KEH and Tamrom 80-210 f/4.5-5.6

[Buschmaster]

There is an EX on KEH for this lens:
80-210 F4.5-5.6 TAMRON (52)(178D) 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS ZOOM TELEPHOTO LENS

And it's $29. It would be perfect for me, as it's a Pentax, it's a telephoto zoom and it's cheap. Any reason why I shouldn't pounce on this? I'm trying to find reviews but having a tough time. You don't think this is so old it's screw mount, do you?

Edit: This is also listed for $45, and probably in my price range as well.
70-210 F4-5.6 SIGMA UC II MACRO (55) WITH HOOD, CAPS, 35MM SLR AUTO FOCUS ZOOM TELEPHOTO LENS

 

[Jay42]

If it's auto focus, it isn't a screw mount.

I guess if you need the reach you can't get much cheaper than that, but I would advise you to save your money for something decent if possible.

 

[Buschmaster]

If it's auto focus, it isn't a screw mount.

I guess if you need the reach you can't get much cheaper than that, but I would advise you to save your money for something decent if possible.

So you are fairly certain this isn't a very good lens?

What about the lens on B&H:
Pentax SMCP-FA 100-300

 

[Jay42]

To be honest, I don't know anything about the specific lenses you mentioned. But generally, you get what you pay for when it comes to lenses (with a few exceptions). It's always a good idea to read some online reviews before buying.

The best way to choose the right lens is to identify the type of shooting you want to do. If you're looking to shoot moving subjects with a telephoto, you're probably not going to want anything slower than f/4. If you're looking to shoot stationary subjects, a slower lens is ok (and much cheaper), but you may need a tripod to eliminate camera shake unless there's a lot of light.

 

[miloblithe]

I have that lens (Tamron 80-210). It's certainly not a stunner, but if you just need a cheap functional lens it might do the trick. What are your plans for the lens? If you want me to try to do an ad hoc test for you, I'd be happy to.

My feeling about the lens is that it was free (I'm "borrowing" it from my mom who has no current use for it), I can't afford Canon's 70-300 IS or 70-200 f/4 any time soon, so I'm perfectly happy with it since I don't really need it (I mostly use my wide angle and 50mm lenses).

 

[Buschmaster]

To be honest, I don't know anything about the specific lenses you mentioned. But generally, you get what you pay for when it comes to lenses (with a few exceptions). It's always a good idea to read some online reviews before buying.

The best way to choose the right lens is to identify the type of shooting you want to do. If you're looking to shoot moving subjects with a telephoto, you're probably not going to want anything slower than f/4. If you're looking to shoot stationary subjects, a slower lens is ok (and much cheaper), but you may need a tripod to eliminate camera shake unless there's a lot of light.

I'm going to be getting a tripod fairly soon. So, I'll just set the aperture (essentially) to it's minimum and that would give me a clear picture, right? Even if the shutter had to be long for an ISO 200 or 400 at a f/32 or so.