Lens comparing ..28-80 or a 18-55 help a newbie please.

when-daybreaks · 08-27-2014, 06:03 PM

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

Read somewhere that the PENTAX SMC FA CAMERA LENS 1:3.5 28-80 MM DSLR-SLR AUTO FOCUS
Is pretty much the same as the pentax kit ken for k-50 .. The 18-55mm I believe urs a DA .. I'm was THISCLOSE! to bidding in the 28-80 lens when I read they were the same and since I already have (gog to have) the 18-55 I thought I'd save some money.

jimr-pdx · 08-27-2014, 06:16 PM - **1 Like**

I have a Quantaray 28-90mm with 1:2 macro, and if you are not planning on wide shooting it's a good lens for general purpose. Especially since it often goes for about $50 but often can be found lower. Flare into the sun is its weak point, but sharpness color and closeups up to 1/2 life size are quite nice!

I have not tried the FA 28-80, but without the 'macro' setting I would not keep my 28-90. The FA was the kit lens for film, so I wouldn't expect it to be much better than the 18-55 kit lens for digital.

Kozlok · 08-27-2014, 06:33 PM - **1 Like**

The focal lengths are different, but the quality is probably similar.

**Just1MoreDave** · 08-27-2014, 06:39 PM - **1 Like**

There are apparently three slightly different FA 28-80mm lenses, plus an FA-J 28-80 and an FA 28-90. They aren't the same as the DA 18-55. The only distant similarity is if you had a Pentax film camera like a ZX with a 28-80. On a Pentax DSLR, the 18-55 has approximately the same field of view. But if you don't have or want a film camera, just forget about all that equivalent nonsense. On the DSLR, a 28-80 starts out in the normal range and goes to mid-telephoto, while the 18-55 is wide to short telephoto.

I tried a few of these and wasn't that excited by them. They all work almost the same as the DA 18-55 on a DSLR - autofocus, aperture, focal length reported to the camera, except if you need in-camera lens corrections. You get an aperture ring with the FA lenses, not with the FA-J lens. Some have plastic mounts, no big deal. The DA 18-55 has a greater magnification ratio, so it's better close up (1:3 magnification). Most are 1:4, the 28-90 is in between. The focal length either works for you or not. Build quality is similar to the DA 18-55.

**jatrax** · 08-27-2014, 07:07 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by when-daybreaks

I'm was THISCLOSE! to bidding in the 28-80 lens when I read they were the same and since I already have (gog to have) the 18-55 I thought I'd save some money.

Outside of both being a "kit" lens, no they are not at all the same. The 28-80 will not go as wide (only 28mm) but goes a bit further (to 80mm). Both are usable on your k-50 and if you prefer a slightly longer focal length and are willing to give up the 18-27 range the 28-80 might serve even better. I often use an F 35-105 when I want a light lens for casual shooting and I lose almost all of the wide angle range but gain a nice short tele range.

when-daybreaks · 08-27-2014, 08:24 PM

Wow you are all just a wealth of knowledge .. I think I understood all that

.. And Im going to stick with just the 18-55mm for now .. What I'm really looking for is a lens for star trails and shooting multiple exposures of the MilkyWay. I know in the olympus brand people tend to use a 7-14mm zoom lens any idea what that equivalent would be for my k-50? The 28-80 was the smallest range I have found on ebay at least that wasn't a fisheye lens.

**jatrax** · 08-27-2014, 08:31 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by when-daybreaks

I know in the olympus brand people tend to use a 7-14mm zoom lens any idea what that equivalent

I believe the Olympus would be micro 4/3 so 2x crop factor to FF, so you are looking at 14-28mm. Then you have to calculate the 1.5x crop back to APS-C so 10-20 zoom would give you roughly the same angle of view as the 7-14mm on m4/3. In Pentax world you have two different Sigma 10-20's, a Tamron 10-24, and the Pentax 12-24. Check the lens database for reviews. Look at the top of the screen under "lenses"

**boriscleto** · 08-27-2014, 09:26 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by when-daybreaks

Wow you are all just a wealth of knowledge .. I think I understood all that

.. And Im going to stick with just the 18-55mm for now .. What I'm really looking for is a lens for star trails and shooting multiple exposures of the MilkyWay. I know in the olympus brand people tend to use a 7-14mm zoom lens any idea what that equivalent would be for my k-50? The 28-80 was the smallest range I have found on ebay at least that wasn't a fisheye lens.

Originally posted by jatrax

I believe the Olympus would be micro 4/3 so 2x crop factor to FF, so you are looking at 14-28mm. Then you have to calculate the 1.5x crop back to APS-C so 10-20 zoom would give you roughly the same angle of view as the 7-14mm on m4/3. In Pentax world you have two different Sigma 10-20's, a Tamron 10-24, and the Pentax 12-24. Check the lens database for reviews. Look at the top of the screen under "lenses"

Though a bit longer, the DA 16-45 might work well and is fairly inexpensive.

Samyang makes a nice 14mm prime that isn't all that expensive either.

when-daybreaks · 08-28-2014, 05:08 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

I believe the Olympus would be micro 4/3 so 2x crop factor to FF, so you are looking at 14-28mm. Then you have to calculate the 1.5x crop back to APS-C so 10-20 zoom would give you roughly the same angle of view as the 7-14mm on m4/3. In Pentax world you have two different Sigma 10-20's, a Tamron 10-24, and the Pentax 12-24. Check the lens database for reviews. Look at the top of the screen under "lenses"

Oh my gosh that ^ is amazing. :0 Thats exactly what I needed! Makes sense too. lol finally starting to understand how all this works.

**Lowell Goudge** · 08-28-2014, 11:15 PM

I don't know if it is still true, but at the onset with the 4/3 format cameras, while the camera itself was as small as for example the *istD series bodies, the equivalent FOV lens, like the 7-14mm 4/3 lens to a sigma 10-20 was prohibitively expensive. Something like a 3:1 price differential between the ultra wide zoom for the 4/3 compared to the APS-C format sensor in the pentax cameras.

Is this still the case?

Just curious

when-daybreaks · 08-29-2014, 05:00 AM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

I don't know if it is still true, but at the onset with the 4/3 format cameras, while the camera itself was as small as for example the *istD series bodies, the equivalent FOV lens, like the 7-14mm 4/3 lens to a sigma 10-20 was prohibitively expensive. Something like a 3:1 price differential between the ultra wide zoom for the 4/3 compared to the APS-C format sensor in the pentax cameras.

Is this still the case?

Just curious

First one I found on ebay v .. Over $1000

Olympus Zuiko Digital 7 14mm 1 4 Ed Zoom Lens Fours Thirds Mount | eBay

**TER-OR** · 08-29-2014, 05:21 AM

When I bought my K10 I read the original 18-55 wasn't great, so I bought a used 16-45 and it's a good short zoom. Great indoors, with that focal range. I haven't sold it yet, even though it's been mostly replaced by the 18-135. I took the 16-45 out in snow with the dogs and started to realized I really should get a WR lens if I continued to do so... Since we have huskies and a malamute, the camera would be out in snow!

altopiet · 08-29-2014, 07:42 AM

Originally posted by TER-OR

When I bought my K10 I read the original 18-55 wasn't great, so I bought a used 16-45 and it's a good short zoom. Great indoors, with that focal range. I haven't sold it yet, even though it's been mostly replaced by the 18-135. I took the 16-45 out in snow with the dogs and started to realized I really should get a WR lens if I continued to do so... Since we have huskies and a malamute, the camera would be out in snow!

Is the IQ on the 18-135 better than the 16-45?

**TER-OR** · 08-29-2014, 09:17 AM

Originally posted by altopiet

Is the IQ on the 18-135 better than the 16-45?

I really don't know. I was pretty much satisfied with the 16-45 but it was never long enough for outdoors with the dogs. From what I've read the 16-45 is pretty well regarded, but also considered a bit fragile. Mine was never pampered and it's still a good lens.

It is considered better than the 18-45, and the extra wide space is noticable vs. the 18-135. Maybe I should do some tests on close pictures to see if there's a discernable difference.

altopiet · 08-29-2014, 09:21 AM

Originally posted by TER-OR

I really don't know. I was pretty much satisfied with the 16-45 but it was never long enough for outdoors with the dogs. From what I've read the 16-45 is pretty well regarded, but also considered a bit fragile. Mine was never pampered and it's still a good lens.

It is considered better than the 18-45, and the extra wide space is noticable vs. the 18-135. Maybe I should do some tests on close pictures to see if there's a discernable difference.

I've got a used 16-45 and if the IQ on the 18-135 is in the same ballpark, I might go for it...

08-27-2014, 06:03 PM	#1
when-daybreaks Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Ohio Posts: 72	Lens comparing ..28-80 or a 18-55 help a newbie please. Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here. Read somewhere that the PENTAX SMC FA CAMERA LENS 1:3.5 28-80 MM DSLR-SLR AUTO FOCUS Is pretty much the same as the pentax kit ken for k-50 .. The 18-55mm I believe urs a DA .. I'm was THISCLOSE! to bidding in the 28-80 lens when I read they were the same and since I already have (gog to have) the 18-55 I thought I'd save some money.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Please help a newbie make sense of superzoom lenses	thechumpen	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	10-11-2012 04:43 AM
Buying a K5 - but with 18-135mm lens kit? Or an 18-55 + 50-200mm lens kit?	robinfaz	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	12	06-04-2012 01:44 PM
A little help please, 18-55 lens?	InlawBiker	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	02-28-2011 04:00 AM
my first lens - please help a newbie out	n8cas	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	24	01-23-2008 08:39 AM

08-27-2014, 06:16 PM - 1 Like	#2
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	I have a Quantaray 28-90mm with 1:2 macro, and if you are not planning on wide shooting it's a good lens for general purpose. Especially since it often goes for about $50 but often can be found lower. Flare into the sun is its weak point, but sharpness color and closeups up to 1/2 life size are quite nice! I have not tried the FA 28-80, but without the 'macro' setting I would not keep my 28-90. The FA was the kit lens for film, so I wouldn't expect it to be much better than the 18-55 kit lens for digital.

08-27-2014, 06:33 PM - 1 Like	#3
Kozlok Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: Albuquerque Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,148	The focal lengths are different, but the quality is probably similar.

08-27-2014, 06:39 PM - 1 Like	#4
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	There are apparently three slightly different FA 28-80mm lenses, plus an FA-J 28-80 and an FA 28-90. They aren't the same as the DA 18-55. The only distant similarity is if you had a Pentax film camera like a ZX with a 28-80. On a Pentax DSLR, the 18-55 has approximately the same field of view. But if you don't have or want a film camera, just forget about all that equivalent nonsense. On the DSLR, a 28-80 starts out in the normal range and goes to mid-telephoto, while the 18-55 is wide to short telephoto. I tried a few of these and wasn't that excited by them. They all work almost the same as the DA 18-55 on a DSLR - autofocus, aperture, focal length reported to the camera, except if you need in-camera lens corrections. You get an aperture ring with the FA lenses, not with the FA-J lens. Some have plastic mounts, no big deal. The DA 18-55 has a greater magnification ratio, so it's better close up (1:3 magnification). Most are 1:4, the 28-90 is in between. The focal length either works for you or not. Build quality is similar to the DA 18-55.

08-27-2014, 07:07 PM - 1 Like	#5
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by when-daybreaks I'm was THISCLOSE! to bidding in the 28-80 lens when I read they were the same and since I already have (gog to have) the 18-55 I thought I'd save some money. Outside of both being a "kit" lens, no they are not at all the same. The 28-80 will not go as wide (only 28mm) but goes a bit further (to 80mm). Both are usable on your k-50 and if you prefer a slightly longer focal length and are willing to give up the 18-27 range the 28-80 might serve even better. I often use an F 35-105 when I want a light lens for casual shooting and I lose almost all of the wide angle range but gain a nice short tele range.

08-27-2014, 08:24 PM	#6
when-daybreaks Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Ohio Posts: 72 Original Poster	Wow you are all just a wealth of knowledge .. I think I understood all that .. And Im going to stick with just the 18-55mm for now .. What I'm really looking for is a lens for star trails and shooting multiple exposures of the MilkyWay. I know in the olympus brand people tend to use a 7-14mm zoom lens any idea what that equivalent would be for my k-50? The 28-80 was the smallest range I have found on ebay at least that wasn't a fisheye lens.

08-27-2014, 08:31 PM - 1 Like	#7
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by when-daybreaks I know in the olympus brand people tend to use a 7-14mm zoom lens any idea what that equivalent I believe the Olympus would be micro 4/3 so 2x crop factor to FF, so you are looking at 14-28mm. Then you have to calculate the 1.5x crop back to APS-C so 10-20 zoom would give you roughly the same angle of view as the 7-14mm on m4/3. In Pentax world you have two different Sigma 10-20's, a Tamron 10-24, and the Pentax 12-24. Check the lens database for reviews. Look at the top of the screen under "lenses"

08-27-2014, 09:26 PM - 1 Like	#8
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,477	Originally posted by when-daybreaks Wow you are all just a wealth of knowledge .. I think I understood all that .. And Im going to stick with just the 18-55mm for now .. What I'm really looking for is a lens for star trails and shooting multiple exposures of the MilkyWay. I know in the olympus brand people tend to use a 7-14mm zoom lens any idea what that equivalent would be for my k-50? The 28-80 was the smallest range I have found on ebay at least that wasn't a fisheye lens. Originally posted by jatrax I believe the Olympus would be micro 4/3 so 2x crop factor to FF, so you are looking at 14-28mm. Then you have to calculate the 1.5x crop back to APS-C so 10-20 zoom would give you roughly the same angle of view as the 7-14mm on m4/3. In Pentax world you have two different Sigma 10-20's, a Tamron 10-24, and the Pentax 12-24. Check the lens database for reviews. Look at the top of the screen under "lenses" Though a bit longer, the DA 16-45 might work well and is fairly inexpensive. Samyang makes a nice 14mm prime that isn't all that expensive either.

08-28-2014, 05:08 AM	#9
when-daybreaks Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Ohio Posts: 72 Original Poster	Originally posted by jatrax I believe the Olympus would be micro 4/3 so 2x crop factor to FF, so you are looking at 14-28mm. Then you have to calculate the 1.5x crop back to APS-C so 10-20 zoom would give you roughly the same angle of view as the 7-14mm on m4/3. In Pentax world you have two different Sigma 10-20's, a Tamron 10-24, and the Pentax 12-24. Check the lens database for reviews. Look at the top of the screen under "lenses" Oh my gosh that ^ is amazing. :0 Thats exactly what I needed! Makes sense too. lol finally starting to understand how all this works.

08-28-2014, 11:15 PM	#10
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	I don't know if it is still true, but at the onset with the 4/3 format cameras, while the camera itself was as small as for example the *istD series bodies, the equivalent FOV lens, like the 7-14mm 4/3 lens to a sigma 10-20 was prohibitively expensive. Something like a 3:1 price differential between the ultra wide zoom for the 4/3 compared to the APS-C format sensor in the pentax cameras. Is this still the case? Just curious

08-29-2014, 05:00 AM	#11
when-daybreaks Forum Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Ohio Posts: 72 Original Poster	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge I don't know if it is still true, but at the onset with the 4/3 format cameras, while the camera itself was as small as for example the *istD series bodies, the equivalent FOV lens, like the 7-14mm 4/3 lens to a sigma 10-20 was prohibitively expensive. Something like a 3:1 price differential between the ultra wide zoom for the 4/3 compared to the APS-C format sensor in the pentax cameras. Is this still the case? Just curious First one I found on ebay v .. Over $1000 Olympus Zuiko Digital 7 14mm 1 4 Ed Zoom Lens Fours Thirds Mount \| eBay

08-29-2014, 05:21 AM	#12
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	When I bought my K10 I read the original 18-55 wasn't great, so I bought a used 16-45 and it's a good short zoom. Great indoors, with that focal range. I haven't sold it yet, even though it's been mostly replaced by the 18-135. I took the 16-45 out in snow with the dogs and started to realized I really should get a WR lens if I continued to do so... Since we have huskies and a malamute, the camera would be out in snow!

08-29-2014, 07:42 AM	#13
altopiet Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: The Gem of the Karoo, South Africa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,307	Originally posted by TER-OR When I bought my K10 I read the original 18-55 wasn't great, so I bought a used 16-45 and it's a good short zoom. Great indoors, with that focal range. I haven't sold it yet, even though it's been mostly replaced by the 18-135. I took the 16-45 out in snow with the dogs and started to realized I really should get a WR lens if I continued to do so... Since we have huskies and a malamute, the camera would be out in snow! Is the IQ on the 18-135 better than the 16-45?

08-29-2014, 09:17 AM	#14
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	Originally posted by altopiet Is the IQ on the 18-135 better than the 16-45? I really don't know. I was pretty much satisfied with the 16-45 but it was never long enough for outdoors with the dogs. From what I've read the 16-45 is pretty well regarded, but also considered a bit fragile. Mine was never pampered and it's still a good lens. It is considered better than the 18-45, and the extra wide space is noticable vs. the 18-135. Maybe I should do some tests on close pictures to see if there's a discernable difference.

08-29-2014, 09:21 AM	#15
altopiet Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: The Gem of the Karoo, South Africa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,307	Originally posted by TER-OR I really don't know. I was pretty much satisfied with the 16-45 but it was never long enough for outdoors with the dogs. From what I've read the 16-45 is pretty well regarded, but also considered a bit fragile. Mine was never pampered and it's still a good lens. It is considered better than the 18-45, and the extra wide space is noticable vs. the 18-135. Maybe I should do some tests on close pictures to see if there's a discernable difference. I've got a used 16-45 and if the IQ on the 18-135 is in the same ballpark, I might go for it...