Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 3, 2006, 10:13 AM   #51
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

meanstreak wrote:
Quote:
Alex 007 wrote:
Quote:
Hi
Peace,

Alex 007:|
Have you heard anything about the quality of the results of the 18-250mm compared to the 18-200MM?

I believe the 18-200 has a plastic lens mount, and Tamron stated the 18-250 would be metal. The blurb I read said that the 18-250 was aimed at replacing the 28-300 for APS sensor cameras. I suspect it will be a pretty nice lens.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2006, 10:33 AM   #52
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Dear Alan & Meanstreak.

Yet the newer Tamron 18-250mm can't be acquired, soon will be possible, my goal or prime selection will be the Zeiss zoom lens...if I will read all the test...& also the newer Tamron will be on stores & will read first all the test on these two zoom lenses, check the prices...& I will decided which one to buy

Peace,

Alex 007:|
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2006, 10:35 AM   #53
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Dear Alan,

Not yet...to buy I think that is better idea to get till 250mm instead 200mm

Peace,

Alex 007:|
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2006, 10:43 AM   #54
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

cope wrote:
Quote:
meanstreak wrote:
Quote:
Alex 007 wrote:
Quote:
Hi
Peace,

Alex 007:|
Have you heard anything about the quality of the results of the 18-250mm compared to the 18-200MM?

I believe the 18-200 has a plastic lens mount, and Tamron stated the 18-250 would be metal. The blurb I read said that the 18-250 was aimed at replacing the 28-300 for APS sensor cameras. I suspect it will be a pretty nice lens.
I think the plastic mount on my 28-300mm is what causes it not to work at all with my 2X TC so going metal is a good start. I hate when they compromisein quality just to stay competitive in the marketplace. Plastic mounts should be outlawed.

I am just wondering if the range will compromise the qualitymore than that that of the 18-200mm or the 28-300mm. If it remains relatively the same, it would make an awsume replacemennt for either lens but especially the 28-300. I would more than willingly give up 50mm at the long end for 10mm at the short end and so would most other people in the market for a walk around lens. I just hope I don't get spoiled by primes by then. I'm really liking the immediate results of the 90mm Tamron I'm getting, but it is hard to argue with the convenience of a wide range zoom for travel and other purposes.






meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2006, 10:49 AM   #55
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Yes I agree with you...a "Wide Range Zoom" is "A MUST" during traveling:P

Peace,

Alex 007:|
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2006, 11:01 AM   #56
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

Alex 007 wrote:
Quote:
Yes I agree with you...a "Wide Range Zoom" is "A MUST" during traveling:P

Peace,

Alex 007:|
How are liking your 10-20mm Sigma? Still using it much? Ipurchased an 11-18 KM lens and I love taking pictures with it.


meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 3, 2006, 12:54 PM   #57
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

meanstreak wrote:
Quote:
cope wrote:
Quote:
meanstreak wrote:
Quote:
Alex 007 wrote:
Quote:
Hi
Peace,

Alex 007:|
Have you heard anything about the quality of the results of the 18-250mm compared to the 18-200MM?

I believe the 18-200 has a plastic lens mount, and Tamron stated the 18-250 would be metal. The blurb I read said that the 18-250 was aimed at replacing the 28-300 for APS sensor cameras. I suspect it will be a pretty nice lens.
I think the plastic mount on my 28-300mm is what causes it not to work at all with my 2X TC so going metal is a good start. I hate when they compromisein quality just to stay competitive in the marketplace. Plastic mounts should be outlawed.

I am just wondering if the range will compromise the qualitymore than that that of the 18-200mm or the 28-300mm. If it remains relatively the same, it would make an awsume replacemennt for either lens but especially the 28-300. I would more than willingly give up 50mm at the long end for 10mm at the short end and so would most other people in the market for a walk around lens. I just hope I don't get spoiled by primes by then. I'm really liking the immediate results of the 90mm Tamron I'm getting, but it is hard to argue with the convenience of a wide range zoom for travel and other purposes.





My 28-300 has the steel mount over a plastic core, but I have no probkems fitting it to my 1.4X and 2X Tamron T/C.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2006, 12:17 AM   #58
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Dear Meanstreak,

NO...since I do some "Test" photos...still boxed:P

Really I made a mistake...acquiring this lens

BTW...A good friend of me, that loves Nikon stuff, add to his collection a Fisheye 10.5mm lens to his 2DX body, among his 17-55mm & 70-200mm 2,8 zoom lens. Only buy "Top" Nikon lenses!

Yes, the Tamron is a good one shorter "Zoom" that the Sigma:!:

Peace,

Alex 007:|
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2006, 8:47 AM   #59
Senior Member
 
meanstreak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,234
Default

Alex 007 wrote:
Quote:
Dear Meanstreak,

NO...since I do some "Test" photos...still boxed:P

Really I made a mistake...acquiring this lens

BTW...A good friend of me, that loves Nikon stuff, add to his collection a Fisheye 10.5mm lens to his 2DX body, among his 17-55mm & 70-200mm2,8 zoom lens. Only buy "Top" Nikon lenses!

Yes, the Tamron is a good one shorter "Zoom" that the Sigma:!:

Peace,

Alex 007:|
Why do feel it was a mistake to buy the Sigma 10-20mm? I assumenot because of the range because most people seem to like an ultrawide zoom.

Do you mean because it is longer than the Tamron or because you think the Tamron is better over all? The Tamron and KM get very good reviews and are very similiar. They might even be both built by Tamron.




meanstreak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 4, 2006, 10:27 AM   #60
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Have a nice working day, my good friend,

No you are a little bit wrong, my meaning is that for maybe 1% of my personal use..., believe me; was a waste of money. It's wider zoom at both ends; that the KM or Tamron...both 100% MADE by Tamron.

No...both are good lenses. here in Israel Sigma is easier to obtain that the Tamron...so I buy the Sigma for this sole reason

Now I will wait for a Zeiss 16-80mm & newer 18-250mm Tamron lenses to decide which to own:P

Peace,

Alex 007:|

Alex 007 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 8:57 PM.