Covenience vs quality - 18-250 or 17-70/55-300

I'm off on holiday to China in the not so distant future and I'm giving some serious thought to buying an 18-250. I already own the DA17-70 & DA55-300 but am wondering if the 18-250 may just prove much more convenient whilst travelling - having read a few reviews it seems that IQ isn't too far behind either of the other 2 lenses.

I'd appreciated others relevant thoughts/experiences?

thanks

Simon

I'm also going to China, specifically Hong Kong, in two weeks (see you there ). I'm taking half my camera bag!!! Including my Sigma 10-20, Tamron 17-50 and Tamron 70-300. Last time I didn't own the Sigma, and I'm really looking forward to come city shots with it.

Hello Simon,

Great place for a holiday, and I think a landscaper like you will be able to bring back some stunning photographs!

I cannot comment on the Pentax 17-70, but can tell you that compared to my (decent copy of the) 18-55 DA AL II, the Tamron 18-250 performs at least as well, if not slightly better in terms of sharpness. It does have more barrel distortion though, and is prone to vignetting when used wide open at the wider lengths. If you use filters this could be a problem unless you have a set of expensive thin ones.

Up to around 100-150mm, the quality is good, but after that the 55-300 (which I also have) would show increasingly significant gains. The 18-250 is OK at 250mm in the centre - certainly for an A4 print - but the edges aren't great and the bokeh is a little harsh too. If you like the warmer colour pallete of Pentax lenses, then the slight coolness of the Tamron glass may not be to your liking.

I must admit that it depends what you think you will be photographing in China, but I'm sat here thinking the 17-70 is supposed to be a great lens, and may well cover the vast majority of your needs? By the time you go much beyond 70mm, you will also start to go outside the comfort zone of the 18-250.

I have the 18-250 and like it, but not sure I would take it on a trip of a lifetime. If I was in your shoes I'd either take the lenses you have, or possibly the 17-70 plus something like the 135 f3.5 SMCM, which performs brilliantly and is small enough to stuff in your pocket. Doesn't cost much either!

I pondered this question for my travels too. Not to somewhere as exotic as China it's true, but La Palma last trip, though I thought about it last year for the US too.

I took my 17-70 and my 60-250 to La Palma, and I used the 60-250 on just one occasion. I am glad I had it with me, but the 17-70 covered pretty much everything I needed. I have wondered if I would have gone for more long end shots with an 18-250 onboard, but I don't think so.

I have decided to save my money and not buy a travel lens.
The 55-300 is almost certainly a better lens IQ-wise than the 18-250 and it will pair well with the 17-70. Weight wise it probably doesn't make a lot of difference either.

Whatever you decide have a terrific holiday. I look forward to seeing your photos.

The 18-250 is a good super-zoom, but that's it. Enough said?

The 17-70 is indispensable, I even prefer it to the DA*16-50. Take it!

The 55-300 is very light and much better than anything else bar the DA* offerings. Take it!

If you have an ultra-wide (12-24?), take it, you may well need it, remember, this is a trip of a lifetime!

There you go, problem solved!

Have a fantastic trip.

Never owned, or used an 18-250, but as I understood it, the 18-250 is similar in quality to the kit lens (perhaps a little better). The 17-70 in my experience is substantially better. On which basis I'd take the 17-70.

The 55-300 sounds like it's a lot better at the long end than the 18-250. Again, your decision looks straightforward.

If you've got room for a smaller lens, and the money to purchase one with that saved by not getting the 18-250, then why not get a fast prime instead for night shots?

If you're down my neck of the woods some time, you're welcome to try out my Tamron 18-250.

Regards
Adrian

How are you travelling? If it's as part of an organised tour group, then you'll have less time to switch lenses about than if you're going on your own and can spend as long as you like in one spot.

Thanks for the replies...everyone has said pretty much what I'm thinking - the 17-70 & 55-300 are going with me !!

Thanks for the offer BTW Adrian

Simon

I agree 100% - If i were lucky enough to be going, my 55-300 and 16-50 would be first in the bag. Never used the 17-70, but everyone I know with one loves it.

No problem.

Adrian