All Forum Comments
Comment by Duncan knifton posted on 18-250mm at 06/09/2008 - 10:00
Unlocker wrote:
To be honest, I sold mine after the wedding shoot because of getting used to the quality in the DA*'s and the Limiteds.
It's great at what it does, but once you get used to SDM focussing, weather sealing, faster glass and superior quality, I cannot see why you would want a lens thats a lot slower, louder, and inferior quality, especially for weddings!
I would make a presumption here that you have at least 2 bodies in use at a wedding, so a far better option would be to have say a DA*200 2.8 if you NEED the length, with a DA* 16-50 on the other body. I personally found the DA*50-135 plenty long enough for the speeches.
Having owned one, I would never consider it to shoot a wedding, not fit for purpose in my book, especially when there is all that great glass out there! Holiday snaps, yes, the range is great, weddings, no.
Thank you....this is what I've been waiting to hear....someone who has used it for a Wedding shoot..To be honest, I sold mine after the wedding shoot because of getting used to the quality in the DA*'s and the Limiteds.
It's great at what it does, but once you get used to SDM focussing, weather sealing, faster glass and superior quality, I cannot see why you would want a lens thats a lot slower, louder, and inferior quality, especially for weddings!
I would make a presumption here that you have at least 2 bodies in use at a wedding, so a far better option would be to have say a DA*200 2.8 if you NEED the length, with a DA* 16-50 on the other body. I personally found the DA*50-135 plenty long enough for the speeches.
Having owned one, I would never consider it to shoot a wedding, not fit for purpose in my book, especially when there is all that great glass out there! Holiday snaps, yes, the range is great, weddings, no.
and can tell me what they think.
All in all...I thank everyone on this thread...I've come to the conclusion that its a good lens for general work etc,....but keep with the other ones for Wedding work...
Thats all I needed to know....thank you all once again, you've just helped me save £350.... ...
Take care.
Duncan
Comment by Duncan knifton posted on 18-250mm at 06/09/2008 - 01:49
George Lazarette wrote:
Sorry Duncan, but if I booked a professional photographer for a wedding and he turned up with a consumer zoom I should be most unhappy.
I do accept that by buying a wide range zoom you are avoiding the hassle of changing lenses, and that is sensible, but the reduced image quality and the small aperture (necessitating more use of flash, and unnecessary DOF for portraits) would massively offset the convenience angle, for me.
G
Thanks George.....may be I should have explained better in my OP....Sorry Duncan, but if I booked a professional photographer for a wedding and he turned up with a consumer zoom I should be most unhappy.
I do accept that by buying a wide range zoom you are avoiding the hassle of changing lenses, and that is sensible, but the reduced image quality and the small aperture (necessitating more use of flash, and unnecessary DOF for portraits) would massively offset the convenience angle, for me.
G
As for the use of flash....I use it for 90% of my Wedding work (fill in)....but I know what ya mean.
And I only do my candid work when I know all the B&G work has been done.
I would like to know the IQ of this lens...I've heard,..and seen mixed reports,...the images on the link given to me on this thread, show good quality....but I'm concerned about how well the IQ is towards the edges, especially with group portraits...
D
Comment by Duncan knifton posted on 18-250mm at 05/09/2008 - 18:12
Mannesty wrote:
I don't have this lens, and I won't be buying it.
If you need that range right now then the DA 18-250mm may have to do if the IQ is acceptable. If you want that range and can wait, the DA* 60-250mm should be available fairly soon.
Let's face it, you probably know enough about consumer zooms having a 14:1 zoom ratio to be able to guess what it's like, and to know that it's going to be at its worst at the long end.
OOOHH!!I don't have this lens, and I won't be buying it.
If you need that range right now then the DA 18-250mm may have to do if the IQ is acceptable. If you want that range and can wait, the DA* 60-250mm should be available fairly soon.
Let's face it, you probably know enough about consumer zooms having a 14:1 zoom ratio to be able to guess what it's like, and to know that it's going to be at its worst at the long end.
I like the sound of that...
Thank you....
The Wedding season is coming to an end soon here on the Island.....so all this is for 09 season....so this lens sounds rather nice
Comment by Duncan knifton posted on 18-250mm at 05/09/2008 - 17:59
hefty1 wrote:
There are example shots posted in the Pentax Photo Gallery - navigate your way to Image Data > Lens and you'll find the 18-250 is the fifth on the list. There are some quite attractive photos on there although I'd personally want something a tad faster for interior shots - each to their own though...
Thank you.....There are example shots posted in the Pentax Photo Gallery - navigate your way to Image Data > Lens and you'll find the 18-250 is the fifth on the list. There are some quite attractive photos on there although I'd personally want something a tad faster for interior shots - each to their own though...
As for interior work....I know what ya mean....but for speeches and the candids I do....a bit of flash helps.
But a nice fast 18-250 would be out of my league,..if one was ever made...
Comment by Duncan knifton posted on 18-250mm at 05/09/2008 - 17:56
George Lazarette wrote:
I've never shot a wedding, and never will.
But if somebody held a gun to my head, and forced me, I would use the DA* 16-50 and nothing else (except some good flash gear).
Unless you are highly experienced, you wouldn't want the hassle of changing lenses, and wondering where you'd left the rear lens cap, etc., etc.. Any advantage you might get by having an additional lens would be offset by losing shots while changing over.
And of course, if you were highly experienced, you wouldn't be asking our advice, or suggesting an 18-250!
Good luck with the 16-50. Or 16-45.
G
Thanks for sounding patronising I've never shot a wedding, and never will.
But if somebody held a gun to my head, and forced me, I would use the DA* 16-50 and nothing else (except some good flash gear).
Unless you are highly experienced, you wouldn't want the hassle of changing lenses, and wondering where you'd left the rear lens cap, etc., etc.. Any advantage you might get by having an additional lens would be offset by losing shots while changing over.
And of course, if you were highly experienced, you wouldn't be asking our advice, or suggesting an 18-250!
Good luck with the 16-50. Or 16-45.
G
After 15 years in the Wedding business I think I do have some experience thanks......
Now can some one WITH one of these lenes please let me know what its like.....
Thank you....
D
Comment by Duncan knifton posted on 18-250mm at 05/09/2008 - 17:42
Hmm....
for those poo pooing the idea of a 250mm range for weddings.....try it..(I have for the last 15 years)
The 18mm to 100mm part would be good for groups and portraits....up to the 250mm range is great for candids of children, the speeches (stay at the back of the room and take it them there, and look out for candids ya can take of the guests whilst listening to them).....
Anyway, back to the question......
its the image quality I'm asking about,....and I've heard the this and the Tamron lens are one of the same, but different badges....
Is this true??
for those poo pooing the idea of a 250mm range for weddings.....try it..(I have for the last 15 years)
The 18mm to 100mm part would be good for groups and portraits....up to the 250mm range is great for candids of children, the speeches (stay at the back of the room and take it them there, and look out for candids ya can take of the guests whilst listening to them).....
Anyway, back to the question......
its the image quality I'm asking about,....and I've heard the this and the Tamron lens are one of the same, but different badges....
Is this true??
Comment by Duncan knifton posted on 18-250mm at 05/09/2008 - 17:28
I've been looking in to this lens, but would love to hear what others have thought.
Is it as good as it looks, or are there any pit falls for such a large zoom range...I'm thinking of it as my prime Wedding lens...
Any cooments please.
Thanks
Duncan
Is it as good as it looks, or are there any pit falls for such a large zoom range...I'm thinking of it as my prime Wedding lens...
Any cooments please.
Thanks
Duncan
Comment by Duncan knifton posted on 18-250mm at 05/09/2008 - 13:25
Prieni wrote:
There is a good reason for converting PEF to DNG before using Camera Raw. It's the upgrade policy of Adobe. I have CS and the latest Camera Raw for that won't read K20D PEF files. New cameras are only added to the Camera Raw for the latest Photoshop version (go figure!).
I guess that's why Rob needs to convert to DNG.
Time to give SilkyPix a test run, Rob...
Prieni
Or........just use DNG in camera to start with.... There is a good reason for converting PEF to DNG before using Camera Raw. It's the upgrade policy of Adobe. I have CS and the latest Camera Raw for that won't read K20D PEF files. New cameras are only added to the Camera Raw for the latest Photoshop version (go figure!).
I guess that's why Rob needs to convert to DNG.
Time to give SilkyPix a test run, Rob...
Prieni
(unless the OP's k100d doesnt have it.... )
Comment by Duncan knifton posted on PEF conversion at 19/07/2008 - 10:47
when ever i use raw files...its always set on DNG in the camera (k10D)......and P.S. Elements 5 can edit these with no probems at all.....
D
D
Comment by Duncan knifton posted on PEF conversion at 19/07/2008 - 03:35
Just to clarify, I did not use it for the wedding shoot! It didn't even get in the bag, which is not surprising when you see what other lenses I have available!
We sold it after the wedding shoot when we realised just exactly what lenses we wanted to keep, it was never under consideration for the wedding!