K10D - one lens?

Tony Polson wrote:
Wilba wrote:
Pete D wrote:

The 18-250mm Tamron is appently quite good, the Sigma 18-200mm is not
in the same ballpark, the Sigma 18-125mm would probably do if cost and
size did matter.

Are Tamron generally considered a good brand?

Tamron makes some excellent lenses and some lemons. Tamron made the
majority of inexpensive "kit" lenses for film SLRs and continues to
make some for DSLRs, although Sigma and Cosina also compete in this
market. Unfortunately, many of those kit lenses are optically very
poor performers, being built down to a very low price. The 18-55mm
Canon kit lens is a current example, but various 35-80mm and 28-80mm
kit lenses for film SLRs were just as bad.

But Tamron does make some fine optics, notably the 90mm f/2.8 macro
and the 300mm f/2.8, both of which compare with camera brand lenses of
equivalent focal lengths and apertures.

Thanks. It's decades since I bought SLR lenses and I didn't have much of a
clue then, either. My impression of Tamron at the time was a bit "cheapo",
so this is good info for me.

"Wilba" wrote in message
...
The Spider Formally Seated Next To Little Miss Muffet wrote:
Wilba wrote:

Another hypothetical ... let's say you go for a Pentax K10D
(http://www.pentaxslr.com/bodies/k10), and want to get going with one
versatile, general purpose lens, what would you choose?

Something like the DA 18-250mm F3.5-6.3
(http://www.pentaxslr.com/lenses/lens_18_250), or the Sigma 18-200mm
F3.5-6.3 DC
(https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/le...2&navigator=6),
perhaps?

Pentax 18-250. Should be on the market very soon.

You'd choose that one because ...?


Because it covers fairly wide and a good zoom range. Simple single carry
around lens that will take care of most needs. If you need to go wider then
you will need to change lenses.

The Spider

--
Ignorance really is bliss, just look how happy President Bush is.

"Wilba" wrote in message
...
Pete D wrote:

The 18-250mm Tamron is appently quite good, the Sigma 18-200mm is not
in the same ballpark, the Sigma 18-125mm would probably do if cost and
size did matter.

Are Tamron generally considered a good brand?


I don't think so. I have never gotten a good one. The same with Sigma that
is why I only buy Pentax brand lenses and yes the new 18-250 is a Tamron,
however it has Pentax's coatings and electronics and it is Pentax that will
suffer if they put out a poor lens which they never really have. I have
tried both Tamron and Sigma probably and half dozen times over the last year
and have never gotten one that was any good. They have major quality control
issues, issues Pentax will make sure doesn't happen in their 18-250 as I
said it is Pentax that will suffer if these ship and have QC issues.

The Spider

--
Ignorance really is bliss, just look how happy President Bush is.

The Spider Formally Seated Next To Little Miss Muffet wrote:
Wilba wrote:
The Spider Formally Seated Next To Little Miss Muffet wrote:
Wilba wrote:

Another hypothetical ... let's say you go for a Pentax K10D
(http://www.pentaxslr.com/bodies/k10), and want to get going with one
versatile, general purpose lens, what would you choose?

Something like the DA 18-250mm F3.5-6.3
(http://www.pentaxslr.com/lenses/lens_18_250), or the Sigma 18-200mm
F3.5-6.3 DC
(https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/le...2&navigator=6),
perhaps?

Pentax 18-250. Should be on the market very soon.

You'd choose that one because ...?

Because it covers fairly wide and a good zoom range. Simple single carry
around lens that will take care of most needs. If you need to go wider
then you will need to change lenses.

OK. That's what I thought. Pentax vs other brands?

Wilba wrote:
The Spider Formally Seated Next To Little Miss Muffet wrote:
Wilba wrote:
The Spider Formally Seated Next To Little Miss Muffet wrote:
Wilba wrote:

Another hypothetical ... let's say you go for a Pentax K10D
(http://www.pentaxslr.com/bodies/k10), and want to get going with one
versatile, general purpose lens, what would you choose?

Something like the DA 18-250mm F3.5-6.3
(http://www.pentaxslr.com/lenses/lens_18_250), or the Sigma 18-200mm
F3.5-6.3 DC
(https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/le...2&navigator=6),
perhaps?

Pentax 18-250. Should be on the market very soon.

You'd choose that one because ...?

Because it covers fairly wide and a good zoom range. Simple single carry
around lens that will take care of most needs. If you need to go wider
then you will need to change lenses.

OK. That's what I thought. Pentax vs other brands?

I saw what you said it in your other reply. No need to reply again. Thanks.

The Spider Formally Seated Next To Little Miss Muffet wrote:
"Wilba" wrote in message
...
Another hypothetical ... let's say you go for a Pentax K10D
(http://www.pentaxslr.com/bodies/k10), and want to get going with one
versatile, general purpose lens, what would you choose?

Something like the DA 18-250mm F3.5-6.3
(http://www.pentaxslr.com/lenses/lens_18_250), or the Sigma 18-200mm
F3.5-6.3 DC
(https://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/le...2&navigator=6),
perhaps?


Pentax 18-250. Should be on the market very soon.

The Spider

I'm not thrilled with the Sigma 18-200. Often the shots are not quite
in focus.

Wilba wrote:

Pete D wrote:

The 18-250mm Tamron is appently quite good, the Sigma 18-200mm is not in
the same ballpark, the Sigma 18-125mm would probably do if cost and size
did matter.

Are Tamron generally considered a good brand?

Get the SP line, and especially if you get the old ones that were made
out of metal and could survive an atomic blast. For instance, you'll
only be able to have my SP 80-200/2.8 when you pry it from my cold, dead
fingers. There's also a CF line, which means 'close focus,' which is
quite good (SP CF 35-80/2.8-3.8 comes to mind).

The old Tamron Adaptalls are some of the best deals in used old-skool
lenses, and they retain their value because they can be fitted to most
SLR mounts with an adaptor.

--
http://www.xoverboard.com/cartoons/2..._argument.html

Wilba wrote:

Another hypothetical ... let's say you go for a Pentax K10D
(http://www.pentaxslr.com/bodies/k10), and want to get going with one
versatile, general purpose lens, what would you choose?

Why would you get a DSLR and then buy only one lens to cover all focal
lengths? The kit lens is pretty good, but the DA 16-45/4 is totally
worth the upgrade. And I've said it before and I'll say it again: If you
have a Pentax body but don't have the FA 50/1.4, you're missing out.

If you need a long zoom, save your nickles and dimes and get the DA*
50-135/2.8.

--
http://www.xoverboard.com/cartoons/2..._argument.html

Why would you get a DSLR and then buy only one lens to cover all focal
lengths? The kit lens is pretty good, but the DA 16-45/4 is totally
worth the upgrade. And I've said it before and I'll say it again: If you
have a Pentax body but don't have the FA 50/1.4, you're missing out.

If you need a long zoom, save your nickles and dimes and get the DA*
50-135/2.8.

Long zoom? Medium at best I think.

Paul Mitchum wrote:
Wilba wrote:

Another hypothetical ... let's say you go for a Pentax K10D
(http://www.pentaxslr.com/bodies/k10), and want to get going with one
versatile, general purpose lens, what would you choose?

Why would you get a DSLR and then buy only one lens to cover all focal
lengths? The kit lens is pretty good, but the DA 16-45/4 is totally
worth the upgrade. And I've said it before and I'll say it again: If you
have a Pentax body but don't have the FA 50/1.4, you're missing out.

If you need a long zoom, save your nickles and dimes and get the DA*
50-135/2.8.

So the question you want me to ask is, let's say you go for a Pentax K10D
and want to get going with two versatile, general purpose lenses, what would
you choose? That's not the question I'm asking. :-)