[houstonmacgregor]

With the 16-50 and any 70-200 lens there is a 50-70 gap. To any one that has this combo- do you miss the gap.

[wlachan]

Any prime shooters know that one cannot fill every gap, and the gap between 50 & 70 is really small. In fact, I feel my 43 & 77 are too close in practice.

[farfisa]

There are so many good fast primes in that range, I'd fill it with one of those!

[Reportage]

it really depends. my coverage is 28-75 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/2.8.

I dont really need a wide angle so no problems here.

[dgaies]

There are so many good fast primes in that range, I'd fill it with one of those!

Let me guess, you'd fill it with the DA*55

[SpecialK]

With the 16-50 and any 70-200 lens there is a 50-70 gap. To any one that has this combo- do you miss the gap.

I have a similar combo, but I do not miss the gap. Technically I do have that gap covered if needed but I use the 55-300 much less now, in fact I haven't for a couple months...

[Pentaxor]

a 55 or 58 would be your best bet. too bas the Tamron 60 is not available for the Pentax mount.

[Unsinkable II]

too bad the Tamron 60 is not available for the Pentax mount.

Seconded

[MPrince]

You could always try filling the gap with your feet. Cheap solution as long as you're not near a cliff, river, or 8-lane highway.

[Ira]

You could always try filling the gap with your feet. Cheap solution as long as you're not near a cliff, river, or 8-lane highway.

Mega-true. And what's easier:

Taking a few steps, or changing a lens?

[sajah]

Or you can just crop in PP. Like wlachan said the difference between 50-70 is small and so you won't lost a lot of resolution if you crop to get the FOV of say 60mm lens from a picture taken with 50mm lens. I'm a prime shooter and usually only bring 3 lenses at a time (15, 43, 77 usually) so I have to deal with quite wide gaps and along with feet zooming I extensively use cropping in PP to get around.

[AdrianM]

I fill the gap in two ways:
- Sigma 28-70 f2.8 which I use every now and then, particularly when you can't adjust with your feet such as at indoor sporting events. I find that this one is very good on a basketball or volleyball court.
- Tamron 18-250 which is the one lens that is always in my bag.

[reeftool]

I recently picked up an F 35-70 Macro. It's small, light and has pretty decent IQ. They are quite common and available for some very low prices. The big drawback is the 35mm is not wide enough so I'm changing lenses a lot. I'm hoping to add a Sigma 17-70 when I get the money.

[Marc Sabatella]

Any prime shooters know that one cannot fill every gap, and the gap between 50 & 70 is really small. In fact, I feel my 43 & 77 are too close in practice.

As a prime shooter primarily, my "gap" is between 40 and 70, and I feel constrained by it at all. Although when I was primarily a zoom shooter, I *did* feel a big difference going from 18-55 + 70-300 to 18-55 + 50-200. It actually wasn't that I shot in the 50-70 range all that much - it was that by having 50mm available on my telephoto zoom, I felt I could get away with leaving the 50-200 on the camera in situations where I'd otherwise have switched to the 18-55 if I had the 70-300 mounted. Of course, I also simply didn't like the size, weight, focus speed, or lack of quick shift on the 70-300, so I was always in hurry to get it off the camera anyhow. And that's not going to be so relevant for you. But the bottom line was, by having a 50-200 rather than 70-300, I change lenses less.

However, given you're not going to get a 50-200 to replace your 70-200 (I assume that's an f/2.8), buying a lens to plug the gap is not going to reduce lenses changes, and like I said, it's not like I actually shot in that range much. With the 50-200, I tend shoot a lot right at 50, and then basically skip right to the upper 60's or so.

[RonHendriks1966]

Well I have mostly primes. I jump from DA*55mm to FA*85mm and that's fine. My only zoom is 50-135mm, but I use it in a different way, not alongside the primes.