A shorter zoom to replace my 18-250mm


petemasty

Link Posted 19/02/2010 - 15:37
Well, after six months of using my Pentax 18-250mm, I again find myself in another quandary regarding it's potential replacement. "Why?", i hear you ask!!. Because:

1 - maybe I just feel like I need to play with another lens (I'm that kinda guy!)

2 - having looked at the EXIF for all my images these past six months, I have found that images over 150mm only make up 10%

3 - images that I have used or deem suitable for TIFFing and putting in my library are all between 10mm (my Sigma 10-20mm) and 100mm, with the bulk of them between 18mm and 70mm

Go for a 17-70mm i hear you shout!!!
But!!!! I like my Sigma! i love the range and the nice contrasty images (certainly more contrasty than my 18-250mm. and I want to find a lens that compliments this one.

I'll use my Sigma for my landscape shots thats for sure, so am looking for something that suits the focal lengths I use the most BUt that has minimal distortion at the wide end.

The last time i went through this 'crisis' John Riley convinced me to stick with the 18-250mm, which I do not regret, but now I'm wanting a lens that is contrasty, suffers from minimal distortion at either end.

I would even consider older lenses . afterall the three primes that I have had (all manual ones) have been as sharp as a button (its still beyond me why this saying is still alive because I've never come across a sharp button yet!).

I never do any long range shooting so the long zoom ranges are of little interest, and if they do become of interest I'd probably go for something starting at 100mm.

So, ladies and gents, your thoughts please. I have looked at the Sigma 24-70mm EX f2.8 . The filter ring is 82mm though and I reckon I'd get some considerable vignetting if I used my P-series filters on it.

DAMN DAMN DAMN!!! That dying fly thats been buzzing behind me on the window cill for the past half an hour hasn't so much as died but buggered off!!! Was gonna take some nice macro shots of it's corpse. Photographic subjects can be so inconsiderate sometimes!!!! Now!! wheres' my 3 year old lad!!
Pete M
My Flickr

johnriley

Link Posted 19/02/2010 - 15:41
Well, you're doomed it seems. Doomed to a lifetime of buying lenses. Still, there are worse things!


Best regards, John

petemasty

Link Posted 19/02/2010 - 16:12
Well John. Everyone has to have a hobby I suppose. I have my photography and the wife has her beauty treatments. Thankfully my hobby is by choice. Hers' is by necessity.
Pete M
My Flickr

johnriley

Link Posted 19/02/2010 - 16:16
Pete, you do like living on the edge. If she reads that, you'll be Doubly Doomed!
Best regards, John

Mike-P

Link Posted 19/02/2010 - 16:32
How about a trade .. your 18-250mm for my Sigma EX 24-60mm f2.8.
Just as sharp as the 24-70mm but only a 77mm filter size.
. My Flickr

Gwyn

Link Posted 19/02/2010 - 16:46
I thought you were selling an 18-250 Mike?

Mike-P

Link Posted 19/02/2010 - 16:49
Gwyn wrote:
I thought you were selling an 18-250 Mike?

Im pretty sure its sold .. just waiting for confirmation (payment).
Since sale agreed, wife now wants to go to Spain in the next few months so I need a travel lens again
. My Flickr
Last Edited by Mike-P on 19/02/2010 - 16:50

iceblinker

Link Posted 19/02/2010 - 17:20
Any single lens that covers 18-70mm will have a fair amount of distortion at the wide end - not necessarily as much as your 18-250mm, though.

Quote:
But!!!! I like my Sigma!

I don't see how owning the Sigma 10-20 means you can't have a 17-70 as well. Surely a good pairing?
~Pete

thoughton

Link Posted 19/02/2010 - 20:17
iceblinker wrote:
Quote:
But!!!! I like my Sigma!

I don't see how owning the Sigma 10-20 means you can't have a 17-70 as well. Surely a good pairing?

Completely agree here. I have the Sigma 10-20, and there's no way I'd consider having my next zoom starting at 24mm (or even 20mm)! For what it's worth, my main zoom is a 17-50.
Tim
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27”, Macbook Pro 17”, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr • Fluidr • PPG • Street • Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!

bychan

Link Posted 20/02/2010 - 00:13
I also own the 18-250 in the Tamron guise, as well as the Sigma 10-20.
Recently added was the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 (72mm filter).

Very pleased with it, and both of the Sigmas make a lovely pair .

Regards
Adrian
K5IIs, Sigma 10-20, Pentax DA 16-85, Pentax DA 55-300, Pentax 70 Ltd, Metz 44 AF-2.
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ambott/

CoDa

Link Posted 20/02/2010 - 00:26
Is the 18-250 (either Pentax or Tamron) better than the Pentax 55-300mm f4-5.8 SMC DA
Colin

“Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could do only a little.”
Edmund Burke (1729 – 1797)



Last Edited by CoDa on 20/02/2010 - 00:26

bforbes

Link Posted 20/02/2010 - 00:38
petemasty wrote:

3 - images that I have used or deem suitable for TIFFing and putting in my library are all between 10mm (my Sigma 10-20mm) and 100mm, with the bulk of them between 18mm and 70mm

Go for a 17-70mm i hear you shout!!!
But!!!! I like my Sigma!

Sigma do a 17-70 don't they?
Barrie
Too Old To Die Young

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/barrieforbes
https://www.flickr.com/photos/189482630@N03/

Mike-P

Link Posted 20/02/2010 - 07:52
Weldingblues wrote:
Is the 18-250 (either Pentax or Tamron) better than the Pentax 55-300mm f4-5.8 SMC DA

The 55-300mm is better at 300mm but not quite as good at 18mm.
. My Flickr

petemasty

Link Posted 20/02/2010 - 09:28
johnriley wrote:
Pete, you do like living on the edge. If she reads that, you'll be Doubly Doomed!

Thankfully John, my wife is computer illiterate, and being a Lancashire lad brought up on the humour of Les Dawson, she would only sigh and call me a 'saddo who lives in the past'. mind you, she calls me that all the time.
Pete M
My Flickr

petemasty

Link Posted 20/02/2010 - 09:31
iceblinker wrote:
Any single lens that covers 18-70mm will have a fair amount of distortion at the wide end - not necessarily as much as your 18-250mm, though.

Quote:
But!!!! I like my Sigma!

I don't see how owning the Sigma 10-20 means you can't have a 17-70 as well. Surely a good pairing?

It is a good pairing indeed, that I cannot deny.
Pete M
My Flickr
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.