Alternative to kit lens

UnknownVT · 08-17-2010, 05:28 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

NASA believes that the 16-45 is better. I'll take their word for it.

and just where did you get that rocket from...
cadet?

Is it tomato or tomato?

RioRico · 08-17-2010, 05:28 PM

I have a suspicion: People get the 18-55 (any version except WR) essentially FREE with the camera body. People shoot pictures (learning), read fora, become dissatisified with shoddy 'kit' lens (even though it's designed by Schneider, high-end lensmaker). People spend bookoo $$$ for chic 16-50, shoot pictures, declare themselves satisfied with new wonder-lens.

But... are they tricking themselves, getting psyched-out? Do they value the 16-50 more because they PAID so much more? Do they NEED to feel they've gotten their money's worth? "Well, my FA50/1.4 MUST be better than that old Zuiko OM 50/1.4, because I paid ten times as much." (I just missed an OM50 on the bay today -- it sold for US$20 + shipping.)

Galleries here are filled with splend images shot with the DA18-55. Pro work can be and is done with it, same as with a Holga. Blame not the tools.

"That's not the electric light, my friend
But your VISION that is dim." --L.Cohen

GeneV · 08-17-2010, 05:30 PM

Originally posted by RioRico

Excellent stuff. The Schneider (look it up) DA18-55 is too-often derided by those who haven't learned to exploit it. I bought my K20D with a DA18-250 instead, then got the DA18-55 later, and I use the 18-55 when I don't need the 18-250's reach. That kit lens is a minor gem.

We have way too many threads on "alternatives" to the kit lens. I went through that phase and bought several "alternatives." Now I am more inclined to ask about "supplements" to the kit lens.

For travel, there is nothing as light and compact as the kit lens with anything like the reach and quality at most travel shot apertures. None of my "alternative" zooms are nearly as light and compact as a kit plus a couple of pancake primes. Sometimes it seems like we are all afflicted with kitaphobia.

Marc Sabatella · 08-17-2010, 05:43 PM

Originally posted by RioRico

'kit' lens (even though it's designed by Schneider, high-end lensmaker)

OK, I'll bite. I did a quick search, and I found a cryptic and poorly translated article that appears to suggest the *Samsung* 18-55 is actually in some way other than name only a Schneider lens - with lots of disagreement among people commenting on what was really meant. But nothing suggesting Schneider actually designed the *Pentax* lens. Do you have a source for that claim?

UnknownVT · 08-17-2010, 05:49 PM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

OK, I'll bite. I did a quick search, and I found a cryptic and poorly translated article that appears to suggest the *Samsung* 18-55 is actually in some way other than name only a Schneider lens - with lots of disagreement among people commenting on what was really meant. But nothing suggesting Schneider actually designed the *Pentax* lens. Do you have a source for that claim?

Marc is correct -
from that PopPhoto review of the Samsung 18-55 clone:

" The wide-angle half of a matched set made for the Samsung GX-1S, this Schneider D-Xenon, like its sister lens (click here to see test), is clearly based on the digital-only, wide-angle kit zoom (a 27.5-84mm 35mm equivalent) Pentax builds for its *ist DSLRs. As for its Schneider-Kreuznach label, Samsung purchased the right to use it, after Schneider had ostensibly tested both these lenses to ensure they met certain optical requirements. According to insiders, however, Schneider wasn't involved in the design or production of the lenses on which both the D-Xenons are based -- making them Schneiders, for all practical purposes, in name only."

Pentaxor · 08-17-2010, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by UnknownVT

and just where did you get that rocket from...
cadet?

Is it tomato or tomato?

you don't have to ask, it's from NASA. therefore you should believe them.

UnknownVT · 08-17-2010, 07:50 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

you don't have to ask, it's from NASA. therefore you should believe them.

NASA = Not A Smart Academy?

Last edited by UnknownVT; 08-17-2010 at 07:59 PM.

Pentaxor · 08-17-2010, 08:04 PM

Originally posted by UnknownVT

NASA = Not A Smart Academy?

nooooooooo.

Internetpilot · 08-17-2010, 08:04 PM

I love my 55-300mm DA-L kit lens, but the 18-55mm DA-L kit lens just wasn't very good. I replaced the short kit lens with a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX and *LOVE* it -- night and day difference. The only caveat to the Sigma 18-50mm purchase is that it is now practically glued to my Pentax KX, which means my beloved 55-300mm rarely gets out of the camera bag.

I also bought a very inexpensive (+/-$100 used) Sigma 28-105mm f/3.8-5.6 UCIII IF, and although it's slower than the kit zoom at the wide end (and actually starts at f/4.0 rather than the advertised f/3.8), I even like it better than the 18-55mm DA-L. Of course it's not seeing much action since the 18-50mm f/2.8 purchase either, but I would still probably use it if I was going on a touristy day trip and was worried about keeping the 18-50mm f/2.8 safe/undamaged.

Pentaxor · 08-17-2010, 08:10 PM

Originally posted by Internetpilot

I love my 55-300mm DA-L kit lens, but the 18-55mm DA-L kit lens just wasn't very good. I replaced the short kit lens with a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX and *LOVE* it -- night and day difference. The only caveat to the Sigma 18-50mm purchase is that it is now practically glued to my Pentax KX, which means my beloved 55-300mm rarely gets out of the camera bag.

I won't exactly call the 55-300 a kitlens. honestly, it is better than the 18-55 (whatever version). I would think you will still be able to use the 55-300 when the condition calls for it, like shooting at longer telephotos. I had used mine practically more during the winter olympics here as it suits the events and scenarios, while my wide lenses were kept out of sight or were used only a few times.

ManhattanProject · 08-17-2010, 08:31 PM

The most obvious direct replacement choice if you're looking for the best is the DA* 16-50 which, I can tell you, is a nice upgrade. I just got the 16-50 and it's definitely sharper than the 18-55 WR, even at 2.8. If you're looking for a replacement that doesn't necessarily have the same focal range, then your options are almost endless.

alohadave · 08-17-2010, 08:43 PM

Originally posted by UnknownVT

I think both lenses are good - there is also sample variations -
if the 16-45 is better - I would hazard it is not night and day better.

Otherwise there may be different rockets in space cadet school

Try shooting the 18-55 wide open. The 16-45 will blow it away every single time with a sharper image and no vignetting.

The 16-45 may be more prone to CA in testing, but in my experience, it really doesn't happen all that often.

UnknownVT · 08-17-2010, 09:12 PM

Originally posted by alohadave

Try shooting the 18-55 wide open. The 16-45 will blow it away every single time with a sharper image and no vignetting.

The 16-45 may be more prone to CA in testing, but in my experience, it really doesn't happen all that often.

Both lenses wide open at their widest setting -

dpReview of Pentax 16-45

dpReview of Pentax 18-55

please also look at post #11 which show both lenses wide open at their next widest setting......

Sorry I shoot the 18-55 at 18mm wide open all the time -
there are plenty of examples in the long thread: Kx in Use

Like I said both are good lenses - the difference is not night and day.....
even though it may seem that way for the first set of test charts in the 18-55 favor.......

LucyGoosey · 08-17-2010, 09:15 PM

Thanks for all the advice. How do all those Sigma lenses compare with IQ on the 40mm da? Since the wife won't approve getting "yet another one of those lens things," do you think it's a good idea to consider trading my 40mm for something like a Sigma 18-50, f/2.8-4.5?

Pentaxor · 08-17-2010, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by alohadave

Try shooting the 18-55 wide open. The 16-45 will blow it away every single time with a sharper image and no vignetting.

The 16-45 may be more prone to CA in testing, but in my experience, it really doesn't happen all that often.

this is what I noticed as well when I tried both lenses. and I dont think that the dpreview chart really gives an accurate report. if people would rely mainly on dpreview chart, I believe that people will get the false sense of information as the dpreview charts would show that Pentax lenses are inferior with other brands, which I would think would cause an uproar from users of such lenses.

it would be advisable to look for other photography review sites other than dpreview alone inorder to check for consistency of such findings and to try out the lenses as well. the danger is when people would only rely on one source which is a NO NO.

08-17-2010, 05:28 PM	#17
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	I have a suspicion: People get the 18-55 (any version except WR) essentially FREE with the camera body. People shoot pictures (learning), read fora, become dissatisified with shoddy 'kit' lens (even though it's designed by Schneider, high-end lensmaker). People spend bookoo $$$ for chic 16-50, shoot pictures, declare themselves satisfied with new wonder-lens. But... are they tricking themselves, getting psyched-out? Do they value the 16-50 more because they PAID so much more? Do they NEED to feel they've gotten their money's worth? "Well, my FA50/1.4 MUST be better than that old Zuiko OM 50/1.4, because I paid ten times as much." (I just missed an OM50 on the bay today -- it sold for US$20 + shipping.) Galleries here are filled with splend images shot with the DA18-55. Pro work can be and is done with it, same as with a Holga. Blame not the tools. "That's not the electric light, my friend But your VISION that is dim." --L.Cohen

08-17-2010, 05:49 PM	#20
UnknownVT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella OK, I'll bite. I did a quick search, and I found a cryptic and poorly translated article that appears to suggest the Samsung 18-55 is actually in some way other than name only a Schneider lens - with lots of disagreement among people commenting on what was really meant. But nothing suggesting Schneider actually designed the Pentax lens. Do you have a source for that claim? Marc is correct - from that PopPhoto review of the Samsung 18-55 clone: " The wide-angle half of a matched set made for the Samsung GX-1S, this Schneider D-Xenon, like its sister lens (click here to see test), is clearly based on the digital-only, wide-angle kit zoom (a 27.5-84mm 35mm equivalent) Pentax builds for its ist DSLRs. As for its Schneider-Kreuznach label, Samsung purchased the right to use it, after Schneider had ostensibly tested both these lenses to ensure they met certain optical requirements. According to insiders, however, Schneider wasn't involved in the design or production of the lenses on which both the D-Xenons are based -- making them Schneiders, for all practical purposes, in name only." Last edited by UnknownVT; 08-17-2010 at 07:14 PM.*

08-17-2010, 08:04 PM	#24
Internetpilot Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: NE Florida Posts: 130	I love my 55-300mm DA-L kit lens, but the 18-55mm DA-L kit lens just wasn't very good. I replaced the short kit lens with a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX and LOVE it -- night and day difference. The only caveat to the Sigma 18-50mm purchase is that it is now practically glued to my Pentax KX, which means my beloved 55-300mm rarely gets out of the camera bag. I also bought a very inexpensive (+/-$100 used) Sigma 28-105mm f/3.8-5.6 UCIII IF, and although it's slower than the kit zoom at the wide end (and actually starts at f/4.0 rather than the advertised f/3.8), I even like it better than the 18-55mm DA-L. Of course it's not seeing much action since the 18-50mm f/2.8 purchase either, but I would still probably use it if I was going on a touristy day trip and was worried about keeping the 18-50mm f/2.8 safe/undamaged. Last edited by Internetpilot; 08-17-2010 at 08:09 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: WTT Pentax 18-55 AL II kit lens for 18-55 AL kit lens + money	wallyb	Sold Items	2	11-11-2009 02:26 PM
lost 31 lens cap - any alternative?	nostatic	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	07-20-2009 07:16 PM
pentax p-fa 35mm f/2 alternative lens hood	architorture	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	12-28-2008 01:55 AM
penta 16-50mm lens alternative	vincentgargano	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	05-05-2008 02:10 PM
Portrait Lens Alternative?	germar	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	12-15-2007 02:19 AM

08-17-2010, 05:28 PM	#16
UnknownVT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by Pentaxor NASA believes that the 16-45 is better. I'll take their word for it. and just where did you get that rocket from... cadet? Is it tomato or tomato?

08-17-2010, 05:30 PM	#18
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by RioRico Excellent stuff. The Schneider (look it up) DA18-55 is too-often derided by those who haven't learned to exploit it. I bought my K20D with a DA18-250 instead, then got the DA18-55 later, and I use the 18-55 when I don't need the 18-250's reach. That kit lens is a minor gem. We have way too many threads on "alternatives" to the kit lens. I went through that phase and bought several "alternatives." Now I am more inclined to ask about "supplements" to the kit lens. For travel, there is nothing as light and compact as the kit lens with anything like the reach and quality at most travel shot apertures. None of my "alternative" zooms are nearly as light and compact as a kit plus a couple of pancake primes. Sometimes it seems like we are all afflicted with kitaphobia.

08-17-2010, 05:43 PM	#19
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by RioRico 'kit' lens (even though it's designed by Schneider, high-end lensmaker) OK, I'll bite. I did a quick search, and I found a cryptic and poorly translated article that appears to suggest the Samsung 18-55 is actually in some way other than name only a Schneider lens - with lots of disagreement among people commenting on what was really meant. But nothing suggesting Schneider actually designed the Pentax lens. Do you have a source for that claim?

08-17-2010, 07:20 PM	#21
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by UnknownVT and just where did you get that rocket from... cadet? Is it tomato or tomato? you don't have to ask, it's from NASA. therefore you should believe them.

08-17-2010, 07:50 PM	#22
UnknownVT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by Pentaxor you don't have to ask, it's from NASA. therefore you should believe them. NASA = Not A Smart Academy? Last edited by UnknownVT; 08-17-2010 at 07:59 PM.

08-17-2010, 08:04 PM	#23
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by UnknownVT NASA = Not A Smart Academy? nooooooooo.

08-17-2010, 08:10 PM	#25
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Internetpilot I love my 55-300mm DA-L kit lens, but the 18-55mm DA-L kit lens just wasn't very good. I replaced the short kit lens with a Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 EX and LOVE it -- night and day difference. The only caveat to the Sigma 18-50mm purchase is that it is now practically glued to my Pentax KX, which means my beloved 55-300mm rarely gets out of the camera bag. I won't exactly call the 55-300 a kitlens. honestly, it is better than the 18-55 (whatever version). I would think you will still be able to use the 55-300 when the condition calls for it, like shooting at longer telephotos. I had used mine practically more during the winter olympics here as it suits the events and scenarios, while my wide lenses were kept out of sight or were used only a few times.

08-17-2010, 08:31 PM	#26
ManhattanProject Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Midwest Photos: Gallery Posts: 221	The most obvious direct replacement choice if you're looking for the best is the DA* 16-50 which, I can tell you, is a nice upgrade. I just got the 16-50 and it's definitely sharper than the 18-55 WR, even at 2.8. If you're looking for a replacement that doesn't necessarily have the same focal range, then your options are almost endless.

08-17-2010, 08:43 PM	#27
alohadave Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Quincy, MA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,024	Originally posted by UnknownVT I think both lenses are good - there is also sample variations - if the 16-45 is better - I would hazard it is not night and day better. Otherwise there may be different rockets in space cadet school Try shooting the 18-55 wide open. The 16-45 will blow it away every single time with a sharper image and no vignetting. The 16-45 may be more prone to CA in testing, but in my experience, it really doesn't happen all that often.

08-17-2010, 09:12 PM	#28
UnknownVT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: USA Posts: 1,812	Originally posted by alohadave Try shooting the 18-55 wide open. The 16-45 will blow it away every single time with a sharper image and no vignetting. The 16-45 may be more prone to CA in testing, but in my experience, it really doesn't happen all that often. Both lenses wide open at their widest setting - dpReview of Pentax 16-45 dpReview of Pentax 18-55 please also look at post #11 which show both lenses wide open at their next widest setting...... Sorry I shoot the 18-55 at 18mm wide open all the time - there are plenty of examples in the long thread: Kx in Use Like I said both are good lenses - the difference is not night and day..... even though it may seem that way for the first set of test charts in the 18-55 favor.......

08-17-2010, 09:15 PM	#29
LucyGoosey Forum Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: New Jersey Photos: Albums Posts: 86 Original Poster	Thanks for all the advice. How do all those Sigma lenses compare with IQ on the 40mm da? Since the wife won't approve getting "yet another one of those lens things," do you think it's a good idea to consider trading my 40mm for something like a Sigma 18-50, f/2.8-4.5?

08-17-2010, 09:30 PM	#30
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by alohadave Try shooting the 18-55 wide open. The 16-45 will blow it away every single time with a sharper image and no vignetting. The 16-45 may be more prone to CA in testing, but in my experience, it really doesn't happen all that often. this is what I noticed as well when I tried both lenses. and I dont think that the dpreview chart really gives an accurate report. if people would rely mainly on dpreview chart, I believe that people will get the false sense of information as the dpreview charts would show that Pentax lenses are inferior with other brands, which I would think would cause an uproar from users of such lenses. it would be advisable to look for other photography review sites other than dpreview alone inorder to check for consistency of such findings and to try out the lenses as well. the danger is when people would only rely on one source which is a NO NO.