I was making a joke. I found the build quality to be a little sloppy as well and I certainly wished for a zoom lock to prevent it from extending when I pointed the camera down. But I never had a real problem with it optically and many of the photos I took with it and the Pz-1p (purchased together) were displayed here and on the PUG.
I often put the K7 in the car and not knowing what I'll see driving down the dirt road, the 28-200 is mounted as my grab and shoot lens, in case I come across some photogenic elk, deer, cougar, bears, wild turkeys... Tom C. On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 11:19 AM, John Sessoms <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Tom C >> >> Then it's obvious the Tamron name plate must be the source of the problem. >> >> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 10:15 AM, John Sessoms <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> > Is that the re-branded Tamron lens? I've got the Tamron version and >>> > I've >>> > never been satisfied with it. >>> > >>> > > > Unless the Pentax version is as un-suitable as the Tamron version. > > The Tamron label itself is not the source of my dissatisfaction with the > lens. The lens is sloppy and not as good optically as I would hope a Pentax > lens would be. > > The other lens I have not been happy with is the Pentax FAJ 18-35 which is > also in my opinion a sloppy lens, although the optical quality is not quite > so lacking. > > So, it's not brand name snobbery. That lens is, however, a source of my > distrust of the Tamron label. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
