Better lens for K10d

explr1 · 09-01-2008, 08:19 PM

I'm looking at buying better lenses for my K10d. One of the lenses that I currently have is a 18-55mm Mk II lens. I was wondering if one of the older FA 28-70mm F4 lenses would take higher quality pictures? Thanks.....

*Canada_Rockies* · 09-01-2008, 10:39 PM

Originally Posted by explr1

I'm looking at buying better lenses for my K10d. One of the lenses that I currently have is a 18-55mm Mk II lens. I was wondering if one of the older FA 28-70mm F4 lenses would take higher quality pictures? Thanks.....

I would first use the 18-55 Mk II and learn to really use it. It is head and shoulders above the rest of the kit lens pack. In other words, it is an most usable lens. Once you have found the failings in your photography that point to a particular failing of the lens, then move to get more lenses, not before.

Please realize that LBA can be a real addiction. To move to digital with the k10d, to retain the wide angle field of view I would only have needed to buy the DA 16-45. The DA* 16-50 was LBA. So was the DA* 50-135. A constant aperture of f/2.8 is a very strong attraction to an old SLR user such as myself. It increases the focus speed and accuracy (manual or automatic) and allows use of lower ISO ratings in dawn and dusk and indoors. By adding only a $400 lens, I could have moved smoothly to dSLR with no loss of field of view.

Instead I bought the DA 12-24 ($700), the DA* 16-50 ($900) and the DA* 50-135 ($1200). [Canadian dollars from reputable sources last November]. Every time I use one of those three lenses, the k10d and attached grip, I will be reminded of my father, whose estate paid for them. They are a joy to me.

Please note, however, that I knew that what I would gain was specific attributes of the new lenses. They cannot improve my photography, only make it somewhat easier to take certain images.

*reeftool* · 09-02-2008, 10:28 AM

I am quite happy with the 18-55 kit lens myself. The only reason I would consider a different lens in this range would be the benefit of having f/2.8 which hasn't been a problem for me at this point. Maybe I just have a very good copy but I consider the IQ very good. I don't know if an older FA 28-70 f/4 would take better pictures. I don't have that lens. I'm sure its a decent lens but not something I would buy unless I found it dirt cheap somewhere and LBA took over. If I was to blow my paycheck on a lens I would consider the DA*16-50 if you really need a faster lens or 50-135 that Albert just mentioned. Or the 10-17 fisheye, or the DA*300 or........this isn't really helping is it?

*hwblanks* · 09-02-2008, 10:32 AM

I agree with Albert--hang on to the lens and get to know it better.

HTH,
Heather

lesmore49 · 09-02-2008, 11:27 AM

I've got the 16-45 mm Lens. Very happy with it. Very sharp, clear.

audiobomber · 09-02-2008, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by lesmore49

I've got the 16-45 mm Lens. Very happy with it. Very sharp, clear.

I agree. I have the 16-45 and it is better than the 18-55mm, BUT, I would recommend the OP get a 50mm F1.4 instead of another zoom. The FA50 is faster and sharper than a 16-50mm, for 1/4 the price.

nixter · 09-02-2008, 12:54 PM

The kit I originally bought had a the 18-55 and an 80-200. I have since sold both and replaced with the sigma 18-250 and a 50mm 1.4. I love this combo as it gives me great range with just 2 lenses.

ftpaddict · 09-02-2008, 01:30 PM

17-70 f/4.

*Clicker* · 09-02-2008, 01:46 PM

Along with my next K200D, i'll be getting another BG3 grip, with those weather proofed DA*16-50 and DA* 50-135 after that something longer.

I keep reading all the reviews and seeing the images from them and that's enough to keep me happy for a long time, not really a "LBA" person, is that the term? I just want good equipment that's not going to bankrupt me while i try for the best images i know i have in me.

I don't need the K20D, i need AA equipment.

lesmore49 · 09-02-2008, 02:23 PM

Originally Posted by nixter

The kit I originally bought had a the 18-55 and an 80-200. I have since sold both and replaced with the sigma 18-250 and a 50mm 1.4. I love this combo as it gives me great range with just 2 lenses.

I was reading a Pop Photo test on the Pentax 50 mm f1.4 and they gave it a very positive assessment. Converts to about a 70- 75 mm , very fast, portrait type lens that is extremelysharp. Price is reasonable too.

*nulla* · 09-02-2008, 02:28 PM

Please note, however, that I knew that what I would gain was specific attributes of the new lenses. They cannot improve my photography, only make it somewhat easier to take certain images.

Great post and a magic last liner Albert.

I also like that you state that not only are you enjoying every shot taking with your HQ lenses but with each shot you are also reminded of their source

Neil

dylansalt · 09-02-2008, 02:53 PM

The kit lens has really excellent IQ.

What I would really like to see is how "much" better IQ the 16-45, 16-50 have picture for picture (not lab tests)

I have perused many pics taken with these lenses and somehow can't "see" their superiority - unless some kind member can convince me.

kind regards

d

explr1 · 09-04-2008, 09:27 AM

Originally Posted by hwblanks

I agree with Albert--hang on to the lens and get to know it better.

HTH,
Heather

The 18-55mm lens takes great pictures, now that I'm using the right metering, but I find myself switching to the 50-200mm lens because it's faster at 55mm than the 18-55mm lens and seems to take better pictures. Ebay has several 28-70mm f4 FA lenses for sale. I'm just wondering if the FA lens is better, meaning faster than the 18-55mm lens I have now. I really want to buy a 17-70mm DA lens when it comes out.

egordon99 · 09-04-2008, 01:42 PM

If you can live with out wide angle (or purchase a companion ultra-wide-angle such as the Sigma 10-20mm), the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 is an excellent lens!

*hwblanks* · 09-04-2008, 07:37 PM

To answer your question, the 28-70/4 is faster than the 18-55 at the long end since it's a constant aperture. Here is a link to some sample images taken with the 28-70:
Pentax smc P-FA 28-70mm f/4 AL Lens Sample Photos and Specifications

Since you're interested in the 17-70 range, I would also suggest that you take a look at the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5. At the long end, it's only 1/2 a stop slower than the 28-70 and it covers a wider focal length. Also, it's a lot cheaper than the Pentax 17-70; you can get the Sigma version for around $350 brand new. The IQ on it is excellent.

Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC Macro Lens Sample Photos and Specifications

Then there's the Sigma 24-60/2.8, which is also an excellent lens. If you go over to the lens forum, and do some looking, you'll notice that people around here are really liking this lens, not only for it's great IQ, but the cheap, cheap price that Cameta via Amazon has on it:
Amazon.com: Sigma 24-60mm f/2.8 EX DG IF Aspherical Wide Angle Zoom Lens for Pentax and Samsung SLR Cameras: Electronics
Sample pics: Sigma 24-60mm F2.8 EX DG IF ASP Lens Sample Photos and Specifications

Finally, I'll second the vote for the Tamron 28-75, also very reasonably priced if you shop around.

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD (IF) Lens Sample Photos and Specifications

HTH,
Heather