Lens quality
May 28, 2013 22:41:43 #
Pegaso
Loc: Novi, MI
Hello everybody.
Thank you for your photographic topics. I enjoy reading them everyday and I always learn something.
I am retired Met. Eng. but my main Hobby has been photography for many years. Starting with the Minolta-Konica Minolta - Sony....
My question is about lenses ...I have been using the Tamron 28-300 for many years with excellent results. Now, I would like to know the difference in optical quality between the Sony 18-250 vs the Tamron 18-275.
Just to make sure that the extra $200 for the Sony is justified.
Thank you for your advise...
Kind Regards.
PS. I have attached a couple of pictures taken with the 28-300
Thank you for your photographic topics. I enjoy reading them everyday and I always learn something.
I am retired Met. Eng. but my main Hobby has been photography for many years. Starting with the Minolta-Konica Minolta - Sony....
My question is about lenses ...I have been using the Tamron 28-300 for many years with excellent results. Now, I would like to know the difference in optical quality between the Sony 18-250 vs the Tamron 18-275.
Just to make sure that the extra $200 for the Sony is justified.
Thank you for your advise...
Kind Regards.
PS. I have attached a couple of pictures taken with the 28-300
Torres del Paine, Chile
Cuernos del Paine, Chile
May 28, 2013 22:45:21 #
May 28, 2013 23:05:30 #
Very interesting question. First though, welcome to UHH. Anyway, I had a Tamron 75-300mm lens but it seemed a little soft. Then I bought the Sony 75-300mm cheapo deluxe for $249.00. It was better but not all that great. What do you expect for that kind of money? Then I sent it into Sony and it came back like nothing I have seen before. It is the one lens that I use the most. It is fantastic!
Now then, the 28-250 is something to behold from what I understand, and it does not need any factory tweaking. I would say that if you did not have either lens yet, for the extra 200 hundred dollars, I would go with the Sony hands down.
But from what I see from your photos, you would be wasting your money.
Now then, the 28-250 is something to behold from what I understand, and it does not need any factory tweaking. I would say that if you did not have either lens yet, for the extra 200 hundred dollars, I would go with the Sony hands down.
But from what I see from your photos, you would be wasting your money.
May 28, 2013 23:11:29 #
Can't advise on the lenses, but I have positive comments on your pics. They do you & the Tamron proud-beautiful to the eye & nice & sharp.
May 28, 2013 23:18:28 #
May 28, 2013 23:21:21 #
May 29, 2013 05:09:03 #
May 29, 2013 05:16:08 #
May 29, 2013 07:00:12 #
Welcome to the Hog. Have no knowledge applicable to your Lens question but would agree with tainkc. They don't get better than the two you posted. ;)
May 29, 2013 15:15:51 #
Pegaso wrote:
Hello everybody. br Thank you for your photographi... (show quote)
Hi Pegaso, Welcome to the hog. Im not that big on lenses. But i also agree with others that have stated your two opening shots are excellent.
Rich
May 29, 2013 16:45:26 #
You would be hard pressed to improve on these two images with any other lens.This is from a non-lens expert. Amazing images. Welcome-let's see more.
May 29, 2013 21:45:36 #
Welcome. Your shots are absolutely breathtaking with the color and composition. If you go to the search function, I believe there was a discussion not too long ago about lenses, and someone posted a link to a website that compares lenses. Looking forward to seeing more wonderful shots from you.
May 30, 2013 00:53:06 #
Pegaso
Loc: Novi, MI
Thank you AuntieM....I just saw today an article in the Digital Photo Magazine, about the Tamron 18-270 and they say that ii has all the traits of a superzoom lens...may be later I will post more shots...
Thanks again....
Thanks again....
May 30, 2013 02:01:16 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.