Wide zoom for Kx


Darstadlydarcey

Link Posted 01/06/2011 - 13:46
Am looking to replace my kit lenses ( 18 -55 + 50-200) with one reasonable zoom for travel/holiday etc. Tamron make a well reviewed 18-270 but not in Pentax mount. They also do an 18-250 which would be ideal in terms of range, size and price (@250) but also not in Pentax mount (although they used to make it under their own name + Pentax badge and some used ones appear on ebay etc). Can any one recommend an 18 -250 for the Kx? Budget limited to 250-300 max. I love the camera , and it's relatively small size, but wonder if might have been wiser to stick with one of the "big boys" simply for lens choice ( I have an emotional commitment to Pentax however, since my Spotmatic days..)

Thanks, Steve
Pentax K50,FA 35 2.0,FA 50 1.4, DA 18-135 WR, Sony RX100 2, Manfrotto bits...

thoughton

Link Posted 01/06/2011 - 13:50
As you've sorta mentioned, the now-discontinued Pentax 18-250 is reputedly a rebadged Tamron 18-250, and is said to have remarkably good IQ for a superzoom. You'll have to find a used one though.
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!

johnriley

Link Posted 01/06/2011 - 14:08
Definitely try to find a good Pentax 18-250mm. It's a good quality, versatile zoom that focuses close as well. The real downside is the limited f6.3 aperture at the long end, but in a general holiday context that might not be too restrictive.

The alternative is the new 18-135mm WR and that has the added advantage of weather resistance, but of course a more limited long end.
Best regards, John

Darstadlydarcey

Link Posted 01/06/2011 - 14:18
Thanks gentlemen - what does "IQ" re the superzoom mean?
Pentax K50,FA 35 2.0,FA 50 1.4, DA 18-135 WR, Sony RX100 2, Manfrotto bits...

johnwhit

Link Posted 01/06/2011 - 14:32
Darstadlydarcey wrote:
Thanks gentlemen - what does "IQ" re the superzoom mean?

Irresistible Quirkiness








No seriously, Image Quality.

John
PPG link

In LBA hiatus.
Last Edited by johnwhit on 01/06/2011 - 14:34

johnriley

Link Posted 01/06/2011 - 15:20
Image Quality, yet another abbreviation in common use. It's a good idea if we write it in full the first time in a post and then thereafter as an abbreviation as not everyone will know what's meant.
Best regards, John

Darstadlydarcey

Link Posted 01/06/2011 - 20:24
Thanks again - I'll try and get hold of one. I think that, and a 35mm prime lens will suit most of my needs. Steve
Pentax K50,FA 35 2.0,FA 50 1.4, DA 18-135 WR, Sony RX100 2, Manfrotto bits...

bychan

Link Posted 01/06/2011 - 21:30
Keep looking in the classifieds here, as I sold my Tamron 18-250 fairly recently here. Also another was sold here within the last week or so.

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/

Anvh

Link Posted 01/06/2011 - 21:51
Would the 18-250 have a better IQ than the two kit lenses?

I had the 18-250 but because of the handling actually sold it, it just wasn't a lens for me.
I found the 18-135 for nicer to handle but the price... ah well i think it's worth it though.
Stefan


K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Last Edited by Anvh on 01/06/2011 - 21:54

Darstadlydarcey

Link Posted 01/06/2011 - 23:35
I hoped it would have have a better IQ than the kit lenses (and, of course be just the one for travelling) but hard to know as the kit lenses do not really get reviewed. The 18-55 sells for some 40 and hard to believe it can have good optics at that price ( although I realise price isn't everything). I have yet to "push" the lenses (and to be fair with my v limited ability and aspirations probably never will ...) but if the advice is that the IQ of the Tamron wouldn't be any better maybe I need to think again.

Will keep checking classifieds here.
Pentax K50,FA 35 2.0,FA 50 1.4, DA 18-135 WR, Sony RX100 2, Manfrotto bits...

johnriley

Link Posted 01/06/2011 - 23:39
Don't underestimate the kit lens - it's very impressive for the price. Stopped down it produces extremely good results.
Best regards, John

aliengrove

Link Posted 02/06/2011 - 07:41
I am surprised the Sigma 18-250 hasn't been mentioned. It needs stopping down to get the most of it but I was pleasantly surprised by mine.
Flurble

My Website
PPG
flickr
G+
Facebook

Eastridge

Link Posted 02/06/2011 - 09:39
Darstadlydarcey wrote:
Thanks again - I'll try and get hold of one. I think that, and a 35mm prime lens will suit most of my needs. Steve

Funnily enough that's my combination as well and I have found it works well.

That said I am not sure that the 18-250 is a real 'step up' from the kit lenses in image quality.

Like you seem to want, I have it for the convenince and the IQ is good enough for my needs, but I would say it is about the same 'ball park' quality wise as the 18-55 and 50-200 it replcaed. I do think we had a very good copy of the 50-200, as it seemed to us on a par with the 55-300 that most people feel is much better.

My 35 and hubby's 100 Macro are clearly streets ahead IQ wise.

So, I'd say it's the combination you want, just don't expect a dramatic step forward IQ wise, that's what your 35 will be for
Sharon's: K-x, FA35/2, DA 18-250.Glen's: K10D, DA100 Macro, 55-300, Paragon 500, Silk Pro700 Tripod

Darstadlydarcey

Link Posted 02/06/2011 - 10:38
Many thanks - advice is much appreciated. Steve
Pentax K50,FA 35 2.0,FA 50 1.4, DA 18-135 WR, Sony RX100 2, Manfrotto bits...

OldTaffy

Link Posted 06/06/2011 - 19:04
johnriley wrote:
(IQ =) Image Quality, yet another abbreviation in common use. It's a good idea if we write it in full the first time in a post and then thereafter as an abbreviation as not everyone will know what's meant.

It's always a good idea to write out in full on first mention. Most scientific journals insist on this, even for commonly used abbreviations.

IQ is, of course, in Stefan's very comprehensive list of abbreviations:

https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/CPPAA-11474/p-0#comm_109425

(Shouldn't Stefan's useful list be a 'sticky' somewhere?)

I came back into digital photography recently, from being a 35mm Pentax Spotmatic user, with a few fallow years in between. I was baffled by all the new abbreviations and acronyms. In self-defence I compiled my own dictionary. It grew and grew, and now for the benefit of others, I have put it up in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_abbreviations_in_photography

Will all you experts please check it for errors and correct them, and please add to it - to help others new in the digital field, like Dastardly and myself.

Cheers,

Martin
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.