Choices..

Ok so Hi all I'm a newb here.. and I have a hard choice to make.

I'm stuck floundering over choice of budget standard zoom.
I say budget because its got to come in under £200.

So far I have for consideration:
Sigma 18-125 f3.5/5.6
Sigma 24-135 f2.8/f4
Sigma 28-135 f3.5/5.6 macro
Sigma 28-105 f2.8/f4
Tamron 28-200 f3.5/5.6
cosina 100mm macro

I already have:
28mm MF f2.8 macro
pentax 18-55 f3.5/f5.6
Sigma 70-300 f4/f5.6 macro
Sigma 400 f5.6


I want to cover the standard zoom with something a little better than the kit lens as its terrible for vignetting.
I prefer a wider range as I can then keep the lens on as a "grab and go" set up.
I would automaticly go for the 24-135, but I have heard it can be soft, especially at 85mm onwards.
The Tamron seems a good all round choice but its an unknown quantity to me.
Any idea's/experience with any of the above?

Of those I've got the Sigma 24-135, the Tamron 28-200 (although wearing a Pentax badge) and the Cosina 100mm macro.

All are better optically than the 18-55 kit lens however the disadvantage with all the lenses mentioned, other than the Sigma 18-125, is that they don't go wide enough to replace the kit lens. So if I was to pick one of the above it would be the Sigma 18-135 even though I've never used one.

My alternative advice however, given the lenses you already own, would to wait a bit longer and get the cash together for the Pentax DA 16-45 F4. It's massively better than the kit lens plus it also has the advantage of going signficantly wider. It's also be significantly better than all the other lenses mentioned (except the Cosina macro of course) IMHO and well worth the extra.

SRS are selling the 16-45 for just over £200. At that price it is a steal. Most dealers are selling them secondhand for a similar price.

Kim

I can vouch for the 16-45 its a fantastic lens. Maybe not the reach you are looking for but well worth having And the price is coming down as Kim attests.
I snapped up mine from the US for 140quid

I have not used the Tamron 28-200 but i have the 28-300 and I have found its only good in the 28-200 range it goes down hill after that in terms of softness.
Any of the 100mm macro's on the market are very good and if you don't mind no AF go for some of the older one's you see on E-bay such as the Kiron, Vivitar. A Pentax M series 100mm macro + a 135 m + a 28mm M went off last night for 150euro's

The 16-45mm sits on my K10D most of the time. A brilliant lens.

I was going to order the 16-45 from SRS but I already have a 16-50 on order so waited. I am glad I did because I am picking up a 645N tomorrow

Kim

Your surplus lens sale must be going well

No, just sold one of the Leicas.

Kim

I did the opposite

I was going to buy a 16-50 with the money from my recent lens clearout, but couldn't resist the 16-45 at the £229 on offer at SRS!

It arrived on Saturday - so far I'm pretty impressed. If the 16-50 is better than this then it's a very good lens indeed!

R

Thanks for your input guys, it made me sit down and think what I really want from any lense I bought.

Three main criteria emerged
I wanted to be able to take better insect and flower images.
I wanted to be able to use it for piggy back mounted astro shots.
I wanted a fairly fast lens to make astro focusing easier (no you cant get away with just sticking a lens on infinity)


Finaly I ruled out all the choices I listed and went for a new Tamron SP90 macro lens.
I also picked up a mint sigma 18-50mm AF on ebay cheaply to cover the wide angle end of things.
I did seriously toy with the idea of the sigma 18-125 and a cosina 100mm macro but after reading several reviews and seeing test pics from both ruled them out.
An added bonus with the SP 90 is that it has an almost perfect flat field and little if any CA both of which are a real must have for astro photography.
The 90mm will convert to 144mm FOV on my camera which brings it close to the 135mm lens I had been using for astro work.
The 18-50 is an unknown quantity to me but hopefully will not have the same vignetting issues as the pentax 18-55mm.

Ian: I have the Tamron and its a superb lens for macro but i have never considered it for astro photography : and doubt you will get any joy in that area. Be interested to see what you get though. As for the sigma i have one also and am considering listing it here as a giveaway if someone wants to hump for the postage. It spent about 1hr in total on my old K100D and to be honest its not the best, The contrast is non existent and very flat, I hope you didn't spend any more than a tenner on it :

sadly yes.. £30.. oh well it happens.

I think the tamron will work out ok. less elements than the sigma design so hopefully less artifacts.
As said I have used a 135 f2.8 up until now without any issues.
I am using lenses for starfield shots though and not trying to capture a planet.. thats where the scope comes in.

speaking of which the new ZS66 turned up today and I cant believe its terrestial performance.. zero colour fringing.. cant wait to get it out there

I look forward to seeing some astro pics
Bad luck with the Sigma, I have seen several recently get passed in asking for 20quid with no bids
I picked up a Pentax DA 18-50 recently for just 20quid
If you can manage to get your money back on it you can have my Sigma for nix.

Why thank you kind sir... I managed to get the sale cancelled.. please let me at least cover postage though.

No problem i will see what it costs to post and get back to you. Do you have a pay pal account.??