Which 18-250 Zoom?

[capt-t]

I've read, marked and inwardly digested several reviews of the Sony DT and the Tamron Di II IF LD, including DK's latest and his review of the Tamron (on a Dynax 7D), but still find it hard to choose between them- the marginal extra cost of the Sony is not a factor.
I'm currently using a Tamron LD AF 18-200 (ex Dynax film camera) on my new Alpha a700 and looking to upgrade to a lens designated to digital and so that either of the above would be an upgrade? The range I most often use is 50 -135mm film equiv.
All advice/comment greatly appreciated.
Pete.

[Dr. Harout]

Welcome to the forum.
If you are using 50~135mm film wise, then I would suggest the DT 16-105.
If the extra tele is of importance then opt for the Sony.
If you're looking a decent/excellent lens, then go for either 16-80 CZ or better 24-70 CZ.

[David Kilpatrick]

the 16-105mm is probably not as good around 70mm as the Sony/Tamron 18-250mm. I think the choice is open; our Sony example is slightly better than the Tamron was at the long end, but maybe not so good around 24-35mm. Each lens may vary a little but once they are stopped down to f11 any two samples should be hard to tell apart.

David

[mikeriach]

David,

Did you find any significant difference with the focusing between the Tamron and Sony 18-250?
It seems optically there is little discernable difference.

Mike

[David Kilpatrick]

The Sony is faster and has a lighter focusing action, but when new a firmer zoom action. The mount is entirely different, not just different grips stuck on the same tube. I would say the Sony is worth the extra outlay if this is an option for you. If you could put the saving towards other items to expland your photography, then it's not worth the outlay - it's only worth it in the same way it used to be better to buy a Singer Chamois instead of a Hillman Imp (or was it the Riley Elf? I forget...).

David

[braeside]

it's only worth it in the same way it used to be better to buy a Singer Chamois instead of a Hillman Imp (or was it the Riley Elf? I forget...).

David

I had a Singer Chamois! - the worst car I ever owned. Clutch failed 2nd day I had it, the rubber donut joints in the drive shafts failed, I also didn't realise a coal merchant had previously owned it and must have carried his coal bags inside it judging by the dirt in the upholstery. Somehow I managed to sell it, despite having to push start it when the purchaser came to examine it. Got a mini Clubman Estate after that - smashing.

[David Kilpatrick]

Just don't buy a lens which has been used to shoot black cats in coal holes then

David

[capt-t]

Many thanks to everyone for the advice and comments - cats in coal holes included!
The adverse report (09 Aug 2008) on build quality/quality contol of the CZ 16 -80
http://www.dyxum.com/reviews/lenses/rev ... IDLens=318
has knocked that choice on the head for me. I'll probably go for the Tamron and use the saving wrt the comparable Sony towards a prime telephoto lens for the future.