sony vs tamron 18-250

[alphaomega]

I actually purchased the Tamron 18-250 for my A700 based on DK's recomndation. I also own the CZ16-80. I prefer the CZ because of its 16 mm wide end and faster speed. The Tamron provides quality images but is slower at 6.3. The AF is not the fastest in the world. My wife uses it on our A350 and loves it for of all things steam engine (railways) photography. She can get the trains from far away to close up and it is a light combination with the A350. Lovely colours. Would not part with the lens for its versatility but I guess it is not the right lens for F1 or fast moving sport. Good value for money as well for what it can do.

[redsim74]

Well, I got the Sony version of the 18-250 and I don't doubt that optically they would be virtually identical.

The price difference at my location is negligible, maybe $100; I'm outside of the US so no 6 year warranty, we get 1 year; there is no branch of Tamron here so I'm at the mercy of camerastore and/or distributor for repair/replacement (already stung once with a faulty Tamron 90). In comparison I get an automatic 1 year warranty extension from SonyStyle and an established stock and repair network.

One thing I have to say against the Sony (haven't tried or even seen a Tamron version) is that the focus ring is very coarse in terms of movement, not ideal if you're a manual focus macro fan. But that would be my only complaint.

[redsim74]

As I said, I'm not in the US.

The price difference I'm talking is between an $800 and $900 lens and just to be clear again, no 6 year warranty on the Tamron.

If you're living in the States it makes total sense to get the Tamron, but if you're elsewhere it may not be so clear cut.

Cheers,


Sim

[redsim74]

Local currency, different exchange rate. I should have been clearer on that. If it was $US800-900 I can guarantee you I wouldn't have bought one.

You're right, we don't know where the OP is from. Which is why I offered a differing point of view, there's no right or wrong answer here.

[tomalpha]

"Mine stays on my camera of the moment most of the time. In fact right now I have the 5D with the 70-300g (SSM does the focus speed thing) and my a700 has the 18-250 both sitting on my table. If I need to rush out into my garden to shoot a butterfly or bird I grab the appropriate combo."

Which is the appropriate camera for what type of shot?

That's a personal preference:

To be honest I would shoot the a700 with the G lens for butterflies or close birds.....Myself, I own both the a700 and the 5D and I would grab my a700 and probably my 100mm macro or my Siggy 70-300 APO DG Macro to shoot the butterfly with. The a700 is way faster and way more accurate when focusing. The a700 also has a sweet MF/AF button that you can easily toggle.

The 70-300 SSM may make the KM5D focus a bit faster, or more accurately I suppose, but in my opinion the optimum combo here would be the 70-300G and the a700...IMHO, superzooms are just a little to slow for me when chasing insects and the like.


To each his own...this really becomes a matter of personal preference. FWIW, the mag ration on the 18-250 is 1:3.5 and it is 1:4 on the SSM....a 100mm macro gives you 1:1 and something like the Siggy APO DG would give you 1:2. Reality says that 250 and 300mm is not quite long enough for shooting birds and the 12MP vs 6MP really gives a ton of cropping power to a700. One more thing is the resolution difference between the KM5D and a700 is quite wide...the a700 can resolve MUCH more detail than the KM5D can.

Konica Minolta 7D
Horiz LPH 1600 1750
Vert LPH 1400 1700

Sony DSLR-A700
Horizontal LPH * 2200 2900
Vertical LPH 2100 2800

Happy shooting!

-Sonolta

I pretty well agree with your comments, in fact right now the 18-250 is on my 5D and the 70-300G on my a700.

I love the results from the 100 Macro, they are unmatched if the shooting distance is OK for the situation, but it's a much more deliberate shoot if I am to put it on....probably I am going out specifically to shoot insects. The 1:2 on the Sigma is very attractive (I have one, and with the matched close up lens), but I think I get shots that have more 'zing' from the 70-300g, even cropped to the same size. However I paid about 1/7th of the price for it (used) and you get what you pay for.

I agree that 300mm (or 250) is not long enough for birds. I do like a lens I can hand carry, and not too much weight either, though if I am going walking. The only option with that in mind is the 500 mirror, but I have not tried it, being put off by the bokeh and fixed aperture. Am I wrong to disregard it? Is there any option? In my experience TC's are hopeless on these lenses.

The weight and range of the 18-250 makes it a great hiking lens, even if you don't get quite the quality of the others.

Once again, I don't think you get anything extra from the Sony version except the label (and lose on the guarantee). I'd rather put that money to something more useful

Sorry to hijack the OP's thread, but you raised some interesting discussion points

cheers

tom

tom

[mikeriach]

Well I've just had my first outing with my new Sony 18-250 and I have to say that first impressions are very good.
On my A100 the focus is accurate and the shots are sharp.
A definite improvement over the Sigma 18-125.

Mike

[alphaPDX]

Just curious - does the Sony version ID itself in the extended EXIF, and the Tamron not? For some, that may be important. Also, in my continuing quest to pass along gossip & pretend they're facts - I've seen that some folks complain that the Sony zoom ring is a dust trap, the ribbing is so tight that it's never clean.

BTW - my comment is really a confession, I've spread the 'fact' that Sony focuses faster & have since read posts (like EvilOne on dpr) that people who owned both lenses at the same time could tell no difference. He sent the Sony back & kept the Tamron, for his own reasons.

[alphaPDX]

The price difference, the 6 year warranty, and avoiding the Sony grips...it's really a no brainer for me if I were considering these two lenses.

Oopz, I see Sonolta also knows of the grip issue, so it most certainly must be true!

[David Kilpatrick]

I have to photograph these lenses for magazines. Two minutes after opening the box, the lens looks used. The Sony/Zeiss ribbed grips are impossible to keep clean. In contrast, I've got 15-year-old Minolta lenses which can be quickly wiped with a microfiber cloth and look as if they are new.

David

[sparaxis]

Some of the grips on older Minolta lenses can look horrible with some sort of white "stuff" exuding from the rubber. My 35-200 was like this when I got and it looked quite hideous. However a bit of washing up liquid on a almost dry rag followed by a wipe with a damp rag was all that was needed to get the lens looking great again.

We have the Tamron and love it, but had to send it back for repair when the zoom action became extremely loose. It returned much better without the inclination to extend without any provocation.....(And the turn around time was very snappy)

I guess the 6 year warranty is important.

Alan

[Joanel]

I bot the sony because that was all that was available when I was ordering. so far the grip and focus ring are clean.

where would you be that it would collect that much dust?

[Joanel]

whoops - took a closer look and it is attracting some dust already. but will keep it. have had so much trouble getting the camera to take sharp pictures- had to send back for repairs and then get new lens - (old 28-300 didn't work that well). I just don't feel like exchanging for tamron - which wasn't availalbe anywhere when I ordered the lens.

any ideas on how to clean it.? Hope the dust doesn't get sucked in the sensor!!!

[Joanel]

whoops - took a closer look and it is attracting some dust already. but will keep it. have had so much trouble getting the camera to take sharp pictures- had to send back for repairs and then get new lens - (old 28-300 didn't work that well). I just don't feel like exchanging for tamron - which wasn't availalbe anywhere when I ordered the lens.

any ideas on how to clean it.? Hope the dust doesn't get sucked in the sensor!!!

[Dr. Harout]

Congratulations Joanel. You're not mentioning where exactly it's gathering dust, on or in the lens?

[Joanel]

on the grip