Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-27-2011, 12:47 PM   #16
Ira
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,218
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
I'm just curious if you would get much use out of the 18-135 past 75 ish mm in a bounce-flash situation.
When you're going for across the room shots, who's bouncing anyway?

I now think it's going to be the 18-135 for range, but I still can't make up my mind. I am very into doing candids, and that 135 reach is very appealing to me.

I know I can expect better IQ from other lenses, but as of now, I can't justify it against the FLs this gives me.

I apologize, because I normally hate these kinds of threads in the first place. It's just that as only my SECOND auto zoom, let only auto lens to begin with, I'm trying not to F it up.

03-27-2011, 01:38 PM   #17
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
I don't think the IQ thing will really matter. For this kind of photography it's going to be content content content and the 18-135 will make it easy to capture things quickly. Have fun!
03-27-2011, 01:44 PM   #18
Veteran Member
fotaki's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Greece and UK
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 309
Just to mention that I've found the 16-45 the most useful for candid party shooting - mainly due to the fact that you can get in 'tight' on the subject. I also think the constant f/4 aperture a bonus. If you're using a powerful gun then I'd expect you'll be working stopped down anyway.

The only downside with this lens would be the hood which intrudes using flash close-up. IMO the lens is a bargain in terms of IQ for the money.

I had occasion to shoot my grandson's sixth birthday party and because of 'house rules', I was obliged to restrict the use of flash. Nevertheless, I managed to get some passable shots (all except a couple taken under ambient lighting wide open). See -

http://www.flickr.com/photos/24601153@N08/sets/72157626365973024/
03-27-2011, 07:42 PM   #19
Veteran Member
sterretje's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Roodepoort, South Africa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,534
DA17-70 might be the right compromise. Just that bit longer than the 16-45. And it's my understanding that the IQ is on par with the DA16-45.

Not sure what kind of parties you're talking about (venue wise). But 28mm might well be wide enough if you go for the 28-75mm. I'm the family photographer and have used the FA31Ltd exclusively during the last Christmas and newyear's family parties. You have a 28mm, so I suggest that you try that out from a FOV perspective.

03-27-2011, 08:47 PM   #20
Veteran Member
wshi's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Illinois
Posts: 455
To me, indoor event photography means fast wide angle. I mainly use a sigma 18-50 f/2.8, and I find that I use it a ton at 18mm and wish it went a bit wider actually. 28mm is too limiting.

The 50mm (or 45mm) end though, I find to be sufficient. If it comes down to it, I think I'd rather shoot at 50mm and get a bit closer and enjoy a faster aperture than be further away with a 135 with only f/5.6. Just my two cents.
03-27-2011, 09:48 PM   #21
Pentaxian
mgvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: MD
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 827
I've been following this thread w/ interest, because I'm in a similar situation. I bought the K-x with the 18-55 and 55-300. I love the 55-30 and don't feel a need for anything more at the long end. I was not happy, however, with the results I was getting w/ the 18-55, and I ended up buying a used 16-45 in the marketplace. It really was a great step up, and I found that the extra width at the short end is noticeable and appreciated. But...
there have been a lot of times when I didn't have time or opportunity to switch lenses, and I really wanted more zoom than the 45 offered. As much as I like the 16-45, I'm thinking of trading it in for a 17-70 (Pentax or Sigma) or the 18-135. I'm hoping I wouldn't lose much quality in order to gain the greater telephoto capability. (And then someday get an UWA Sigma 10-20 or Tamron 10-24.)
So, to the OP, I think the real question is between a 17-70 and the the 18-135.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
af, aperture, flash, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, range, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
shoot out DA*50-135 v.s. A50 A*85 A100 A*135 Douglas_of_Sweden Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 42 12-11-2008 10:44 AM
Sears 135/2.8 vs. Pentax M 135/3.5 Alvin Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 04-07-2007 06:18 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:38 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top