Tamron 18-250mm EBay.

Heads up for anyone interested.

Henry's, Canada have a used one listed. They are a good company to deal with, however do not except Pay Pal.

RG.

http://cgi.ebay.com/TAMRON-DiII-ASPH-AF-18-250mm-f3-5-6-3-IF-PENTAX-K10D_W0QQite...

That's an astounding range, 18 - 250!

Is this too good to be true? One lens from ultra wide to pretty long?

How would the picture quality compare to the two Pentax "Kit" lens offerings for example?

I agree about Henry's - very professional.

Thanks

Mac,

I have the lens and love it.

Please see other threads on this Forum for comments on the Tamron 18-250mm and the Pentax 18-250mm manufactured by Tamron.

Can't comment on other two lenses as I don't have them to compare.

RG.

The rule with zoom lenses is that the greater the zoom ratio (this one is 14:1) the more difficult the design problem, and therefore the lower the likelihood that it will be good.

It's no surprise that the best zoom lenses have a ratio between 2:1 and 4:1.

One of Pentax's best zooms is the 24-90, and it has a ratio of 3.75:1. The admired 16-45 is 2.8:1, and the new 16:50 is just over 3:1.

That said, this lens is not bad considering its phenomenal range. Those who place convenience above quality, or who have a genuine need for just one lens, seem to be very pleased with it.

G

George,

Re extreme vs short range zooms.

That's kinda what I thunk - or what you and John taught me when I was a novice.

Now that I'm a pro (know my way around all the pro sites, and can misuse some buzz words) I realize that there is a heck of a market for these extreme zooms - everyone's making them - including Pentax. Also, I guess aspherical technology(?) allows them to be very small compared to prime telephoto lenses?

My brother-in-law - the evil Nikon worshiper - has a Sigma Wide-to-about 300mm zoom. The pictures don't especially impress me, but wow, is it ever fun to look through and play with (I need Gravol).

I can see the convenience attraction for travelers and hikers for sure, but not at all for studio work.

Will primes become extinct as zoom technology evolves?

My guess is yes, and I wonder if it all started with the point-and-shoots the newer generation of photographers start out with. They all had/have built in zoom lenses.

My daughters, for example, feel severly handicapped using prime cameras.

I just played Santa for some professional studios, who had excellent lighting (soft boxes etc) and very expensive (the other evil company) 12mp cameras. All used wide short zooms and no tripods. (Yea SR!)

When asked, they all said they didn't own any primes for their digitals.

Oh, and none had bought filters for their digital lenses either - just hoods.

Maybe a smart move on Hoya's part to take over a camera manufacturer?

Lots of change for an old guy to hang onto.

It's mainly a quality versus convenience issue, and as with most things in life, convenience wins every time.

Fortunately, however, zooms and primes are not mutually incompatible, and there will I am sure always be a niche market for primes. Several people who have shifted to Pentax from the two mass-market brands cite the Limited lenses as their "primary" reason for doing so.

G

Of course one equation is left out. Software.

If one shoots RAW and gets the basics correct, most images can be made to look excellent. Good software can make JPEGS look great.

We can perform magic with the latest software which will continue to allow those inclined to have performed wonders with the finished image.

Why, we can even make people look thinner using a feature in the K10D.

Yes I agree the top of the line lenses do the best job, however with the exception of Pro's, most of us don't need them except for maybe an ego trip. Plus if one doesn't have a penchant for photography, I don't care what lens one uses, the image will still not be great right out of the camera.

If one is a great photographer and a perfectionist, does not want to fiddle fart around with software, likes to spend the time finding the right spot to frame the image correctly, then by all means use your primes.

For me good zooms are the way to go. I can get my images framed much faster over a great range and take far more shots of the subject at a various distant. Way faster than any prime, when given the fact one either has to change lenses, or positions to get various shots.
Yes, on occasion I do use primes for portraits and buildings.

The 18-250mm is a great lens, not perfect but it does the job if one wants convenience, speed and less chance of missing that once in a lifetime shot.

I guess it all comes down to whatever floats your boat.

Merry Christmas to all,

RG.

buy 'em all.
learn to use em all.
use whatever works best to get the shot.

I use primes and zooms, and even super zooms.
I will buy the 18-250 after I get the macro 100, and the 16-50.
need to finish a stack of jobs before xmas though.....javascript:emoticon('')