Focal Length Gap

dklod · Sep 16, 2008

With a kit lens having an 18-55mm focal length, it was suggested to me that I should also add an 18-250mm zoom. Having 18-55mm already covered, Im not sure I see much point covering those lengths again in a second lens. Im thinking more along the lines of a 70-200 or 300 which would leave a gap of 15mm between them. Is that gap going to cause me headaches? I know I could go with a 50-200 but Im hoping that by increasing my minimal focal length I can improve the quality at the maximun focal length.

Cheers

tsaraleksi · Sep 16, 2008

A lot of photojournalists carry a 16-35 and a 70-200. That gap will probably not really be a big deal for you.

reg · Sep 16, 2008

No, definitely not. That's next to nothing.

dklod · Sep 16, 2008

Sweet...The only reason I ask is that I notice alot of people covering all focal lengths (where one lens stops, the next starts).

Thanks.

Bifurcator · Sep 17, 2008

Yeah... that's kinda silly IMO. I mean I used to shoot with just 3 or 4 primes and no zoom at all. In the 60's and 70's zoom lenses just weren't good enough at anything even approaching a reasonable price. I'm not exactly sure but I don't recall there being any at all at any price that I thought were as good as my primes actually. Anyway covering all lengths just to have everything covered is very weird - and yeah, I too see people doing that allot on web sites.

Battou · Sep 17, 2008

fifteen mm is nothing to worry about,

the image quality from a zoom with the range of 18-250 can't be all that appealing anyways.

dklod · Sep 17, 2008

It's not a bad lens, but when you compare it to the 50-200f2.8 pentax I used a few months ago, there is no comparison. I did get this shot at full zoom (with the 18-250). Try to ignore the composition, there were photographers everywhere I had to dodge. In any case, I wont be getting this lens. Thanks again.

JerryPH · Sep 17, 2008

No need for it at all. BTW, who makes a 18-250? The longest range I know of is the Nikon 18-200?

Anyways, even at that, "super zooms" are nice lenses to have around as walk-around lenses, but when I want superior results, I pull out the Nikkor 70-200VR F/2.8. When I first got it, the thing felt like it weighed a ton. Now, I do not feel it much more than I would any other lens (though the 30 and 50mm primes sometimes screw me up... nothing long enough to stick out to hold on to with my left hand... lol).

dklod · Sep 17, 2008

JerryPH said:
No need for it at all. BTW, who makes a 18-250? The longest range I know of is the Nikon 18-200?

Pentax make one and I believe Tamron make one also.

http://www.pentax.com.au/pentax/index.cfm?pageID=4&modelID=49&

Bifurcator · Sep 17, 2008

dklod said:
Pentax make one and I believe Tamron make one also.

http://www.pentax.com.au/pentax/index.cfm?pageID=4&modelID=49&

Sony, Pentax, Tamron, all make a 18~250.

Then when you go a little higher on the wide end there are two different Tamrons, a Canon, and a Sigma 28~300 and on to the Pentax 55~300, and etc. etc. I used the Sigma 50~500 for a few days - tho that was awhile back.

epp_b · Sep 17, 2008

BTW, who makes a 18-250?

Tamron, and maybe Sigma. Actually, Tamron makes an 18-270 (!!!)

Anyway, the 55-200 VR is a great lens as long as you have enough light. It depends on what you are shooting.

Battou · Sep 17, 2008

I'd much rather carry twenty pounds of primes.

Bifurcator · Sep 17, 2008

Nope no Sigma. Just Tamron, Sony and Pentax make an 18~250.

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=Tamron+18mm~250mm&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=Sony+18mm~250mm&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=Pentax+18mm~250mm&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Tamron also makes an 18~270 tho.

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=Tamron+18mm~270mm&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

dklod · Sep 17, 2008

Bifurcator said:
Sony, Pentax, Tamron, all make a 18~250.

Then when you go a little higher on the wide end there are two different Tamrons, a Canon, and a Sigma 28~300 and on to the Pentax 55~300, and etc. etc. I used the Sigma 50~500 for a few days - tho that was awhile back.

I borrowed a 50-500 also. I had to use my tripod like a monopod. I could make out licence plates on cars from over 500m away. Not sure if my friend has a 55-300 in the K mount. The extra 50-100mm would be nice, but at what cost to image quality, I dont know.