Originally posted by 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?
People have been clamoring about this for years. When the K20D was announced, there was speculation that the 16-45 would be the kit lens.
Originally posted by 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.
Here's the thing, though: the Pentax 18-55 has fallen behind the competition. There are plenty of consumers and "reviewers" - that is, bloggers - who will gauge the camera based on the kit lens. These days, there are more folks buying DSLRs who aren't interested in "photography" so much as "picture taking". Folks will stay away if they become convinced Pentax has the worst kit lens.
Besides, IMO, a really could kit lens would prove inspiring, and maybe spur sales of additional lenses.
Originally posted by 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.
But neither Nikkor nor Canon lenses you mention are typical kit lenses, so Pentax does not need to compete there.