Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 29, 2007, 8:20 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 268
Default

I have a K100D with the 18-55mm kit lens. I understand some of the limitations of the kit lens, but for now it works. I was wondering if anyone has taken two shots of the same subject, only one with a not-so-sharp lens and the other shot with a sharp lens. I'm curiously to see the differencewhen both images areviewed"side by side".
Contriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 29, 2007, 11:55 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Illuminati's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 583
Default

This site has a comparison of a Tamron 18-200mm vs Sigma 18-200mm lens. It compares the lenses in Canon mount, but I'm linking it so you can see the difference between a sharp lens (Sigma) compared to an unsharp lens (Tamron).

http://www.babelfish.altavista.com/b....html&lp=ja_en
Illuminati is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 7:25 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 268
Default

Thanks Illuminati! Does anyone else have examples as well?
Contriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 9:45 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

Contriver wrote:
Quote:
I have a K100D with the 18-55mm kit lens. I understand some of the limitations of the kit lens, but for now it works. I was wondering if anyone has taken two shots of the same subject, only one with a not-so-sharp lens and the other shot with a sharp lens. I'm curiously to see the differencewhen both images areviewed"side by side".
Look at a number of these vs the many Sigma (or Tam) 70-300mm shots here.... big difference.
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=80

S 28-300mm is a convenient one lens and camera solution... but has its failings if not bright daylight (small f/) when at long end. ( I had one before going 2 or 3 lens and Sig 70-300mm)
Tam has a 28-300mm too but have never even seen a sample from one of those.... likely suffers the same failings trying to be WA and Long all in one. (And low end Sig and Tam leses are very similar/near identical.. even in specs)
Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 31, 2007, 10:37 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 268
Default

Do you think that this would be a noticable improvement (in sharpness) over the kit lens:

Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX

http://www.adorama.com/SG1850PXAF.html
Contriver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 1, 2007, 12:24 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
superakuma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 550
Default

I would spend the extra $10 and get the "macro" version of that lens. The Macro version is the newier version that just came out and "I read" that it was better. But than again you are going from a 67mm front lens on the non macro to a 72mm on the macro = more $$ if you buy filter.
superakuma is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:59 AM.