[RonHendriks1966]

I think that the image quality coming from the kitlenses 18-55 and 50-200 isn't up to the camera's performance for the K-5. People buy a >1000$ camera so they have to expect that there is a lens to it that does the trick.

So a new lens can be designed, but I see alsoo a already excisting option:
DA 16-45mm/f4 WR as a new kitlens

How do you think about it?

[adr1an]

I'm by no means a lens aficionado - so excuse my ignorance; but does the 'two stops from open' rule apply to the DA16-45 for MTF? if so.. then it might end up being a fairly neutral type scenario...

The drawback I potentially see as an uneducated user - You're loosing 10mm at the far end (which for a 'kit' lens, is probably important..) but only gaining 2mm more at the wide end. You are however loosing 1/3(??) of a stop over the kit lens up to 35mm - so only getting the extra benefit of the 1/3rd better stop from 40->45mm... But one might feel on a K5 with its better ISO capabilities, besides DOF, there isn't much 'loss' in that 1/3rd of a stop (given we are talking about lenses sold with current bodies - not what should have been sold on say a K20D....)

Now I realise the standard 18-55 has probably lousy IQ at 55/5.6 compared to the 45/4.. but for your 'fresh off the shelf' user - I still think the potentially lower stops from 18-25mm and the extra 10mm reach is a better 'sell'.

Ultimately I think the trade off between 'function' of the 18-55 versus the 'quality' that the 16-45 may offer is not worth it.. The 18-55 or 50-200 may not be the best lens for the buck, but it probably is the most flexible in terms of being 'an all rounder'.... and thats what ideally the 'included' lens should do - provide the most flexibility and function (and thus probably 'use') then allow the user to determine higher quality specific purposes lenses later (at a much higher price...)

But as I said - I don't know squat about lenses or the various IQ differences to be taken seriously....

[adpo]

If I was a new user with a whole ton of cash and a mindset to buy a k-5 with a kit lens, I think the best kit lens would be the 18-135mm. It covers basically everything a new user would shoot and give them a chance to see what focal lengths they prefer.

and while we're still discussing this theoretically wealthy new user, the next step would be to buy the 16-50 and 50-135 once they discover their love for the whole zoom range but need for more speed. Or the 60-250 if they want more reach and speed. Then after that, onto the mountain of prime lenses some of our fellow forum members have been fortunate enough to own

[Raffwal]

I think the whole kit lens idea is to provide the camera with a cheap lens that can be used to get some pictures. But anyone and everyone interested beyond that is expected to buy better ones.

[Verglace]

I think the whole kit lens idea is to provide the camera with a cheap lens that can be used to get some pictures. But anyone and everyone interested beyond that is expected to buy better ones.

I would agree, an alternative to this is to buy a body only package and purchase the more expensive lens you want at the same time so you have more bargaining power for a discount (generally the more you spend the more retailers are willing to provide a greater discount).

[Digitalis]

I had a Pentax 16-45mm f/4 ED AL once, and the impression I got was that it is a middle of the road lens, it isn't spectacular but it does passably well for most applications.

If pentax wants to play with the rest of it's competitors on equal footing than pentax is going to have to do something about the 16-50mm f/2.8 SDM - compared to the Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED VR and the Canon EF 17-55mm f/2.8 IS the Pentax lens is found wanting.

[Lowell Goudge]

The kit lens may or may not deliver up to the sensors capability but I don't think that should be a debated question. There is not all that much difference after all between the resolution between the k-r and k5 sensor resolution

But for those who get a K5 or any camera for that matter the decision to take a kit lens is one of use. Does it fit their needs yes/no. I took the kit lens with my *istD because the 18/35 FA-j lens gave me focal length options I did not have comin from film. But I bought body only for K10 and K7

[Rondec]

Much better to weather seal the DA 17-70 and use that. It already has the O ring at the base, it would just be a matter of putting some kind of sealing on the rest of the lens. 16-45 just seems to have a little bit too small a zoom range to be a kit lens replacement.

Maybe it would be too much competition for the recently released 18-135.

[Tonto]

I have to agree with an above suggestion, the 18-135 is perfect for the K5, WR covers a wide range of scenarios, fast quiet focus and arguably a step up over the 18-55 IQ. Still smallish the greater ISO can help out the relative slow speed of the lens.
My favourite 1st lens ( rather than go for a kit lens) from another brand is the Carl Zeis 16-80, pretty handy range bit big though

[freewheeler]

I even didn't go for the 18-55 for my K200d.
At first I used some old m lenses with the K200d
and bought the DA16-45 later.
Don't think of the 18-135 as a better alternative either.

[Skog]

My kit lens for the k.5 is the 18-135. And for everyday use I think it's superb! Very useful zoom range, WR, sharp images, fast and quiet AF (much better then SDM ) and not as heavy as a f2.8 lens. All in all it's a very enjoyable all-round lens and I'm glad I got it. It cant compete with my limited or DA* primes in terms of image quality, but I honestly never expected that of ANY kit-zoom. Once you start to crave professional quality it stops being a kit lens and start being a niche product in my opinion!

[Aristophanes]

The Nikon kit lens for the D7000 is the 18-105 VR.

The 105 has less optical compromises than the Pentax 135. The original 18-105 VR had a rep for soft at 18mm, but apparently that has been tweaked and it is not a higher quality lens.

Technically the 18-135 from Pentax is their top-end "kit" zoom. There is no way they would bundle the DA* series as those have much larger after-market sales margins than as a kit.

[JHD]

Rather than assigning a lens to a body and naming it a "kit lens", wouldn't it be nice if Pentax offered a rebate on any lens you desire? This way you could choose the lens you want - when you want it.

[Aristophanes]

Rather than assigning a lens to a body and naming it a "kit lens", wouldn't it be nice if Pentax offered a rebate on any lens you desire? This way you could choose the lens you want - when you want it.

They've done that on and off as a promotion.

I bought my K200D in July 2008 and got a rebate on an FA 50/1.4 for $40 from a coupon that came with the camera. The lens was then at CAN$170, so I paid $130 for it new. There were other lenses available for rebate as well.

[RonHendriks1966]

Well for one reason is that off and on you see a test (not hi-end test, but just for some magazine) and it's always the same. The camera is fine, but the provided kitlens is crap. So stop with this 18-55 lens, and the question is what else to provide?

A DA 20-100mm/f3.2-f4.5 WR would definetly be a very nice lens, but then there is a new lens to design.

We never had those coupons with our body's to purchase a lens at discount, but that would be also great.

At the start of the sale for K-7 and K-5 it was easier to buy a two-kit bag then a body-only.