[pcarfan]

I love your work, Sanjeevan, and it sounds like your mind is made up. The only thing that is important to consider is the cost of repurchasing, if you decide you want any of the lenses back that you have sold. The price of lenses has really sky-rocketed in the last three years, both for new and used stuff.

That is always what gets me when I think about selling a lens (I hardly ever use my DA 40). What if I should really want to shoot with it down the road? What if my shooting style changes and it would be the perfect lens for me?

I think by now you know what you like and what works for you and your probably best just going with that. None of the rest of us can tell you better than that feeling you have inside.

Thanks...true about prices going up, but it is a risk I need to take and once I think of something I act on it quickly and so I am already putting them for sale

Thanks

---

Last edited by pcarfan; 12-13-2010 at 05:55 AM.

[farfisa]

I was surprised to see your F 135 and FA 77 for sale (with so many of your PPG shots coming from those lenses) and that actually led me to this thread!

But after reading your post, I think you're making some good moves. I recently had to pare down my collection to make room for a new system and had to make some tough choices as well, including letting go of some old favourites.

For you though, I think the 12-24 would fit in very well, pairing nicely with the FA*28-70. You could then sell the 15 and 16-45 (and technically the 21, but it sounds like you like that lens a lot, and as others have pointed out, it would make a nice pair with the 43).

I've owned the Sigma 10-20, the Pentax 12-24 and the DA 15, but the 12-24 was my favourite. Despite having more CA than the Sigma, it just seemed to me to be a more versatile range--having 24mm on the long end was the clincher, as well as being much nicer looking and feeling than the Sigma (IMO).

Good luck with your sales and decisions!

[DogLover]

pcarfan:

I'm just wondering about your feeling that your interest in photography is waning. Do you feel on some level that photography is something that you've conquered and so you are ready to move on to a new challenge? Someone with your body of work could easily feel that way, I would think. (non-believers see his PPG page) I am in no way even close to feeling that way myself, I know I still have so far to go, but I'm just curious as to whether this is something that commonly happens to accomplished photographers. If it is, I may be in trouble someday as photography is the only hobby I've ever stuck with for very long.

[Ash]

Yeah! I need the 16-45 to be wider and I also think it will be much more compact (I should get it today).

I do care about lens sizes in most occasions, and that's why I am keeping the 21. This is my biggest issue with replacing the 15 with the 12-24. I sold the Sigma 10-20 for the 15, mostly for size. I also very much appreciate shooting with well constructed (metal ext.) lenses, and the 15 I am sure is nicer in that regard as well....I may hold onto this swap. My favorite focal length is 24 and that's another reason for me to consider the 12-24.

Sanjeevan, if 24mm is your one desire, then I'd suggest bypassing the 12-24 (if you're not going to use the wide end, and the 15 ltd will suffice for all your ultrawide shots) and just go for an FA* 24 if you can find one. The DA 12-24's strength is at the wide end, not so much at 24mm, or since the 21 is already with you, perhaps that is better size-wise if 21mm is close enough for 24mm for you...

Also if you're OK with changing lenses often, then keeping the 77 ltd and 135 rather than the 50-135 may be another option, particularly since size is an issue for you and you're going to be keeping your 60-250, with all that FL overlap.

[pcarfan]

I was surprised to see your F 135 and FA 77 for sale (with so many of your PPG shots coming from those lenses) and that actually led me to this thread!

But after reading your post, I think you're making some good moves. I recently had to pare down my collection to make room for a new system and had to make some tough choices as well, including letting go of some old favourites.

For you though, I think the 12-24 would fit in very well, pairing nicely with the FA*28-70. You could then sell the 15 and 16-45 (and technically the 21, but it sounds like you like that lens a lot, and as others have pointed out, it would make a nice pair with the 43).

I've owned the Sigma 10-20, the Pentax 12-24 and the DA 15, but the 12-24 was my favourite. Despite having more CA than the Sigma, it just seemed to me to be a more versatile range--having 24mm on the long end was the clincher, as well as being much nicer looking and feeling than the Sigma (IMO).

Good luck with your sales and decisions!

I appreciate your comments as you had owned all three of the wide angle lenses. I am leaning more towards the 12-24.

[Lowell Goudge]

My interest in photography is somewhat waning and I've been selling some lenses. Sold my FA31 as I use the 43 a lot more and I really don't need the 31.

I was trying to sell the FA* 28-70/2.8.

I've bought the 16-45 for casual shooting. I am getting the DA*60-250 as a gift but I already have the sigma 100-300 F4. So, I was thinking of putting the DA* for sale (I did and withdrew it).

I have the FA77 and F135, both of which are great but I don't use much. I know nothing can replace the F77, but I just don't use it.

I am now thinking of selling the FA 77, F135, sigma 100-300 F4 and keep the FA* 28-70 and DA* 60-250. I am getting the K-5 and I think F4 should be fast enough given the improved iso performance.

So, I will end up with DA15/4, DA 16-45/4, DA21/3.2, FA* 28-70/2.8, FA43, A 50/1.7, DA* 60-250.

I think this would be an ideal set-up for me, am I missing something? 300mm is not THAT much longer than 250 and the FA* 28-70 is really an amazing lens (only slightly inferior to the limiteds...I will have the FA43 if I really crave for that pixie dust rendering of the limiteds ).

I know only I can decide what I want, but thought it would be fun and useful to bounce this idea with the memebrs here....

In my opinion, and I don't mean to knock the DA 16-45 or the FA 28-70 but there still seems to be too much overlap

EIther F4 is OK or it is not, and in all reality, given the 60-250 I think the best compromise lens would have been the 16-50 F2.8 and accept the 10mm gap between 50 and 60mm. I just don';t see a lot of use for the FA lens, and if you need F2.8 the 16-50 is a better fit.

that also gets you a basic kit with 16-250mm coverage, in only 2 lenses that you can gop out and take on vacation with little greif.

As for the primes, I assume you have specific uses for those lenses and are comfoprtable with the results they give for your uses. For me, I have a combination of zoms and primes, zooms for travel, primes for play time so to speak.

[pcarfan]

pcarfan:

I'm just wondering about your feeling that your interest in photography is waning. Do you feel on some level that photography is something that you've conquered and so you are ready to move on to a new challenge? Someone with your body of work could easily feel that way, I would think. (non-believers see his PPG page) I am in no way even close to feeling that way myself, I know I still have so far to go, but I'm just curious as to whether this is something that commonly happens to accomplished photographers. If it is, I may be in trouble someday as photography is the only hobby I've ever stuck with for very long.

Thank you for the kind compliments. No, I don't feel like that at all...this may sound strange but after my visit to Yellowstone National Park (IMO, the most beautiful spot in the world) every other photo opportunity feels so pedestrian. I just cannot make myself go to the local parks or nature spots to take pictures as they all look blah, compared to Yellowstone. I cannot take artistic photos of routine objects and make them interesting - I just don't have it and I don't particualrly enjoy that style of photography either (well! I do enjoy seeing them, but not capturing them). I like to photograph beautful things in nature and try to capture those objects to the best of my abilities.

So, my photography is now going to be limited to the 1 week of vacation I will take to some exotic nature spots - photographing Alaska, Kenya, Arizona/Utah and all interest me VERY VERY much - if I can I will jump on a plane today

Other than this once a year event, it is just family snapshots.

[pcarfan]

Sanjeevan, if 24mm is your one desire, then I'd suggest bypassing the 12-24 (if you're not going to use the wide end, and the 15 ltd will suffice for all your ultrawide shots) and just go for an FA* 24 if you can find one. The DA 12-24's strength is at the wide end, not so much at 24mm, or since the 21 is already with you, perhaps that is better size-wise if 21mm is close enough for 24mm for you...

Also if you're OK with changing lenses often, then keeping the 77 ltd and 135 rather than the 50-135 may be another option, particularly since size is an issue for you and you're going to be keeping your 60-250, with all that FL overlap.

Ash,

I've had the FA*24/2 in the past and that's why I know it's my favorite focal length. I sold it as I didn't want to haul a large lens like that and wanted to get the 31/1.8 (So, I sold the 24/2 and the 35/2 to get the 31/1.8).

I actually like what I've seen of the 12-24, it's just the size.... and I had seen Benjikan mention it as his favorite lens....so, I think i should be fine with the 12-24.

I have to go to the post office now to mail the 135/2.8

P.S: Ash, also when I need a compact set-up, i will be more than happy with the 21 and 43 alone ...I've done this before and they work well toegther.

[pcarfan]

In my opinion, and I don't mean to knock the DA 16-45 or the FA 28-70 but there still seems to be too much overlap

EIther F4 is OK or it is not, and in all reality, given the 60-250 I think the best compromise lens would have been the 16-50 F2.8 and accept the 10mm gap between 50 and 60mm. I just don';t see a lot of use for the FA lens, and if you need F2.8 the 16-50 is a better fit. that also gets you a basic kit with 16-250mm coverage, in only 2 lenses that you can gop out and take on vacation with little greif.

As for the primes, I assume you have specific uses for those lenses and are comfoprtable with the results they give for your uses. For me, I have a combination of zoms and primes, zooms for travel, primes for play time so to speak.

Well! I am looking at it from a usage point of view. When I take my camera for family events and parties I will take the K-5 and the 16-45 for those 5X7 prints. The FA*28-70 is a huge lens.

For casual/serious landscape work it will be 12-24, 28-70 and 60-250...and for serious yet compact pakage it will be the 21 and 43.

When I took all my lenses to Yellowstone (the 15, 21, 31, 43, 77, 135, 100-300), I used the 43 the most followed by DA21 and DA15 and 100-300...the rest found very little use.

So, from the point of view of how I actually use the lens, this setup I think will work better.

[Ash]

Well lools like your mind's made up. Just bear in mind that although the 12-24 is relatively lightweight, it's an awkwardly large lens by virtue of its large front element and lens hood. That said, it's one of my favoured lenses - definitely a go-to landscape lens.

[Lowell Goudge]

Well! I am looking at it from a usage point of view. When I take my camera for family events and parties I will take the K-5 and the 16-45 for those 5X7 prints. The FA*28-70 is a huge lens.

For casual/serious landscape work it will be 12-24, 28-70 and 60-250...and for serious yet compact pakage it will be the 21 and 43.

When I took all my lenses to Yellowstone (the 15, 21, 31, 43, 77, 135, 100-300), I used the 43 the most followed by DA21 and DA15 and 100-300...the rest found very little use.

So, from the point of view of how I actually use the lens, this setup I think will work better.

Where in the mix did the 12-24 come from? I did not see you mention it before, but it was an obvious need (ultra wide).

If you have the 12-24 then I would ditch the 16-45 as it is totally overrun at the wide end by the 12-24 and at the long end by the 28-70. The 5mm gap is no big deal to bridge.

I just think you have one too many lenses, but that's your decision. Maybe the thing would be to keep the 28-70, and trade the 16-45 for something like a 17-75. That way, for the 5x7 prints you are well covered, but still have the big monster when you want the extra quality

[DogLover]

Thank you for the kind compliments. No, I don't feel like that at all...this may sound strange but after my visit to Yellowstone National Park (IMO, the most beautiful spot in the world) every other photo opportunity feels so pedestrian. I just cannot make myself go to the local parks or nature spots to take pictures as they all look blah, compared to Yellowstone. I cannot take artistic photos of routine objects and make them interesting - I just don't have it and I don't particualrly enjoy that style of photography either (well! I do enjoy seeing them, but not capturing them). I like to photograph beautful things in nature and try to capture those objects to the best of my abilities.

So, my photography is now going to be limited to the 1 week of vacation I will take to some exotic nature spots - photographing Alaska, Kenya, Arizona/Utah and all interest me VERY VERY much - if I can I will jump on a plane today

Other than this once a year event, it is just family snapshots.

I understand that completely and feel much the same way myself. I do have some places close-by that offer some pretty good opportunities, but eventually I will have taken all those photos. I totally feel the same way about photos of routine objects. I do not enjoy that style at all, either.

[farfisa]

Well! I am looking at it from a usage point of view. When I take my camera for family events and parties I will take the K-5 and the 16-45 for those 5X7 prints. The FA*28-70 is a huge lens.

For casual/serious landscape work it will be 12-24, 28-70 and 60-250...and for serious yet compact pakage it will be the 21 and 43.

When I took all my lenses to Yellowstone (the 15, 21, 31, 43, 77, 135, 100-300), I used the 43 the most followed by DA21 and DA15 and 100-300...the rest found very little use.

So, from the point of view of how I actually use the lens, this setup I think will work better.

I think you've got it now! Look forward to seeing what you do with the new kit. I see your 15 is already up for sale--shouldn't take long!

I'm not sure what winter in Ohio's like, but up here in Toronto, it gets pretty bleak. I usually end up doing some shuffling myself, realizing that I have 3 lenses that I only use when the cherry blossoms are out, or something like that.

I also appreciate keeping a lens with overlap just because you enjoy it for casual use--in your case it's the 16-45, in mine it was the Tamron 28-75.

[pcarfan]

I think you've got it now! Look forward to seeing what you do with the new kit. I see your 15 is already up for sale--shouldn't take long!

I'm not sure what winter in Ohio's like, but up here in Toronto, it gets pretty bleak. I usually end up doing some shuffling myself, realizing that I have 3 lenses that I only use when the cherry blossoms are out, or something like that.

I also appreciate keeping a lens with overlap just because you enjoy it for casual use--in your case it's the 16-45, in mine it was the Tamron 28-75.

I was from Toronto, but have been here for over 10 years now. I know Toronto winters and most of my family is still there, and i know you guy's are getting hitting pretty bad now. I'll be there for New Years, to get a taste of it

Yeah! I am very comfortable with the 12-24, 28-70, 60-250 zooms with the DA21 and FA 43 as back up for compactness, flavor and ultimate IQ. The 16-45 is just there for some casual shooting (just got it today ) and I may decide to replace that with something even smaller later.

[Pentaxor]

I was from Toronto, but have been here for over 10 years now. I know Toronto winters and most of my family is still there, and i know you guy's are getting hitting pretty bad now. I'll be there for New Years, to get a taste of it

Yeah! I am very comfortable with the 12-24, 28-70, 60-250 zooms with the DA21 and FA 43 as back up for compactness, flavor and ultimate IQ. The 16-45 is just there for some casual shooting (just got it today ) and I may decide to replace that with something even smaller later.

what happened to your A50/1.7? going to sell it as well?

well, maybe you can sell both A50/1.7 and DA16-45 and replace it with either K/A 50/1.2. then you'll be completely happy.

anyway, I'm going on the same boat as you. I'm going to replace 4-7 lenses by next year to finance a new lens and a new camera/ or body. limiting my lenses further down to what I use regularly. the M85 is on the list but I will try to see if it is worth keeping after I get the Sigma 85. the FA100/2.8 might be on the trading block as well since I have the S1 90/2.5 and FA135/2.8. tough decision, but I'm loving the bokeh and color more on the S1 90 for macro and portrait and the FA135 for action/candid/portrait (although I would miss out the macro level resolution and superior CA handling of the FA100). we'll see by next year what happens.