[chrism_scotland]

Thanks for the images, the hood doesn't really put me off the 12-24 and I know from what I've read that its meant to be a cracker of a lens with a lot of people saying its as good as some of the primes, the 12-24 range would more than cover the range of the 15mm and 21mm at a lower price, as it looks like around £800 for a DA15mm and DA21mm, that said I am still tempted by the smaller prime lenses... I think its the worst thing about the UK is that there are not a lot of local shops stocking Pentax lenses for me to have a go!

[chrism_scotland]

I know a lots been said about the relative IQ of the 12-24 versus the Primes and it generally being very similar but I was wondering if any of the longer Pentax lenses have similar IQ to their prime equivalents, particularly the 17-70?
Also can anyone comment on how big the 17-70 is in comparison to the 18-55 kit lens?

[civiletti]

Claims that zooms other than ultra-wides give equal or better IQ than the best primes in a given range are uncommon. The f2.8 mid tele zooms, i.e., 70-210mm, come closest. Primes from 31-100mm can be so good, a zoom has a near impossible task equalling them. I doubt a zoom will ever equal a great 50mm macro lens in IQ.

[chrism_scotland]

Thanks again, I'd rather go down the prime route and with having the 40mm already adding something at the wide end (21 or 15) would probably cover me off, I don't really use anything above 50mm very much so having a prime kit at 15, 21 and 40 would probably do for me.
That said the price of the 17-70 is quite good at the moment a little more than the 21mm but quite a bit cheaper than a 14 or 15mm.