Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 2, 2007, 4:22 AM   #1
Member
 
gothiquity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cheshire (UK)
Posts: 61
Default

help wanted.:?

Im getting a K10 soon, and have been looking aroundfor different lenses. Am going to be getting the Tamron 90mm macro for some close up macro work, but am also wanting a good zoom lense.

Two lenses that im looking at are the 28-200 Tamron lense or the 70-300 Sigma lense

Im wanting to use the lense for wildlife shots and also hopefully for a more general purpose lense.

Im just not sure which one to go for.

Does anyone out there have either of these lenses, any opinions would be much appreciated.



Thanks in advance

goth


gothiquity is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old May 2, 2007, 6:16 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
rhermans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Antwerp - Belgium
Posts: 3,454
Default

Hi goth,

don't have the 70-300Sigma but the 70-300Tamron and I'm really happy with it.

The Sigma 70-300 is for wat I read as good or in apo version even better as the tamron.

The 28-200 is a bit short to use for wildlife shots (imho) and is if I'm not mistaken slower than the 70-300 at the same focal length.

So if you ask me the 70-300 is best for wildlife. I don't know what you are going to do for the range below the 70, but the kitlens is not bad.

Ronny
rhermans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2007, 7:52 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
robar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: D/FW area Texas
Posts: 7,590
Default

the tamron 90 is a good choice. i've seen some remarkable shots posted here with th sigma 70-300APO. i miss royce's bird shots.

roy
robar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2007, 9:50 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
ishino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 661
Default

Hi Goth,

I've got the Tamron 28-200, the Tamron 70-300 and the Tamron 90. The 70-300 is going to be the lens you want if you want to do any sort of wildlife shots. It's not a general walkaround lens as the 70 is way too long to do most landscapes. You can still do some portraits, but unless you have a football field to work across most of the portraits will be close-ups. With that said, I picked up the 28-200 thinking it would be a good compromise as a great walk around lens. The 28 being wide enough and 200 being long enough.

When I go out to the zoo, or the lake, or anywhere to shoot animals or birds I take the 70-300. Why take a lens that can only reach 200mm when you have one that has even more reach, at least that's my theroy. So what do I take when I'm not heading out to take wildlife shots? I don't reach for the 28-200, I usually go for the kit lens, the 18-55. The 18mm gives me more capability to get a wider shot. If I can't use my own two feet zoom to get closer, then I'll switch lenses, that's the beauty of a DSLR.

So when do I use my 28-200... I don't, at least not very often. It is one of my least used lenses. When I do want to compromise and am willing to trade off some wide and some telephoto capabilites but will need to use both ends wide and long and I know I won't have the time to switch lenses is when I use my 28-200. This may not reflect your particular shooting style but it is mine, and the 28-200 may be a great lens for your needs. It just doesn't work well for me when there are so many other lenses to choose from. Now Tamron does make a 18-250... that may be a better compromise, but it is impossible to find that one lens that will cover everything.

The Tamron 90 is a great, great, great lens! Have I mentioned how great it is? You'll love it!



Ish
ishino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2007, 12:09 PM   #5
Member
 
gothiquity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Cheshire (UK)
Posts: 61
Default

Thanks for the feedback ISH,

Havent got my K10 yet but am eagerly awaiting my next pay day.

Have read plenty of reviess of tamron 90mm macro so was hoping it was a great lense so thanks for the feedback on that.



Appreciate your comments on 28-200 v 70-300.

I was erring towards the 70-300 simply for the better reach hoping that it would finally enable me to photograph those critters which seem to sense my lense range and hover just beyond it.

I guess it makes more sense to go for the bigger lense, and just use the kit lense for everday use when im not at the zoo or nature reserve.



Thankyou all for your comments and feedback, its helped



Regards

Goth:|
gothiquity is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 2, 2007, 11:41 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Hayward's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,318
Default

ishino wrote:=
Quote:
over everything.

The Tamron 90 is a great, great, great lens! Have I mentioned how great it is? You'll love it!

ish
Nope no such thing!!!.... (as the universally perfect lens)

But having been real DISAPOINTED with the SIGMA 28-300mm (too far a range) at the long end....

Just got a good EBAY buy on a Tamron 28-200mm.... (and pretty good but PERFECRONIST reviews) and that is were the 28-300 REALLY fell off sharpness and contrast wise.... and on the 28-200mm, most reviews the same even with the longer reach ideal is around 135mm and that is JUST what I want to bridge that gap.

My current SIGMA 28-70 is a little short some times reaching to my happy with (surprisingly) Phoenix AF 100-400mm.... will cover that middle areas yet not really need the FAR 200mm end..... just close the gap or not need the lens swap.

I will report when I get it.

And HONESTLY I have a 70-300 as well.... and is is a SINGLE choice... go for that!!!! Darn nice lenses even if the low end (not EF, EX, SP ones.... one of the few cases where NO real compromise is being made.... unless money is just no object)

But to have the low end and not so much high.... 28-200mm seems a good compromise in that area... without the real problems of the 28-300mm's..... (above 200mm )

Again when I actuallly get my Tam 28-200mm and work with it some, I will report.
Hayward is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2007, 1:08 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
Illuminati's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: California, USA
Posts: 583
Default

I've used to own a Tamron 28-200mm f/3.8-5.6 ASP IF LD and currently own a Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO. Now, I'm not sure if you're looking at the newer Tamron lenses, but the older one I had wasn't so great; the lens was too susceptible to creep (although that might be due to its age). The photos I've taken with the lens are okay at 200mm, but they could be sharper. This lens was also quite heavy (the newer DI models should be much lighter though). This new Sigma 70-300 lens so far is great. It does not suffer creep, has a more rugged build, and it has a macro capability. However, It's significantly larger than my old Tamron 28-200, and unfortunately the Sigma lens' front element rotates (come on Sigma! You could have done better). The pictures I've taken with the lens come out quite nice, and focusing with it in the dark isn't bad either. Colors seem to pop more with the Sigma lens, although that may be due to the change in camera (upgraded from a *ist DL to a K100D) and/or changes to my PP workflow. Check below for a sample shot from each lens.

Sigma 70-300 @ 300mm, taken on a K100D (1/1000 sec, f/11, ISO 1600):


Tamron 28-200 @200mm, taken on a *ist DL (1/500 sec, f/9.5, ISO 800):


If you do decide to get the Sigma 70-300, make sure to get the APO version (red ring) and not the non-APO version (black ring); the extra APO elements do make a difference.

- Jason
Illuminati is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2007, 1:15 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
Robert Barnett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 323
Default

Personally, I would get the 18-55 kit lens (a very nice lens for the money) and then get the Pentax 50-200 which is a very good lens.

Robert
Robert Barnett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2007, 1:43 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
ishino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 661
Default

Hayward wrote:
Quote:
ishino wrote:=
Quote:
over everything.

The Tamron 90 is a great, great, great lens! Have I mentioned how great it is? You'll love it!

ish
Nope no such thing!!!....

But having been real DISAPOINTED with the SIGMA 28-300mm (too far a range) at the long end....

Just got a good EBAY buy on a Tamron 28-200mm.... (and pretty good but PERFECRONIST reviews) and that is were the 28-300 REALLY fell off sharpness and contrast wise.... and on the 28-200mm, most reviews the same even with the longer reach ideal is around 135mm and that is JUST what I want to bridge that gap.

My current SIGMA 28-70 is a little short some times reaching to my happy with (surprisingly) Phoenix AF 100-400mm.... will cover that middle areas yet not really need the FAR 200mm end..... just close the gap or not need the lens swap.

I will report when I get it.

And HONESTLY I have a 70-300 as well.... and is is a SINGLE choice... go for that!!!! Darn nice lenses even if the low end (not EF, EX, SP ones.... one of the few cases where NO real compromise is being made.... unless money is just no object)

But to have the low end and not so much high.... 28-200mm seems a good compromise in that area... without the real problems of the 28-300mm's..... (above 200mm )

Again when I actuallly get my Tam 28-200mm and work with it some, I will report.
Hayward

I've read your post 4 times and I can't make any sense of it. What contribution are you making to answer question of the original post? From what I have dissected from your post you currently have a 28-70, a 70-300, a 100-400, and a soon to be 28-200. You seem to praise the 70-300, but talk about needing to cover a gap between your 28-70 and your 100-400 lenses. Well you already had that covered with your 70-300 which is a seamless range with no overlap from your 28-70.

Now I am not suggesting there isn't a need for multiple lenses that overlap focal range, but please make an effort to make a contribution to the topic. Post your personal experience between the lenses and give some reason to back your recommendation. Post comparison photos of the lenses you are referencing such as Jason did. Just please don't post a bunch of jiberish that I've had to read multiple times just to figure out that it doesn't benefit the information in the topic. I respect your contributions to this forum, but please contribute in a positive and meaningful manner.
ishino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 3, 2007, 1:53 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
ishino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 661
Default

Jason,

I've got the Tamron 28-200 AF Aspeherical XR (IF) Model: A03. It is not the newer Di version of the lens. My copy does not suffer from lens creep, but it does have a little bit of weight to it. Not Bigma weight, but it's still noticeably heavier than my kit lens.

Also a good point about the Sigma 70-300 APO model. Definitely if you go Sigma, get the APO version... shots I have seen from this lens have been rather remarkable and the colors fabulous. I've seen your surfing shots before, those are so great!
ishino 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 6:11 AM.