Tamron 17-50/2.8 vs kit lens. Worth the price difference?

Started Jan 23, 2013 | Discussions thread
Twong
Regular MemberPosts: 433Gear list
Like?
Re: Tamron 17-50/2.8 vs kit lens. Worth the price difference?
In reply to ilikespam, Jan 24, 2013

My Tamron 17-50 will be 5 years old in March. It replaced a Tokina 28-70 f/2.8 from film days. The Tamron never ceased to amaze me IQ wise. It is my workhorse which is on my K-5 90% of the time. As for UWA, I recommend Sigma 8-16; it is much better than 10-20 which I sold.

The Tamron is a quality lens. If you need WR, then the kit may be better, however.

ilikespam wrote:

I know there's a difference in the results. I am a hobbyist/casual traveler, coming from P&S, should I just stick with the kit lens? I usually make a photo book from the vacation pictures, and an 11x14 print from time to time. Has anyone seen comparisons side by side?

Is it justified to spend the extra $400 on the tamron?

I am definitely getting the Sigma 10-20.

I suppose I could get the kit lens and a 35/2.8 or 28/2.8 for a little better sharpness when needed. I love manual focus on the K01, and might even say I prefer it to autofocus. Any recommendations?

 Twong's gear list:Twong's gear list
Pentax K-5 Pentax K-5 IIs Pentax smc FA 50mm F1.4 Pentax smc DA* 50-135mm F2.8 ED (IF) SDM Pentax smc D-FA 100mm F2.8 Macro WR +16 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow