the gardens), but Kona is our first choice. Last year we spent time in Kauai and loved that with the exception of a particularly nasty case of seasickness during a cruise up to the northwest coast.

Anyway, I appreciate what you are saying. I was a member of a camera club for many years and actually managed to acquire a few lenses myself. It seems to me that at this stage in my life, I'm no longer desirous of lugging around a lot of extra glass in the hopes that I'll be able to get that shot that has eluded me all these years. It's just too much bother to me. I don't think it has to do with laziness on my part; at least I hope it doesn't. Thanks to my genetic pool, arthritis is beginning to become a bit of an issue. That's why I'm looking to travel as light as possible and the reason why my wife looked for a light, durable and easy-to-use bag, bless her heart. Switching gears here for just a minute, she bought the Lowe Pro 200 Sling bag. I can't adequately describe how comfortable and useful this bag is. I'm willing to add one more lens to it and I'm quite certain that it will be the 18-250mm. In the future I can envision dropping the kit lens (since that focal range will be covered by the 18-250) and perhaps acquiring something wider. That is not, however, in the immediate future. There are too many other things taking priority.

Thanks for the information. I'm always open to new ideas.

All the best.

the 18-250 is not a bad choice. I expect it will prove quite popular, though it seems ironic that the 'one lens for all occasions' is becoming popular in the digital world just as
digital cameras with interchangable lenses are being perfected.

[Confused]

Hi Robert

I take your point when you said that:

"It seems ironic that the 'one lens for all occasions' is becoming popular in the digital world, just as digital cameras with interchangeable lenses are being perfected".

To a certain extent I can see your point of view, but is there perhaps a kind of unwritten commandment somewhere which categorically states:
“Thou shalt not be permitted to buy a DSLR with additional 3rd-party lenses and take photographs with it, unless this equipment is fully sanctioned and approved by an unofficially appointed body of eminent experts” ?

Like lots of others before me, I waited a considerable time for the price of DSLR's to come down to what I regarded as a realistic or 'affordable' level, before eventually entering the marketplace. A few years ago as an interim 'stopgap', I decided to
'bide my time' & buy a digital Fuji S602Z 'bridge-type' camera, then finally chose the Pentax K10D & Tamron 18-250mm Di II combination this April.....what an amazing 'bargain' !!
To the best of my knowledge, a 35mm equivalent of the Tamron 18-250mm 'super-zoom' never existed in the days of film, due to the technical limitations of the time. I'd already been down the well-trodden 35mm SLR & medium-format route during the 1970/80's, acquiring a small selection of lenses along the way. Life is often full of compromises and I have no argument whatsoever with those photographers who insist on obtaining the sharpest and (finances permitting) most expensive lenses available. As I've become older, the requirement to lug-around a heavily laden camera-bag crammed full of equipment has become less attractive, whilst I'm out-and-about or travelling on vacation.
I was essentially looking for better 'image quality' than the typical Fuji S9600/Panasonic FZ50 camera can provide, whilst extending the optical range of the lens to cover the vast majority of situations. The only other lens I intend to buy will be one of Sigma's extraordinary 10-20mm wide-zooms, which should be fantastic for capturing vast landscapes and architectural interiors. As far as LBA is concerned, that will most definitely be 'it' for the foreseeable future !
Thus I now find myself enjoying the best of both worlds........I don't see why I should feel the need to 'apologize' in some way for using my camera in this fashion ? Whilst not wishing to appear slightly discourteous, I really don't care 'a toss' what other photographers 'do' or 'don't' think about my choice of DSLR equipment and vice-versa.
Always remember that you can possess the finest photographic equipment in the world, but as has often been stated
"It's not the camera that counts, it's the photographer standing behind it" !!!!!

Best regards
Richard

[maxamillion]

Confused.

I am a new member. Hi to all.

Do you have any experience with the Tamron 18-250 in very low light conditions ? If so how does it perform on the K10D running the ISO up to 800-1000. is there a lot of noise ?

I also have a Finepix s9100 (s9600) and get pretty good quality images. How do you think the lens would compare to that ?

Thanks from a fellow Oregonian.

GAR.

[Confused]

Hi maxamillion (GAR.)

Re your question:

"I also have a Finepix s9100 (s9600) and get pretty good quality images. How do you think the lens would compare to that" ?

As it happens, at one point I very nearly purchased the immediate predecessor (S9000/S9500 in the UK) to that camera, but unreliability issues concerning the longevity of it's command-dial eventually put me off buying one !
Now down to 'brass-tacks'.....well for starters, the Tamron extends optically by another 75mm at the long end, so there are no 'questionable' digital magnification artifacts to fret about !
Note that the Fujinon lens has an aperture range between f/2.8 - f/4.9. whereas the Tamron is only f3.5 - 6.3., but to compensate for this the APS sensor of the K10D is appreciably bigger, so it's not quite such a problem as it first seems. The K10D uses a proprietary LIon battery which although not as widely available as the universal AA pen-cells that Fuji employs, will allow you to shoot virtually all day with no problem whatsoever. Batteries from third-party suppliers are both cheap and plentiful nowadays, so you can probably justify the added expense of buying a few spares to keep you in business photographically speaking ! Don't forget that you will also need to budget for some SD cards, but thankfully prices have fallen dramatically since they first appeared on the market.
Quite honestly however, the most noticeable difference you are going to experience will be between the bodies themselves.
Have you ever tried to critically focus on something via an LCD viewfinder ? All the ones I've had the misfortune to peer through are virtually useless in this respect and that's putting it politely ! I can assure you that the joy of using the superb optical viewfinder of the K10D, rather than struggling to compose images through the electronic LCD contraptions that bedevil most fixed-lens 'bridge-type' cameras is reason enough to make the change. You will also have to forego the ability to take video on the K10D, but I hardly ever used this facility on my Fuji S602Z.
The major advantage of a DSLR is naturally it's ability to swap lenses around. Tamron's 18-250mm is excellent in it's own right, but if you ever get the opportunity to try out one of Sigma's amazing 10-20mm HSM lenses.....I can confidently guarantee that it's undistorted wide-angle coverage will quite literally 'blow your socks off'.....you can't do THAT on a Finepix s9100 ! As far as the quality difference between the images that these two cameras produce, if you can't immediately detect the difference then I'd demand a full refund ! My favourite function on the K10D is it's ability to fix the ISO speed and have the camera decide which aperture/shutter speed combination to use. That's my 2-cent's worth, but you'll have to decide for yourself if Pentax's K10D satisfies your criteria......it certainly exceeded mine by a huge margin !

Best regards
Richard

[maxamillion]

Confused.

Thanks for all the info.

I have the K10D, KM7D and the Finepix S9100.
Just trying to find a good wide range lens to leave on
my K10 most of the time.

GAR.

[Confused]

Hi again maxamillion

Here are some 'straight-out-of-the-camera' shots taken with the Tamron 18-250mm with NO pp whatsoever, just reduced in Paint Shop Pro to meet forum requirements:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/100958-post24.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/83871-post6.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/83875-post7.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/97397-post5.html

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/85055-post8.html

Best regards
Richard