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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 13, 2009, 12:09 PM   #21
Senior Member
 
Biro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 835
Default

I'm sure the Pentax 18-250 will at least equal the quality of what you'll get out of the S5. Meanwhile, here's another possibility: a Sigma 18-200mm lens that costs more than $100 less than the Pentax 18-250:

http://www.adorama.com/SG18200PX.html

Its telephoto zoom isn't as long as the 18-250, but you indicated you might be happy with a 16-135mm range. This lens also doesn't feature the latest and greatest ultra-fast zoom motor. But neither does thePentax 18-250. Why not check around the Internet for reviews of this lens?

I'm sure that, on balance, the Pentax 18-250 and this Sigma will get you results at least as good as the S5. But there's a reason why these lenses cost so much less than thePentax 16-50 and 50-135. If you are so blown away by the quality of results from the 50-135, I'm thinkingyou can tell the difference and, therefore, shouldn't get rid of that lens.

But if this Sigma is more than $100 cheaperthan the Pentax 18-250, is it possible you can purchase this and just add it to your kit?


Biro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 1:33 PM   #22
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,544
Default

Here's a review of the Pentax 18-250 (with it's undisguisedTamron nameplate):

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...ct/1009/cat/23

Here's a review of the Sigma 18-200:

http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showp...uct/175/cat/31

TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 2:14 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: East Central Vermont
Posts: 1,890
Default

Before buying my K100D Iused (and still have) a Panasonic FZ30. It's a wonderful camera in many ways. My only two complaints were that the veiwfinder (or LCD on the back) would freeze up when shooting in burst mode, and the images were quite noisy in low light. From everything I've read, the FZ 28 performs much better in low light than my FZ30. (The FZ 30 tops out at ISO 400, and even at that sensitivity the images were very noisy.) Of course, the FZ28 will not perform as well as your Pentax DSLR in low light, but if the reviews are correct, it should perform reasonably well. So, the low-light problem has been largely resolved. The only drawback I can see with the FZ28 is that the viewfinder will still freeze up in burst mode; I have no idea if that's important to you.

You already have a very nice lens selection for your Pentax DSLR.For the money you'd spend on the 18-250, I'd go with the Panasonic FZ28. But either way, I suspect you'll be happy.
mtnman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 2:17 PM   #24
Senior Member
 
Biro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 835
Default

Thanks TCav... I think this pssage from the Tamron (Pentax) 18-250 review kind of sums it up:

"All in all, a very close-fought race between the two lenses: I'd give the nod to the Tamron for sharpness, but the Sigma is close behind, and has better CA over much of its range. The Sigma is also quite a bit cheaper, with a street price as of this writing (June, 2007) a good $150 less than that of the Tamron. If you need the greater focal length range, the Tamron wins hands down, and you can be happy about its somewhat greater sharpness. If you're budget constrained though, the Sigma will win out, and you can be happy with its better CA performance."

I would think the Sigma would do the job for Dave... and might be cheap enough for him to keep his other lenses.




Biro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2009, 2:20 PM   #25
Senior Member
 
Biro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 835
Default

mtnman wrote:
Quote:
You already have a very nice lens selection for your Pentax DSLR.For the money you'd spend on the 18-250, I'd go with the Panasonic FZ28. But either way, I suspect you'll be happy.
mtnman... I think you're right about the FZ28. Unless something comes along to change my mind before spring, I think that'll be my choice.
Biro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 15, 2009, 2:44 PM   #26
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

This is an interesting thread, and shows why there's not a one-size-fits all answer. While a p&s is going to be a good fit for Biro, it might notbe the way to go for Dave or for me. I sure wouldn't trade two fast, high quality lenses for the convenience of one slowlens, even with adding a flash to the situation. What I do when I don't want to switch lenses, is to take a long a second camera body and grab the right camera/lens combination. I've hiked for short hikes like this, and use it all the time when I'm doing road and travel trips. If I am physically able, I'd rather carry the extra weight than compromise on quality. Adding in the low light capability of these fine lenses makes it a very compelling answer.

If you were going to always use the lens outdoors, in good light where you were going to be shooting at f8 or smaller anyway, then itmight makesense selling the two f2.8 lenses and replacing them with the 18-250.

And I do know what you mean about photography being about fun - I actually enjoy changing lenses and pushing the envelope of my equipment (which may or may not work). But hiking with the DA 55-300 and only changing once in a while is also great fun, too. All photography is a compromise. You may end up deciding that the quality gain you get with those big, fast lenses really aren't worth the effort to cart them around, that you'll be happy with less quality for the ease of use. I thought that once, too, when I chose a Panny FZ30 over a dSLR. A month later I realized that I wasn't as willing to compromise on quality as I had thought so sold the Panny (at a big loss) and bought the Pentax DS. While it was an expensive lesson, it's one that I'm glad I made - I now know what I'm REALLY willing to compromise on. Not everyone is willing to make the same choices I do -it means I end up carrying heavier weights than perhaps I should, I use some manual focus lenses to save money but not compromise on quality. That's the price I'm willing to pay, but not the price everyone can, or should make.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 15, 2009, 9:06 PM   #27
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

took a couple of days off on the subject to get my thoughts together and did some in depth research and went over reviews on this 18-250 lens.

As it turns out, this lens i would say got at least a 90% thumbs up, for ease of use, good quality and sharp pics once the lens is stopped down. Most complained of slow autofocus in low to dim conditions, and recomended getting a fast lens when the lighting conditions go to low.............................................an d that got me thinking.

if i go that way i am back to 2 lenses,

you know what , i am gonna wait for a very brilliant lens designer to come out with a lens that is 16-135 F2.8 that will give me the same quality as my 50-135. and until then , i will just have to read the scean and change lenses a little faster or force my self to take pictures with the 50-135 and what gets left out, too bad :lol:

Dave



Pentax K20D / D-BG2
DA*16-50 : DA*50-135 : 360 FGZ
Domke F3X





dafiryde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 15, 2009, 10:14 PM   #28
Senior Member
 
Biro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 835
Default

LOL, Dave... we're all waiting for that lens as well!

Harriet, I completely agree with you... and in any situation in which I have the time to change lenses and the room to carry them (even in a backpack) I'll take the DSLR every time - and will continue to do so. But for those cramped situations when I just don't have the room or when I know I'm going to miss more than a couple of shots, the P&S will be an acceptable compromise.

But we might not have to compromise all that much for that much longer. The new micro four-thirds format has me intrigued. Not enough to leave Pentax, but I can see when some kind of micro four-thirds camera might become the second camera - requiring far fewer compromises than something with a 1/2.3 sensor.

And I understand Pentax won't be sitting on its laurels, either. I read an article recently in which a Samsung executive hinted at joint development of more compact APS-sensor cameras. These, like micro four-thirds, might not have a bulky prism and mirror assembly.

So a P&S right now is just a temporary solution for a specific situation - that works for me.
Biro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2009, 10:31 AM   #29
Senior Member
 
julianne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 122
Default

I got the 18 - 250 for christmas. and so far i LOVE it. i also have a P&S but i don;t think i have used once it since i got the lens. I have gotten some amazing shots. i will admit that i use my camera as a big p&s when the lens is on.

so i don;t know if this helps or not. i am no expert on lens. but i does work well for what i wanted it for. regular life .



i don't recommend using in in low light at all even with the flash ( i have aexternal flash). inside i always use my50mm f1.4 .
julianne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 16, 2009, 9:28 PM   #30
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 688
Default

mtngal wrote:
Quote:
I thought that once, too, when I chose a Panny FZ30 over a dSLR. A month later I realized that I wasn't as willing to compromise on quality as I had thought so sold the Panny (at a big loss) and bought the Pentax DS. While it was an expensive lesson, it's one that I'm glad I made -

Words of wisdom,

it now came back to me when i was in this position . backin july 2007. i sold my minolta maxxum 5D and got the canon S5IS which was small and compact and had a super zoom, and i still say as of today , i was very pleased with it, but then i took my son to Disney World in Sept'07 , and i remember as we were leaving i saw this guy with a digital SLR strapped around his neck, and i immedately felt like something was missing from wy life. so i did some research, and by oct'07 , i rarrowed it down to Pentax K10D, had previous experience in buying lens after lens after lens, so then i forked out the extra for the 16-50. an was pleased. Then i started hearing so much talk about the 50-135, i just had to get one , since then i have upgraded to the K20D and coupled with the 50-135, the results are astonishing. One thing that proved this, is the K20D can bring up to pictures side by side, so i took a photo with the 16-50 set at 50, and the same scene with the 50-135 set at 50. put both picsup side by side and zoomed in and believe you me the 50-135 clarity blew the 16-50 way way way out of the water.

So you see, with a little time and patience, and with the great help from you guys in this forum, i saved my self $500 bucks and for even thinking of giving up two great lens.

like i said before and i will say again, i will use my K20D with the 50-135 and if i dont have time to change lenses , who gets left out of the picture thats just too bad
dafiryde 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 7:31 AM.