Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-31-2006, 08:06 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Amherst, NY.
Posts: 334
Question on my Tamron AF18-200mm F/3.5-6.3 XR (Di II)

...how well do you think I did with the purchase of this lens?

In the limited experience that I have had with it, it has pleased me quite a bit. But one must understand that this is only my second DSLR. My first (E500) was outfitted with the kit lens, that I had just a few months of possession with, and my present lens (on my Pentax K10D) has really amazed me. But, I guess my question boils down to this: could I have done better than this lens, at about the same pricepoint ($459) - or a little more? I just wonder if I could have gotten a faster/sharper 'walk-a-round' lens for my camera.

I bought from a local camera shop, which only had the camera bodies and - as I was SO anxious to get started - I purchased the Tamron. I had previously heard some decent things about it, but am now wondering as to how well I really did. I am awaiting the arrival of my battery grip, from the same store, and (depending on the input that I get, here) will exchange this lens for another.

The 'spontaneity' behind this lens purchase (or any purchase, for that matter) is very uncharacteristic of me. Normally, I research - high & low - before I shell out monies for anything. I am not ashamed to admit that the Shutter-Bug-fever has got me - REAL GOOD , and that I do need to grow, within the concerns of 'patience', when it comes to this deep photographic interest.

I am hoping to find that my lens is a well-regarded one (maybe..highly regarded?), by you guys & gals. If not, I'll see what I can do about the seller ordering a different one for me. But, please share your feelings.

12-31-2006, 09:02 PM   #2
Veteran Member
-=JoN=-'s Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,000
sigma has about the same specs...price wise..both never really are far off from each other...never used either lens, but...if ur happy...
12-31-2006, 09:03 PM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 643
i have one as my walk around lens.. teamed up with a sigma 70 to 300 they nicely cover most things.. for anything below 150mm the tamron is spot on and anything above that the sigma takes over..

the big overlap in the middle saves too much lens changing..

either way the tamron 18 x 200 is a good starting point.. for what it does there is nothing to touch it really..

trog
12-31-2006, 09:20 PM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 643
my tamron 18 x 200 at 200mm..



trog

12-31-2006, 09:30 PM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 643
at 18mm..



trog
12-31-2006, 09:42 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 643
and just for a laugh.. a 100% crop of some starlings sat on the bridge u can see in the pic above taken from the same spot at 200mm.. he he



trog
01-01-2007, 12:29 AM   #7
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: usa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 68
Nice ones Trog

Trog, very decent images you took with that lens. Thanks for posting those. Im going to check into the upcoming Tamron 18-250 lens which Amazon.com says will be available January 15. Before I buy that though I want to see other user reviews of it, since it will cost about $500. So I will either get that one or the 18-200 for my K10D which I am taking to Ecuador and Galapogos this coming May.
01-01-2007, 01:12 AM   #8
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rapid City, SD
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 138
I use a Tamron 28-200 for my general lens, I have been VERY happy with it and the pictures are sharp at all aspects to me.

Good shots by the way.

01-01-2007, 06:59 AM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 643
whenever a super zoom gets a mention they pretty much always get knocked for poor image quality but in truth they do a remarkably good job..

there is cheat factor at the 200mm end.. they are only 200mm at infinity or with far off subjects.. with smaller objects closer up like say the swans head pic they are really only about 150mm..

all the focus close up super zooms do it.. i never realized till i compared mine with a 70 x 300 at 200mm..

they are bigger than the pentax kit lens but in the same zoom range take a noticably better picture.. at around their mid range point they are very good.. at 200mm a 70 x 300 works better.. its not an image quality thing more a usability and focus speed thing..

the tamron 18 x 200 is more "usable" than the sigma equivalent..

all in all its my favourate lens by far.. its what i would call a boring lens.. it just works and does what u ask it to without complaint.. he he

i know this will be considered an insult by some.. but it really does turn my k100 into a "better" point and shoot super zoom.. which in truth is very often what i want my dslr camera to be..

the pics are just lens test pics.. but typical of what the lens produces..

trog

ps.. a macro from the same lens..


Last edited by trog100; 01-01-2007 at 07:10 AM.
01-01-2007, 07:26 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 643
be warned about the size weight/thing thow.. they aint small and the figure on the scales for k100 camera/lens/batteries reads 1140 grams a k10 will weigh more..



add about three inches to that when zoomed out to 200mm

trog

ps.. and interestingly there u see the difference between my very usefull panasonic fz20 and the bigger heavier dslr equivalent.. u cant have the black detail and the white.. try and pull in the blacks and the whites would blow.. the pic was taken with my fz20..

Last edited by trog100; 01-01-2007 at 07:46 AM.
01-01-2007, 08:53 AM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Amherst, NY.
Posts: 334
Original Poster
Thanks everyone.

The Tamron lens does take nicer shots than I had been used to seeing, with my last camera, and you all regard it is a very good walk-a-round lens. So, I am at ease now. I will probably look into the Sigma 70-300mm (recommended here) also, a little later on.

Thank you very much. And HAPPY NEW YEAR.
01-01-2007, 09:26 AM   #12
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bridgeville CA
Posts: 73
Trog - a request

Since you've got the necessary equipment.

I spend time on a travel/camera forum and often the image quality question of a fixed lens superzoom (like your FZ20) vs. a dSLR with superzoom (like your Tamron 18-200) comes up.

Would you consider shooting some test shots and posting them?
01-01-2007, 09:39 AM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 643
i have plenty.. but same time same place shots are always better for this comparing stuff..

having gone the dslr route and spent far more than i first envisaged i still have one foot in both camps to be honest..

its not just image quality its usablity.. internet pixel peeping always tends to ignore usability..

start a thread and i will see what i can do as regards image comparing and the general usability factors..

trog
01-01-2007, 10:04 AM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 643
"you all regard it is a very good walk-a-round lens"

actually the standard kinda forum opinion is "okay if u can tolerate the poor image quality".. mostly from people who believe other people and have never used the lens.. the internet is bad for this kinda thing.. often said things just get accepted and passed around and in the end become "fact"..

u made a good if poorly informed choice.. i posted the pics i did to make u feel happier about your good but poorly informed choice..

i intended to bias the "common" opinion and it seems i succeeded.. i did expect a little more opposition thow.. i think the pics put paid to it.. he he

my cheque from tamron should be in the post tommorow.. he he

trog
01-01-2007, 10:42 AM   #15
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 259
We have different needs and different limits for acceptable quality. There is no need to bash people who do not think that superzooms picture quality is enough for their purposes. If those lenses are enough for many users, it dont make them any better performers than they really are.

Superzooms are not as good as shorter, max x3 zooms. Difference is not sometimes big, but it exists. But difference in usability is not big either. And mostly you cannot deny the existence of better quality of shorter zooms.

It depends on your bias what kind of solution you choose. And the end use of your pictures. All purposes dont need bias towards quality. :-)

For me not even the optical quality of many shorter, but still consumer grade, zooms is not enough.
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!
camera, dslr, f/3.5-6.3 xr di, lens, photography, purchase, question, tamron
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tamron Rebate ....AF18-200 a good deal? Docrwm Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 09-29-2010 01:47 PM
Newbie Question on Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 leefranke Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 9 09-23-2010 08:04 AM
For Sale - Sold: PENTAX *ist D Body and Tamron AF18-200mm flyyung Sold Items 13 01-16-2009 09:33 AM
For Sale - Sold: FS: Tamron AF18-250mm F/3.5-6.3 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) WMBP Sold Items 4 10-05-2007 05:04 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:26 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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