K100D + Tamron 18-250 as a bridge from Fuji S7000?

Currently, I've got a Fuji S7000. I've used the heck out of it and it's dying. It's time for a new camera. I think I'm ready to take the jump to a DSLR, but I'm still not that excited about carrying multiple lenses when I go hiking, which is when I take most of my pictures. Typically those images are landscapes, macros of flowers, and wildlife. The camera would also be used for the odd snapshot of my child.

What do you think about the combination of the K100D and the Tamron 18-250? Does anyone have images to share of that combination? The reviews of both seem to be good individually, but I've not seen many comments specifically on the combination.

Secondly, does anyone have a feel for if/when the 18-250 might drop in price? It's been on the market for roughly six months, yet it seems to be nearly original price and in short supply. I've pondered the possibility of getting an old, used Sigma 28-80 f/2.8 with a special macro mode for less than $100 at the local shop and a Pentax 50-200 as a kit to hold me over until the 18-250 was cheaper. With rebates the 18-250 kit is about $875. With rebates, the other kit is about $600. Will the 18-250 be $350 in a year?

Thank you very much.

As a recent K100D purchaser, I would indeed recommend the K100D as clear advance over the best of the fixed-lens alternatives (the excellent FZ50 Panasonic). My big concern is ultimate image quality per dollar, and the K100D and its kit lenses really deliver. But the FZ50 is no slouch either, and you may well want to consider it due to its excellent lens for your application. In the end though, the K100D's nearly tenfold sensor area advantage (while simultaneously only hosting 60% as many pixels) places overall image quality, especially in less than ideal light, in another league.

As far as the 18-250mm Tamron, I wouldn't expect it to get much cheaper very soon. Look to the 18-200mm lenses to see what price level it will ultimately seek, as it's essentially Tamron's latest version of such. I would expect essentially zero movement in price until a competitor introduces a like product, and expect both to gravitate to the price level of their 18-200mm predecessors in 6-12 months.

As far as a short zoom goes, I would recommend getting the 18-55mm kit lens for two reasons: it's both excellent and nearly free. You only save $50 by forgoing this lens, and it's far better than it has any right to be. It does tend to vignette and pincushion a bit at the short end of the focal length range, but it's not a big enough issue to detract from its otherwise excellent optical qualities. I find the 18-55 to be extremely sharp with excellent color and contrast.

The DA 50-200 is also a good lens. I'm not sure its as sharp nor has as much contrast as the 18-55, but it capable of excellent images and is very light and compact. With the rebate situation as it is, it is also too cheap to pass up considering the quality of the images one can produce with it.

You can get a pretty impressive low-dollar macro capability by combining a Raynox DCR-150 or 250 achromat with the 50-200. These lenses are dynamite on the Panasonic FZs and perform similarly well with the K100D/50-200.

I'd make sure the sigma lens you've located is really good enough to spend twice on it as the 18-55 kit lens costs, and in reality, at $50 I'd rate passing up the DA 18-55 as a poor decision regardless the other lenses you might pick up. If you upgrade to a K10D or other future Pentax body, The K100D will be much more useful as a gift or much more easily sold with its intended 18-55--and I think you will find the lens enough of a gem that its minimal cost will seem some of the best money you've ever spent on photography.

I would also have liked to try a 18-250mm Tamron, but it's simply too desirable at this juncture to expect deals on it just because you want one. And in fact, it is exactly that you (and everyone else) wants it that insures it won't be on the bargain table anytime soon.
--
Pentax K100D w/kit 18-55 & 50-200, Panny LZ3
http://s90223656.onlinehome.us/

Steve,

Thank you for the thoughtful and complete response.

I'm afraid you're probably right about the 18-250's price. Thanks for saying so.

My fear with planning to use macro filters has always been that they'd degrade image quality. Based on your endorsement of that approach, I suspect you haven't encountered that.

Thanks again.

Leif

I just bought the K100d body since I already had a FA 28-80 mm zoom
My resoning was that I probably eventualy will buy a Sigma 17-70 ....

But I never did and ended up buying the 18-55 kit lens anyway and I'm so glad I did it is really a wonderfull versatil lens.

yes I have to humbly admit with Steve's comclusion that not buying the kit lens with the camera body is a poor decision I ended up paying more for my choice.

Hi

I am in the same situation, my Fuji 9500 is getting to inconsistent, and I have decided on the K100D (however it has run out of stock in body only form where I am, waiting for the last few to arrive).

My plan was to get the body only plus the tamron 18-250 or sigma 18-200. Both the same price here.

Near future plan was to get a macro maybe sigma 105 or use th 70-300 with a close up filter.
Also very keen on the 10-20mm.

My view with the kit lens is that it is not that fast, same as the long zooms, and its said other similar range zooms, eg the sigma 17-50? is better. So my thought was that if I need it I will get that later.

Good point though about having the kit lens from the resale point of view.

--
---
Keith (fluffy)

from what I have read, the 18-250mm Tamron is getting better reviews than the 200mm Sigma, so you might want to check that out.

fluffy said:

Hi

I am in the same situation, my Fuji 9500 is getting to inconsistent,
and I have decided on the K100D (however it has run out of stock in
body only form where I am, waiting for the last few to arrive).
My plan was to get the body only plus the tamron 18-250 or sigma
18-200. Both the same price here.
Near future plan was to get a macro maybe sigma 105 or use th 70-300
with a close up filter.
Also very keen on the 10-20mm.

My view with the kit lens is that it is not that fast, same as the
long zooms, and its said other similar range zooms, eg the sigma
17-50? is better. So my thought was that if I need it I will get that
later.

Good point though about having the kit lens from the resale point of
view.

--
---
Keith (fluffy)

Click to expand...

I had the Fuji S7000 and moved on to the *ist DS, which is the same size as the K100D. I instantly fell in love with the bright, clear viewfinder, no shutter lag, instant startup and handling in general.

The whole point of a (D)SLR is that lenses are interchangeable. If you want a small package, mount a DA pancake lens (or the older M 40/2.8). If you want a versatility at a low price and weigth, go for the DA 18-55 and DA 50-200 combo. If you want macro, buy a macro lens. That's the way to get the most of your camera.

Good as the modern superzooms are, they still represent a compromise, so that you pay either in size and weight or in picture quality and a dark viewfinder.

Lars

leifw said:

I've pondered
the possibility of getting an old, used Sigma 28-80 f/2.8 with a
special macro mode for less than $100 at the local shop...

Click to expand...

Hmm. Photodo.com lists some Sigma 28-70s but no 28-80. Some of the older 28-70s are rated fairly poorly. Does the lens have autofocus? I would find out more about this lens before buying it---it might not be very good.

You also indicate that you do landscape photography. For landscapes you would want wide angle. 28mm on a 1.5x crop factor sensor isn't all that wide, and most lenses don't perform their best at the extreme wide ends. One of the advantages of the kit lens and the 18-250 is that 18mm is nicely wide.

The kit lens provides good image quality for the price, but my personal opinion is that it doesn't have enough reach to be used as a general walkaround. I'm also not convinced that it's that much better between 18mm and 55mm that an 18-200 or the 18-250. For your needs, the 18-250 as a one lens solution seems pretty reasonable.

You should understand, though, that superzoom lenses are jacks of all trades and master of none. The 18-250 is the best of the lot, it is very versatile and does many things adequately, but the image quality is not as good in any area as a lens of similar price with less zoom range. E.g., it's not as good toward the wide end as the 17-70 or the 28-75; it won't do macros like a macro lens; and so forth. It's also fairly slow and therefore not the ideal lens for low light. None of this is necessarily a reason not to buy it, but you should understand what you are getting.

--Brett

--



K100D, June 2007

Lars Holte said:

The whole point of a (D)SLR is that lenses are interchangeable. If
you want a small package, mount a DA pancake lens (or the older M
40/2.8). If you want a versatility at a low price and weigth, go for
the DA 18-55 and DA 50-200 combo. If you want macro, buy a macro
lens. That's the way to get the most of your camera.

Click to expand...

That used to be the whole point, but with manufacturers doing away more and more with high level bridge cams with good IQ and control, a DSLR has become more and more an increasingly affordable way to get that IQ and control.

I think a 18-250mm is a great lens to start with, yes it is a compromise, but no fuss with lens changes and less fuss with dust. You can still buy more specialized lenses later, that doesn't mean your 18-250mm has become useless, you can still use it as a walk-around/vacation lens.

Lars Holte said:

Good as the modern superzooms are, they still represent a compromise,
so that you pay either in size and weight or in picture quality and a
dark viewfinder.

Click to expand...

Everything is a compromise, not buying a full frame sensor is a compromise as well, but there can be good reasons for it.

--
http://flickr.com/photos/56983515@N00/
Current cam: TZ1
Wish cams: LX2 with Fuji F30 sensor and Pentax K100D super.
Wish lens: Tamron 18-250mm.

The Tammy 18-250 is getting some decent reviews and from what we've seen the lens appears about as good as the kit 18-55 and 50-200. Changing lenses is a MASSIVE pain when out and about (rather than "day out shooting" so IMHO the superzoom route is now viable for those who were using the two kit lenses for casual shooting.

Lars Holte said:

I had the Fuji S7000 and moved on to the *ist DS, which is the same
size as the K100D. I instantly fell in love with the bright, clear
viewfinder, no shutter lag, instant startup and handling in general.

The whole point of a (D)SLR is that lenses are interchangeable. If
you want a small package, mount a DA pancake lens (or the older M
40/2.8). If you want a versatility at a low price and weigth, go for
the DA 18-55 and DA 50-200 combo. If you want macro, buy a macro
lens. That's the way to get the most of your camera.

Good as the modern superzooms are, they still represent a compromise,
so that you pay either in size and weight or in picture quality and a
dark viewfinder.

Lars

Click to expand...

--
***********************************************
Please visit my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/alfisti

Pentax Lens examples at http://www.pbase.com/alfisti/images_by_lens

Updated July 2007

I got the K100D last December to use with my old manual (PTX) lenses. When I heard of the 18-250 I ordered it in January, received it in May and it has not been off the camera since. Though it is a compromise, I find it suits almost every need I have. As to price, you answered your own question when noting 'short supply'.

Also, I have yet to see a review that was not positive, even highly complimentary, and this too will support the retail pricing........

BrettRTurner said:

You should understand, though, that superzoom lenses are jacks of all
trades and master of none. The 18-250 is the best of the lot
None of this is necessarily a reason not to buy it, but you should
understand what you are getting.

Click to expand...

Yes. The agonizing thing is trying to decide if it's more important to me to have better IQ or to have less aggravation by carrying exactly one lens.

With the various rebates from Pentax, it's cheaper to go to multi-lens route, assuming I don't buy the 200-250 range. I think if price weren't an issue, I'd buy the 18-250, find out what aspect of its capability I was dissatisfied with, and buy a lens to supplement it.

Oh, money.

Lets face it, you in all likelihood wouldn't be considering the K100D were it not for its extreme value and low total cost of ownership. If one were to relax the budget, I'd probably opt for a K10D, as it offers weather sealing, better dust dust tolerance, mucho better buffering, SDM lens support, a brighter viewfinder, and less stupid control gaffes. I really like the K100D's low-light performance more than I do the K10D's, but in all other respects the K10D is a fairly significant step up. Were it not for the K100D's incredible IQ per pixel in combination with its low cost, it would be hard for me to love.

One signifcant upside to the 18-55 and 50-200 DAs is their extremely tidy dimensions. While carrying two lenses is less than ideal, both are so small that the entire kit will fit into a bag not much larger than what is required to accomodate the body with 18-250 Tamron attached.
--
Pentax K100D w/kit 18-55 & 50-200, Panny LZ3
http://s90223656.onlinehome.us/

I love my K100 and regularly use all 4 of my lenses for various situations. Changing lenses is not a problem. My hiking combo is the Sigma 17-70 and 70-210. Not so heavy and provides a nice range.

Using multiple lenses that are primes or limited zooms give you higher IQ and help bring out the most in your DSLR investment. If you are only going to use a superzoom on a DSLR, I wonder if you're better off getting a fixed lens superzoom high-end P&S like Sony H2 or Canon S3 IS.
Just my $0.02.

DD

Daddy Dan said:

I wonder if you're
better off getting a fixed lens superzoom high-end P&S like Sony H2
or Canon S3 IS.
Just my $0.02.

Click to expand...

Yes. I narrowed my choices down to the K100D or the S3. I've been leaning toward the DSLR because I'm beginning to get the impression that the P&S cameras have a lifetime. It's as if they're just not made to last. They're certainly not made to be repaired.

If I can invest in a reasonable body and some decent glass, then I feel like I've got something that will have value, even if one piece piece gives out. Supposing I give my body a dipping in river two years from now, the glass should still be good and a used body should be have at least the capability of the first and cost less than a high end fixed lens superzoom.

Daddy Dan said:

you are only going to use a superzoom on a DSLR, I wonder if you're
better off getting a fixed lens superzoom high-end P&S like Sony H2
or Canon S3 IS.

Click to expand...

Not really - the big difference is sensor size, the DSLR is a lot bigger therefore noise is less and higher ISO possible. The other big difference is the weight / size difference.

Generally, although the gap is closing, the lens for the DSLR event a super zoom is better than the P&S. Costs are becomming less considering the current K100D price and super prices.
The decision is a persanal one in the end, horses-> courses blah blah.

As a bonus, the DSLR can expand as you do, photographically I mean rather than physically!!!.

--
---
Keith (fluffy)

Everyone wants to go DSLR because of low noise but the consumer lenses are slower than the superzoom lenses so you get maybe a one stop advantage.

The bigger difference is in the useability, proper MF, mechanical zoom, fast start up etc etc etc.

fluffy said:

Daddy Dan said:

you are only going to use a superzoom on a DSLR, I wonder if you're
better off getting a fixed lens superzoom high-end P&S like Sony H2
or Canon S3 IS.

Click to expand...

Not really - the big difference is sensor size, the DSLR is a lot
bigger therefore noise is less and higher ISO possible. The other big
difference is the weight / size difference.
Generally, although the gap is closing, the lens for the DSLR event a
super zoom is better than the P&S. Costs are becomming less
considering the current K100D price and super prices.
The decision is a persanal one in the end, horses-> courses blah blah.
As a bonus, the DSLR can expand as you do, photographically I mean
rather than physically!!!.

--
---
Keith (fluffy)

Click to expand...

--
***********************************************
Please visit my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/alfisti

Pentax Lens examples at http://www.pbase.com/alfisti/images_by_lens

Updated July 2007

Alfisti said:

Everyone wants to go DSLR because of low noise but the consumer
lenses are slower than the superzoom lenses so you get maybe a one
stop advantage.

The bigger difference is in the useability, proper MF, mechanical
zoom, fast start up etc etc etc.

Click to expand...

yes - these are big differences to useability and are down to personal preference, some P&S have mech zoom, fast startup, MF by wire but none have a sensor that is as big as the DSLR.

I'm not sure what the "myth" is - can you explain please.

P&S seem to have a useable ISO to 200 often only a top ISO 400. DSLR ISO useable to maybe 1600.
DSLR lenses faster than compact cameras, arn't they?

I may have missunderstood something somewhere but this is my view.

--
---
Keith (fluffy)

See this is what peopel fail to grasp but it is understandable.

Let's look at the Tamron, at 200mm (350mm equiv) it is f6.3, the Panny FZ50 is around f/4 at 350mm which is a full 1 1/2 stops faster. Now ISO 800 on the DSLR is about equal in noise to ISO 100 on the panny for a 2 stop gain.

So overall you gain what, 1/2 a stop. Virtually NOTHING, max 1 stop.

That is the problem going superzoom on a DSLR, you get very little to no light gathering advantage and may as well buy a digicam superzoom with video and tiltable screen etc etc.

fluffy said:

Alfisti said:

Everyone wants to go DSLR because of low noise but the consumer
lenses are slower than the superzoom lenses so you get maybe a one
stop advantage.

The bigger difference is in the useability, proper MF, mechanical
zoom, fast start up etc etc etc.

Click to expand...

yes - these are big differences to useability and are down to
personal preference, some P&S have mech zoom, fast startup, MF by
wire but none have a sensor that is as big as the DSLR.

I'm not sure what the "myth" is - can you explain please.

P&S seem to have a useable ISO to 200 often only a top ISO 400. DSLR
ISO useable to maybe 1600.
DSLR lenses faster than compact cameras, arn't they?

I may have missunderstood something somewhere but this is my view.

--
---
Keith (fluffy)

Click to expand...

--
***********************************************
Please visit my gallery at http://www.pbase.com/alfisti

Pentax Lens examples at http://www.pbase.com/alfisti/images_by_lens

Updated July 2007

Alfisti said:

Now ISO 800 on the DSLR is about equal in noise to ISO 100 on the
panny for a 2 stop gain.

Click to expand...

Could you calculate that for me?

--
http://flickr.com/photos/56983515@N00/
Current cam: TZ1
Wish cams: LX2 with Fuji F30 sensor and Pentax K100D super.
Wish lens: Tamron 18-250mm.