[Javaslinger]

Shooting the k7 with the 18-55 kit lens...

Staying with that zoom range or perhaps expanding the high range, what are my options for better glass?

Thanks,

Ken

[clockwork247]

Shooting the k7 with the 18-55 kit lens...

Staying with that zoom range or perhaps expanding the high range, what are my options for better glass?

Thanks,

Ken

pentax rely on 3rd party zoom for their zoom (always been sort of weak VS other brand, not a whole lot of choices).

so look into fast sigma/tamron/tokina zoom for replacement... all is probably gonna go around 300-350 a pop i think.

[pbo]

Don't forget Pentax 17-70mm F/4 SDM. Great lens, you can get it for about $350 maybe.

[SpecialK]

Shooting the k7 with the 18-55 kit lens...

Staying with that zoom range or perhaps expanding the high range, what are my options for better glass?

Thanks,

Ken

In that range is the Tamron 17-50 or some version of the Sigma 18-50, both f2.8. The next "expansion" is a Pentax or a version of the Tamron 17-70.

A slight shift of focal length in one direction would be a Pentax 16-45, or in the other direction a Tamron 28-75.

The Pentax 16-45 and 55-300 would make a good basic set.

[hcc]

You already have a zoom lens, hence some experience with a zoom. Therefore it would make sense that you consider next a prime lens. The strength of the Pentax lens line-up is the superb prime lenses: why not adding a prime to your collection?

The kit lens is not the strongest in low light, and a fast prime lens could be a good addition (eg about 50 mm and f1.4). With a fast prime, you will be able to take superb shots in low light conditions, and expand the performances of your K-7 to low light. (I have a K-7 and I am amazed by its abilities in low light outdoor shooting when combined with the Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f1.4.)

Next you should ask yourself if you are prepared to get a MF lens. Most AF lenses can be used as MF, but the focus ring is usually not as precise nor accurate as that of a true MF lens. You will learn a lot with a MF lens and it is worth to consider.

Some options for a fast prime lens include:
- Pentax FA50mm f1.4 (AF)
- Pentax DA* 55mm f1.4 SDM
- Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f1.4 (MF)
- Carl Zeiss 50 mm f1.5 (MF)

In summary: you may consider: (a) a prime lens, possibly a fast prime and (b) a MF lens to develop your skills.

I hope that the suggestions will help.

[Tommot1965]

OP

whats the budget

a 16-45 is a good step up from the 18-55 kit lens..at not too much more $

the Tamron 17-50 is a notch up again for more $ again

the Sigma 17-50 is the sharpest of them all..but alas more expensive. { not that much sharper than the Tamron though, but enough ]

dont go near a 16-50 DA * pentax..worst of the lot and SDM problems to boot

I take all my observation from first hand use with the 17-50 sigma/ Pentax 16-45..the rest is observed from DXO lens MTF resolution performances with 15 mega-pixel bodies ...

[JohnX]

What about the new 18-135?

[Ash]

dont go near a 16-50 DA * pentax..worst of the lot and SDM problems to boot
...

I wouldn't say this - I'd rather vouch for it being the best of the lot - only you have to be cautious over SDM malfunctions. It has without a doubt produced the best results from all my wide-normal zooms in all applications.

So from the kit lens you have 16-45, 17-70 (Sigma and Pentax versions), Sigma 18-50/2.8, Tamron 28-75 (if 28mm is wide enough), Tamron 17-50, 18-135 (clearly more versatile, but then so are the 18-250s - no longer in production), 28-70/2.8 (no longer produced), 16-50, then primes.

These are the commonly purchased AF lenses around - there are *many* others if you include MF lenses and lesser known third party manufacturers.

[Tommot1965]

I wouldn't say this - I'd rather vouch for it being the best of the lot - .

im intrested to know why that would be the case Ash?

everything ive seen and read about this lens. is that its not too sharp unless stopped down ..DXO tests seem to back that up...and with its SDM history...im curious?

[bdery]

You got lots of choices.

From Pentax:

18-135 WR
17-70
DA* 16-50
Or a prime setup (15, 21, 40, 70... pick 3, that would make a great setup).

In third-parties:

Tamron 17-50
Sigma 17-50
Sigma 17-70 (I own it, so I can comment that it's great!)

There are also superzooms if you're so inclined (no real improvement in IQ from the kit lens, but better range) : Tamron 18-270, for instance

Are you looking to improve IQ, range, speed, all of the above?

[bdery]

everything ive seen and read about this lens. is that its not too sharp unless stopped down ..DXO tests seem to back that up...and with its SDM history...im curious?

First of all, there has been no significant reports of SDM failures for over a year. And talking to sales clercks in two stores around town here, they had ONE return in the last two years. So SDM is NOT that prone to failure. Let's keep things in perspective.

Sharpness is one element of a lens's quality, and even there according to Photozone the 16-50 is great. But it is only one element. It's something relatively easy to measure, so many photographers put a lot of importance on sharpness, but it's far from telling the whole story.

[Tommot1965]

yes..but sharpness is about the only thing that cant be overcome in PP

and I don't believe a 16-50 is sharp...so Im gonna have to disagree with that....Photozone shows it sharp in the centre stopped down..but quite crappy in the edges..something that the DXO example backs up ..


screen captures of the lenses in question as tested by DXO....all tested on 15 mega pixel cropped format bodies, a K 20 and Canon D50

not that im trying to prove a point..LMAO

the 16-50 is also twice the price where I live than the other two :{

[paperbag846]

DA* is not a step up, it's a whole different beast. Heavy, weather sealed/SDM, and expensive.

The most logical step up would be the 17-70 SDM f4. Constant aperture and quiet autofocus. If you need a fast lens, I would go with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8, and keep the kit lens for wide angles.

The 18-135 would be your best bet if you want the maximum zoom range, and you don't find that the f5.6 aperture on your kit lens bothers you too much.

[Blue]

Pentax Glass without going DA* :

DA 17-70mm/4
DA 18-135mm WR
DA 16-45mm/4

I good copy of the older
FA 28-70mm/4 and F 35-70/3.5-4.5 are worth considering if you get a copy that hasn't been damaged. However, they give up the wide end compared to the DA series.

That said, I don't like zooms. Ironically, I like the F 35-70 better than any zoom below any of the * series that I have ever tried in Pentax glass.

[zoltan1983snapper]

I just got the 18-135 and it is extraordinarily small, light, quiet, and fast. I haven't examined the files yet, but the internet likes it rather better than the kit lenses.