Tips for a single travel lens

Good afternoon all,

I am doing quite a bit of travelling in the next year or so. Last time round I took 2 lenses covering 18-200mm but found changing the lenses was a hassle, particularly when in duty conditions and with friends not interested in photography.

Therefore this time I want a single lens that covers 18-200/250 for less than £300 I know there are a few about but have no idea which one to go for?

How does the quality compare to the 18-55 kit lens?

Thanks!

I hear good things about the Pentax 18-250, and it's Tamron cousin of the same design. But have you considered a cheap compact camera with a big zoom range like the RZ10? Would take up no space alongside your normal kit and be handy for casual snapping.

I've got a Pentax 18-250 and have been really impressed with it as a travel lens on a couple of recent trips.

The main criticism I have is that there is more distortion at the wide end than with the kit lens. Otherwise, it is very sharp in the mid-range, not bad at the extreme wide/tele ends and generally better than a zoom covering that big a range has any right to be!

What I have found, though is that most of the time I use it below 70-80mm, so it might be worth considering whether you actually need the reach, otherwise one of the other options, like a DA 17-70 may worth a look.

I have the Pentax 18-250mm. It's a fairly recent purchase so haven't actually used it for travelling yet.

First impressions are that it's very sharp across the range, easily as good as the kit lens and better in mid-range. Colours seem a little colder compared with the kit lens or prime, but this can be adjusted in Photoshop or perhaps by playing with the white balance a bit if necessary. It's not up to my FA 50mm, hardly a suprise, but much closer than I thought it would be.

Zoom creep is a bit of an issue, but I've used one of the silicon charity wristbands which makes the zoom a little stiffer, but stops any creep.

It seems heavier than it ought to which might become an issue for carrying it for long hours. The actual weight isn't that much, but seems more on my K-r - something to do with balance, perhaps. I've bought a digital holster for my speed belt so can 'rest' it occasionally if it becomes an issue. It might need a better neck strap.

I travel a lot and bought it because I didn't want to be changing lenses all the time and I'm satisifed that it is more than up to the task. With that and my FA 50mm I will be able to cover most eventualities.

I haven't noticed any distortion or chromatic abberation at any length (have both turned on on the K-r).

I seriously thought about a smaller zoom, like the 17-70mm as well, plus the 55-300mm, but bought this as a compromise.

They are pretty scarce now. Expect to pay around £250 on Ebay, if you can find one. There is a Tamron one (identical optics) on the classified section of this forum at the moment for £190 delivered, which is a very good price (seller is bobda). If you don't get on with it, you won't lose out when re-selling it anyway.

The 18-250mm is a highly desireablt travel lens. Its only real drawback is the f6.3 maximum aperture at the long end.

Sorry to say that I am another 18-250 promoter. I have the Tamron. Great for knocking about, and gives you enough reach at football or other sporting events.

Has anyone tried this? Sigma 18-200? Seems to have good reviews and is VERY cheap...?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sigma-18-200mm-f3-5-6-3-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0007U00XU/re...=cm_cmu_pg__header

Tend to agree with the f/6.3 issue. I, myself, would see it as an issue.

However, if your off to sunny, bright climates?

Pentaxophile's suggestion of a compact super zoom has merit but may also have a slow long end aperture.

At the end of the day, compromise is just that and the results may be indicative.

Best regards

I had a Sigma 28-105 which was ok, then moved to my FA 28-200 f3.8-5.6 AL(IF)which whilst not particularily new or light is a good option and was cheap.
If I had the spare cash though, I would go for the Pentax 18-250 too.

I would recommend speed over range even with a travel lens. I found I missed more shots due to insufficient speed that due to insufficient zoom capacity. A fast 17-50 or 17-70 zoom is my ideal travel lens, I use the Tamron.

everyone else seem to have pointed out the pros and cons!
I have travelled on long trips with both the 17-70 f4 and pentax 18-250 on seperate occassions.

I found the 17-70 great on the wide end, but a bit too short if you want to take any tele shots. F4 is a great aperture, and the IQ of the lens is absolutely stunning.

the 18-250, is heavy, has zoom creep and suffers a bit from distortion. also at f6.3 it's a slight drawback, but if you have a k5 or kr/x you can certainly take advantage of the high iso performance and I've got away with it most of the time.

If you're more concerned about not having to bring extra lenses to cover different focal lengths, the 18-250 will be the obvious choice. If you want something in between maybe the 18-135 as that'll also be prepared for the weather when it takes a turn.

Personally if I only had to take one lens, it'd be the 18-250.

The best lens for a trip depends very much on where you are going, and what you like to photograph.

For cities, I would rather take the 12-24 and leave everything else behind. It's obviously great for buildings, but you can also get good people shots at 18mm because the subject will often feel that you are photographing something else.

G

To offer a totally different approach, I now only take either the DA40 or DA35 and rely on the number 11 bus for tighter shots.

I used it to replace the kit lens on my K100D (not a carefully thought through decision but a naive choice from a newbie that didn't know better so don't ask me to justify it!) and didn't feel the need for another lens for a couple of years. That said, I've heard that there were consistency issues with the manufacturing so perhaps I just fell on my feet (beginner's luck!) and got a good copy.

Saying that, it's a long time since I last reached for it and on my recent holiday I took the DA 17-70 in preference. It's just that little bit more vibrant and I reckoned it was worth giving up the extra reach for that.

Here's a couple of links (one two) to photos on my Flickr stream taken with it — two links due to inconsistent tagging.