Assessing need to change some lenses

<p>Hello All,</p>

<p>I started my adventure into DSLR-land with a K100DS to which I added the Tamron 18-250 lens. The Tammy lived on this camera all the time I owned it, which was my learning curve in this new arena. I sold the camera and kit lens to a friend and kept the Tamron to use with my K20D.</p>

<p>Since obtaining the K20D, I've bought an assortment of lenses (fish eye, macro, a couple primes, a couple zooms) and the Tammy has found itself spending most of its time in the bag. But I think I want to tweak my kit for covering the wide to tele range. Yes, the Tamron 18-250 covers that range all by itself, but I don't often stretch all the way to 250, actually rarely getting near even 200.</p>

<p>What do I shoot? Well, mainly anything outdoors, shy of wildlife. Landscape/nature, some urban, not so much for people (scary), daytime, nighttime, whatever strikes my fancy. So, if I pack a 3-lens kit to go out the door, today it would be my Sigma 10-20mm, Sigma 18-50mm and _______. By that last blank line, and I really don't know why I'm thinking like this, but should I fill in that blank with the Tamron 18-250 and be done with it, or is there a different normal-to-tele zoom that I should consider? And I'm open to ideas. Somewhere in the 50 to 150 or 200mm range. As I said, I'm open to ideas and open to 3rd party brands.</p>

<p>Another legitimate question- does a normal-to-telephoto zoom provide a better image than a wide-to-telephoto zoom?</p>

<p>Lastly, there is one non-image creation thing that I don't like about the 18-250 Tamron, and that's lens creep. The protruding zoom tube of the lens easily slides out whenever the lens is aimed downward more than about 30-40 degrees from horizontal, such as when walking with the camera in hand.</p>

<p>While super zooms have gotten pretty decent over recent years, the short answer is they still lack quality compared to a higher end, lower magnification tele.</p>

<p>You options fortunately are quite good. The 50-135mm DA* is about as good a lens as you can get in this traditional 70-200 range, and it's sealed.</p>

<p>The 60-250mm f/4 is also about as good as you can get, and it covers your super zoom range perfectly. Plus, it's still faster at most FLs than the super zoom which probably reaches f/6.3 at the long end. Again, while not a priority on your list, it's also sealed.</p>

<p>Beyond that there is the 55-300mm DA (a very decent lens but not necessarily better than the next option)</p>

<p>Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 (APO or non APO), both have good reviews, both can be had fairly cheap new or used, and having owned the 70-300 since before I had a DSLR, I can say it's a very good lens that is shockingly sharp even at 300mm and f/5.6 (i should note, i think I have an exceptionally good copy which I paid $70 for used).</p>

<p>There is a Tamron variant of the Sigma mentioned, it also gets good reviews.</p>

<p>Beyond that I am not sure what is available for Pentax, but those 5 lens choices should fit either your budget or your quality requirements, or probably both if you get a good copy of the 55-300 or 70-300.</p>

<p>Since you rarely need 200mm, and want the essence of quality to add too your bag, as Justin has mentioned, the DA* 50-135mm is a very fine quality tele zoom. It would be a perfect complement to what you now have.</p>

<p>Your Tamron superzoom is still a useful tool when you need to instantly go from wide to longer tele and back without lens-changing. Group shots to portrait, quick,quick.</p>

<p>Gentlemen,</p>

<p>I bow to your wisdom and thank you very much, I'll start my search with your ideas. Thanks again!</p>

<p>And like Michael is pointing toward, the Tammy is bought and paid for, so even if I don't sell it off it can remain as a backup/supporting player for me.</p>

<p>Steve --<br />As a K20D (primary) and K-x (backup/wifey) owner, here are my tele lenses today:</p>

<ul>

<li><strong>DA 18-250 f/3.5-6.3</strong> -- eh, good IQ on my old 6MP K100D, until you hit below 24mm, where it clearly loses light in the corners. I don't recommend it and never use it, but got it for a steal on an Amazon Marketplace open box deal. I believe this is the Tamron Dii APS-C "digital only" design licensed by Pentax.</li>

<li><strong>DA 55-300 f/4-5.8</strong> (<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.popphoto.com/Reviews/Lenses/Pentax-DA-55-300mm-f-4-5.8" target="_blank">PopPhoto Review</a>) -- slow, but surprisingly very good IQ throughout most of the range, good enough IQ + range that I used it over the DA* 50-135 f/2.8 for all tele photo work in daylight. Now that I bought a K-x body, it is my non-weather sealed, "extra reach" telezoom.</li>

<li><strong>DA* 200 f/2.8</strong> (<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.popphoto.com/Reviews/Lenses/Lens-Test-Pentax-SMCP-DA-200mm-f-2.8ED-IF-SDM-AF" target="_blank">PopPhoto Review</a>) -- the ultimate IQ and buttery bokeh, perfection, it "somehow" stays on my K20D and never comes off when I'm shooting tele. If you have the sub-$1K to drop on this baby, just do it! It is also barely over 5", so I have no problem taking it into stadiums as a spectator and the like.</li>

<li><strong>D-FA 100 f/2.8 Macro WR</strong> (<a href="http://www.popphoto.com/reviews/lenses/2010/04/lens-test-pentax-d-fa-100mm-f28-wr-macro">PopPhoto Review</a>) -- just came out and I just bought it (<a href="00WHOd">Photo.NET thread with test shots</a>), and boy is this the bomb for Macro! I have yet to use it for any serious tele, as it does "fill the fast / weather sealed gap" between my DA* 16-50 f/2.8 and DA* 200 f/2.8, but most Macros are not going to be ideal AF lenses for general usage. It's also not SDM (although some people consider that a bonus).</li>

</ul>

<p>Lenses I no longer have:</p>

<ul>

<li><strong>DA* 50-135 f/2.8</strong> -- I bought this with my K20D + DA* 16-50 + AF-360FGZ rebate bundle, to maximize the rebates. I never used it during daylight once I bought the DA 55-300 f/2.8 (only 4 times total), and never again after I bought the DA* 200 f/2.8. It's just too short for my typical usage. But it is an award winning optical package (both as the Pentax DA* and the Tokina AT-X Pro for other systems).</li>

<li><strong>DA 50-200 f/4-5.8</strong> -- Got a great sample of this lens, and it was solid on my K100D. But once I upgraded to the K20D, and got a taste of the DA* 50-135 f/2.8 and DA 55-300 f/4-5.8, I never used it again. The IQ doesn't go much beyond the 6MP of the K100D, and the DA 55-300 f/4-5.8 is just better.</li>

</ul>

<p>The <strong>DA 55-300 f/4-5.8</strong> can be had for under $350 new. I highly recommend it if you don't have close to $1K for a DA* tele, and I used it for over a year on my K20D. You won't be disappointed as long as you have enough daylight or other, bright illumination. If I didn't already have it, I would have bought the $700-750 K-x + DA L 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 + DA L 55-300 f/4-5.8 package instead to get it (I just recently bought the K-x + DA L 18-55 f/3.5-5.6 for under $500), as the K-x is my dedicated backup/wifey body for non-weather sealed DA lenses.<br /> If you have $1K, and you find you are often at 180-250 with your Tamron, I cannot recommend the <strong>DA* 200 f/2.8</strong> enough. I bought it on an impluse buy (at Ace Photo in DC) on July 2nd, flew home (Orlando) and <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/thebs413/sets/72157620845106641/">used it at the Coke Zero 400 on July 4th</a>.</p>

<p>Steve, unless you need the money I'd consider keeping the 18-250 as a travel and backup lens. My travel kit is usually the DA18-250 with a couple of limited primes and often the 10-17 fisheye. If you're traveling with non photographers their patience can grow thin quickly of lens changes and setting up shots. The superzoom can you bring you back shots you just otherwise would not get. </p>

<p>Since you already own both the Sigma 10-20 and 18-50 f/2.8 ex lenses. Don't over look the Sigma 50-150mm ex which having owned it in Canon and now owning a DA* 50-135 the two lenses are very, very similar in IQ. I don't think I could pick a winner between them. The Sigma would keep you consistent with build, focus and zoom direction with your other Sigma ex glass. Likewise their 70-200 ex gets excellent reviews and both are compatible with their matched teleconverters. </p>

<p>Roger --<br>

That's why I bought a K-x. I use DA glass on my K-x and my DA* (and new Macro WR) on my K20D. Now I don't have to change.<br>

If I'm doing wide angle, the DA 10-17 f/3.5-4.5 Fisheye is on my K-x and the DA* 16-50 f/2.8 is on my K20D. If I'm doing tele, the DA 55-300 f/4-5.8 is on my K-x and the DA* 200 f/2.8 is on my K20D.<br>

And if I really need to switch between wide and tele without a lens change, then I can choose one for one role, the other for the other role. E.g., I also have the DA 16-45 f/4 for my K-x. It's also my wife's primary lens when she's shooting the K-x away from me.<br>

I just can't stand the IQ of the DA 18-250 f/3.5-6.3, especially the serious drop-off wide, in comparison.</p>

 

<p>Oh, of course you don't expect top notch performance in all respects with a 18-250 superzoom, but it is just the tool for certain, rather common situations. Some people, however, never deal with those situations and have no need for one.</p>

<p>I have heard the Sigma 50-150mm is a very good lens also. Roger brings up a point regarding the compatiblity with other Sigma lenses, if they do turn all the same way, but it seems I've read some of them are reversed to other Sigmas anyway! I pair my Sigma EX DG 24-60mm f/2.8 lens with my Pentax DA* 50-135mm regularly, and this design difference does not bother me like it does some others. I tend to adjust to such differences rather quickly, I guess. Maybe it's a good thing I have a mixture of gear, since if everything I have were all the same I'd get too used to operating everything in the same way all the time, so after a long time of just one style, if I'd then have occasion to handle other equipment, the difference would indeed bother me!</p>

<p>Advantages for the Pentax DA* 50-135mm: weather sealing, size and weight. Pretty compact and lightweight for what it is. I considered a 70-200mm f/2.8 but those are much bigger and weigh about twice as much!!</p>

<p>Advantages for the Sigma 50-150mm: same Sigma style of operation (maybe), no SDM (maybe) for less worry about possible lens motor failure.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Thanks Everyone.</p>

<p>So far, that DA 55-300 and Sigma 70-300 seem viable, both in their recommendations and pricing. Some of the options in the >$700 range are not in the cards for me. A local shop has some used lenses (nothing that's been mentioned here other than a Tamron 70-300, but used has no advantage over new for the really low new price of the Tamron with it's 6-year warranty). But they also have a used Tokina 70-210 autofocus lens that I can't find much info about, other than it must be fairly old for Tokina in a Pentax mount.</p>

<p>Amazon.COM has the Pentax DA 55-300 f/4-5.8 for $349 new. I haven't heard of too many people getting bad samples (unlike the DA 50-200 f/4-5.6 prior). I love mine. PopPhoto rated it as excellent for a basic lens, much better than other systems. I tend to agree. I could see IQ issues with the DA 50-200 on my 14.6MP K20D, but not the DA 55-300 until I really pixel peeped to an extreme. Outstanding design for a near 6x zoom, and it trounces the DA 18-250 f/3.5-6.3 (which I have, and is a licensed Tamron IIC) completely.</p>