Tamron 18-200mm vs 18-250mm

[Biomech]

Hello again!

I've just come back from holiday and decided that I could do with a more - versatile - lens. I'm looking at replacing my Sony 18-70mm and Sony 75-300mm kit lenses with a single lens solution.

Looking at the Tamron 18-200mm and 18-250mm : what do you think? The 18-250 is more what I'm after with the bigger range, but it's twice the price!

[OsmosisStudios]

I'd strongly argue against getting a superzoom. They're never the same quality.

[Biomech]

Out of interest, anyone have any views on the

Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 VS Sony 70-200mm f2.8 G ?

Pricing is epically deferent.

[bruno_tmedeiros]

From what i've read, G lens from Sony are they're top lens!
Amazing quality!

[LenDog]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

I'd strongly argue against getting a superzoom. They're never the same quality.

+1. They just never work out very well. Buy a bigger bag and get more (shorter range) lenses.

[BlueFightingCat]

Well maybe I'm not so experienced but I would say it depends! I have a Tamron 18-270mm for my Canon 550D. I can probably call myself an enthusiast/tourist. That is I am not out there to try and get amazing photos that I can sell or publish but just good photos for memories and to impress my friends and family with.

Therefore the 18-270mm has been great. It actually means that since this lens is to versatile I actually take my camera and the lens attached everywhere I go. If I had 2-3 lenses to take around with me sometimes I might be inclined not to take them all.

If you're a professional and you're looking for high-quality details then probably you should avoid the lens and go for 2-3 lenses. If you are an "everyday" photographer doing photography for fun as a hobby or as a tourist then a super-zoom is a great compromise.

BFC

[My December]

@Biomech
The 18-250mm have the higher rating and reviews on the net. Being newer of the two, and having an extra reach, of course the 18-250mm would be pricier than the 18-200mm, but people say its worth it.

I have a superzoom too, though I have the Sigma 18-250mm. I use it as a walkaround lens, and also for sport, so the Hypersonic motor helps a lot for fast action, unlike tamrons 18-200/250 which doesn't have fast motors.

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

I'd strongly argue against getting a superzoom. They're never the same quality.

Originally Posted by LenDog

+1. They just never work out very well. Buy a bigger bag and get more (shorter range) lenses.

I beg to differ, I agree with BlueFightingCat. There's a reason why these Superzooms are created, and new ones keep coming in.
Superzooms are good as a walk-around or touring lens. Bringing up to 2 or more lens and keep changing lens to get the right focal length for your picture is a hassle. Not only you're risking that perfect moment goes/fade away, you're also risk your sensor to catch dust (unless of course you have 2 cameras... but that'll defeat the purpose of traveling light).

Like BlueFightingCat had mentioned, a tourist with a DSLR doesn't really care about pic quality, as long as they could get all the moment or memories of their tour/vacation picture right.

Originally Posted by Biomech

Out of interest, anyone have any views on the

Tamron 70-200mm f2.8 VS Sony 70-200mm f2.8 G ?

Pricing is epically deferent.

I think both shows superb optical quality, but the Sony G wins with SSM (Super Sonic Motor).

[Timboson]

I'm with BlueFightingCat.

Why is the 18-270 more expensive than the Canon/Nikon version?

the dude who sold me the camera said that Sony lenses would be cheaper because you don't need the Vibration Control in the lense. I have a Sony SLT-A33 with 18-55 kit lense.

[RichardTaylor]

I shoot with a Tamron 18-250 as well as some better lenses on Canon cameras.

To me the the Tamron 18-250 is an acceptable, for web publishing and prints up to 10x8 (A4), one lens solution if you have to travel light (only one lens) , and do not know what you will be shooting. That is the only time I use mine. Be prepared to do a fair amount of sharpening etc when PPing.

I did use a Tamron 18-200 for a short period few years ago however it didn't meet my shooting needs at the time & I wasn't really impressed with it.

Some examples, all taken on the same day with the 18-250 on a Canon 40D

All have had a fair amount of PPing.

(1)

Camera Canon EOS 40D
Exposure 0.002 sec (1/640)
Aperture f/7.1
Focal Length 42 mm
ISO Speed 640

(2)

Camera Canon EOS 40D
Exposure 0.003 sec (1/400)
Aperture f/10.0
Focal Length 250 mm
ISO Speed 800

(3) Wide open at 250mm


Camera Canon EOS 40D
Exposure 0.002 sec (1/640)
Aperture f/6.3
Focal Length 250 mm
ISO Speed 1600
Exposure Bias 0 EV