Tamron 18-200 E-mount or Tamron 17-50 A-mount + LA-EA2 ?

Started Apr 8, 2012 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
NeutrinoFermion
New MemberPosts: 21
Like?
Tamron 18-200 E-mount or Tamron 17-50 A-mount + LA-EA2 ?
Apr 8, 2012

Just wanted to start by saying hello, just signed up on the forum. I have been reading the forums for quite a while though.

I owned a NEX C3 for a few months now, got it this winter. Last week it had its first real test: 3 day vacation in Rome - absolutely beautiful city

I love traveling and this was my primary reason to get something better that a p&s. The NEX offered SLR quality in a very small package.

I left with only 2 lenses the 16mm emount and an old legacy Helios-44M-6 58mm f2.0 via M42 adapter. One of the things I wanted to discover in this trip: what lenses would I miss.

This i what I came up with: I need a good quality "walk around" lens and a wide fast prime for indoor (flash-less) shots like museums and cathedrals.

As far as walk around lenses I narrowed it down to (open to other suggestions):

1. Tamron 18-200 E-mount lens
http://www.tamron.com/en/photolens/di_III_all_in_one/

2. Tamron 17-50 A-mount lens with the LA-EA2 adapter
http://www.tamron.com/en/photolens/di_II_hi_speed/

I had problems finding full reviews of the 18-200 but found plenty for the 17-50:
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/355

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/290-tamron-af-17-50mm-f28-sp-xr-di-ii-ld-aspherical-if-nikon-test-report--review

http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/289-tamron-af-17-50mm-f28-sp-xr-di-ii-ld-aspherical-if-canon-test-report--review

It seems that the 17-50 is a top notch lens (part of Tamron pro series) and my impression is that it's a clearly superior lens (from an optical standpoint) to the 18-200 (please feel free to correct me if i am wrong)

So to compare the two:

The 18-200 would give me extra reach (useful but for me it seems that the 50-200 range would not be that important in vacations), the lens would match the body better of course, but most importantly it offers stabilization - I am really not sure how important is that for a walk around lens.

The 17-50 would offer better optics, larger constant aperture (with the 1/3 stop light loss to the adapter it would become an f3.2 - light gathering wise) and offer fast phase detect AF. But the setup would be more ungainly and I would loose IS.

(17-50 + LA-EA2).Price = (18-200).Price

I know there is a rumored G zoom lens that might fit the bill perfectly but so far we know nothing of it (price, range, fstop)

I would really appreciate your feedback on this

ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow