[roliver]

Hi all, it's been a while since I've posted here but I still frequently follow the forum.

I bought my K-7 in April 2010 with the kit lens. However, last November, I bought the 12-24mm F4 which, quite frankly, is absolutely marvelous. This is now, by far, my favorite lens along with my Pentax-M 50mm F1.7, however, the kit lens is now going unused and it seems wasteful to keep a lens I'm not using.

What should I do with this lens, should I keep it for it's weather resistance, part-exchange it for an A 28mm F2.8 or even one of the new 18-135mm?

Any advice on this would be brilliant, because currently, the 18-55 just doesn't meet my needs at ALL.

Thanks, roliver.

P.S. Forgot to mention... still shooting a ME Super!!! DA lenses do interesting things on film bodies! :P

[bdery]

I own the WR kit myself. I don't use it that often, because my main lens is the Sigma 17-70, but having a WR normal zoom is invaluable at times. I do a lot of camping and outdoors sports, including under snow, and when the weather gets though, or when I want to travel light, I'm glad to have access to the WR lens.

If you don't use it in difficult conditions, then maybe you have no reason to keep it. The 18-135 is apparently a little better, but not that much (sadly). If you want a higher-quality zoom instead of a WR zoom, then look at other options.

[Kim C]

The value of the "kit" lens is so low in the UK even the WR that I would be tempted to keep it. SRS are selling them new for less than £60! I rarely use my 18-55 but there are times when I do prefer to take that for "snapshots" rather than "risk" one of the expensive lenses

Kim

[Ash]

I'm in the process of selling my stellar copy of the WR kit lens - I've had my fun with it on my travels, but I no longer have a use for the lens myself (other non-WR lenses can take its place, and I don't absolutely need WR now).

My point is that there's little point in hanging onto a lens that you know you won't use - put it towards a lens you will use - if that's an 18-135, save your money (it's considerably more expensive), or if you're into the 30mm or so primes, then you can consider the DAL 35 f/2.4, which is a small plastic-fantastic lens that has lots of soul - for just a little more than what the WR kit lens is worth.

[Aristophanes]

Backup lens. Worth more in that capacity than the effort to sell.

[kathyk]

If the 18-55 was part of your k7 purchase, I'd just pack it back into the box and keep for for when you sell/upgrade the k7. Also, since it is the WR model, you actually might need it at some point to spare your 12-24 in less then favorable weather conditions.

[pjthiel]

I'm with aristophanes and kathyk on this. My 18-55 WR has not been on the camera since I got my first couple of primes; and it's unlikely to make it's way back on unless I want single lens versatility.

Regardless, I can't see myself selling it -- it's worth more to me, despite the low usage, than the low $$$ I'd get for selling it on. It'll probably go with the camera (in as-new condition) when I eventually trade-up to a K-5.

[northcoastgreg]

It's worth selling if you can get more than $50. I sold my 18-55 v.2 for $80 about six months ago. I don't believe I'd have any chance of getting over $50 for my v.1 of that lens; so I still have it, even though I'll never use it.

You could also keep the 18-55 until the day you want to sell your k-7. Then the lens can be used as a thrown in to sweeten the deal.

[RioRico]

If you're into experimentation, the 18-55 is a nice test-bed for various filters and optical adapters. I bought my v.1 (CHEAP!) long after I assembled my kit, and that's what I mostly use it for. And even though I generally avoid bad weather, I'd like a WR version for wandering around in storms. As suggested, you might do best to keep it and bundle it with your camera when/if you upgrade.