[bymy141]

My GP lens is the DA*16-50. I use it on a K-7 and a K-5.
I also have a kit lens (18-55mm) and a Tamron version of the DA 18-250mm.

Since I bought the 16-50mm the others have never made it on the camera again.
There is so much difference in sharpness between these lenses.
The results I've seen from the 18-135mm are not good enough for me, specially the edge sharpness.
The limited long range of the 16-50 is not so much of a problem, with sharp pictures and a K-5 there is enough room for cropping the pictures.

My travel kit is:
- K-7 & K-5, DBG4 grip
- DA* 16-50mm
- DA* 60-250mm
- Tamron 90mm macro
- Pentax 1.7 AF TC
- Metz 58 AF 1 flash
If we travel for more than a week and long distances, I take the 18-250mm with me as a backup lens.

My hiking kit is:
- K-5
- DA* 16-50mm
- DA 55-300mm
Macro extention tubes

I think if my DA*16-50mm ever breaks, that I'll get myself a Sigma 17-50mm f2.8.
The reported test results seem to be the best in that range.
Good price, pity it has no WR.

Bert

[Boris]

Presently I've Sigma EX DG 24-60/2.8 which is actually just fine in all departments (sharpness, OOF rendering, etc). It is just not wide enough sometimes. I'm slowly hunting down either Sigma 17-50/2.8 (latest model) or Pentax DA* 16-50/2.8. I've tried Sigma on my friend's Nikon D7000 and I'm very positively impressed with it.

If you're a prime lenses person, FA 20 and DA 21 are very good, where in my personal opinion FA 20 gets a little edge.

[aoleg]

The 16-50 seems like a good lens, just a bit short on the long end and quite heavy. Also, there have been some quality control issues in the past. Are these solved now?

No, they are not solved. My first sample (brand new from B&H) was very soft on the right. The second copy is fine, so I kept it.

A good copy of 16-50/2.8 is much better (and has a more pleasing rendering & colors) than an average copy of 16-45/4; however, there's little to no copy variation in the latter model, whereas the 16-50 can be hit-or-miss. At least it was for me. So, if you want safe, the 16-45 is a reliable and very inexpensive bet. If you buy one used, you'll probably sell it for about the same price later on if you ever want to upgrade.

[Ash]

Looks like a pretty good plan to me Bert.
Your current DA* lineup is as good as any, and the 55-300 gives you a compact, lightweight and still very good IQ capability for hiking.

[Chex]

If I had it to do over again, I would get the 16-45, not the 18-135..the hit the other end with a 55-300 and your done with basically 2 lenses which you can pick and choose your primes later.

[JeffJS]

Well, Have you decided yet? MY questions would be how much wider do you really think you need to go and how much do you really want to carry on those hikes? Also, has WR ever been a concern Before? That is, how did you handle getting stuck in the rain with your camera before?

I think with your current lens kit, the addition of either (as mentioned before) the DA12-24 or the DA15 would be fine choices. A less expensive option might be the 10-17 but that one is a fisheye zoom (perhaps just on the 10mm end?). As a general walkaround, though it's a heavy lens, I don't think you can do much better than the DA*16-50 for image quality.

That's my 3¢ anyway.

[yyyzzz]

28-70 f4 is not bad. I would keep it. If I were you, I would consider DA15, DA14 or DA12-24 to expend the width. DA15 is the lightest. Best for travel and occasional outdoor use. It is the lightest of all. DA12-24 is more expensive and it seems to have good IMQ. DA14 has a wider aperture. Alternatively, Samyang or a variant 14mm f2.8 is a good non pentax alternative if you need large aperture and manual focus.

[Glen]

I've used the Pentax DA 17-70 for two and a half years. It was always my main lens. However, just before the warranty expired the SDM went on it. Fortunately the two year CDN warranty had it fixed and back in about three weeks. However now, after very limited use since the return from repairs, the lens will not lock focus at above 60mm. I sent it back to Pentax and it will cost $220 (including return shipping) for the repairs. They mention a circuit board replacement in the estimate. In the lens reviews, many owners have mentioned this problem. The result is that it has two defects, the SDM and the long range focus lock.

Images were good to great and the Photozone review is pretty good but I found it inconsistent. I had many a badly focused image, even with the K-5. Personally I would not consider this lens; unless you want to buy mine (it comes with a new SDM motor and circuit board!).

I needed a walk around lens so I bought the new 18-135 and a dealer offered lifetime warranty. I'm curious if the new DC motor will last longer than the SDM, This lens is quiet, fast focusing, weather sealed, and reasonably sharp. It also has a quality feel to it. I think it is the ideal walk around lens. I can see myself adding a DA 15 or 12-24 someday and maybe a 55-300 if I'm using the long end of the zoom range. Overall I'm pleased with it. Maybe Pentax has learned from past mistakes.

[Biro]

I have to say... Despite owning both DA* zooms and DA Limited primes, I've gotten a surprising amount of satisfying use out of Pentax's consumer-grade zooms.

I bought the 16-45 on closeout for just under $300 about 18 months ago. I bought it only because it was such a good price and I wanted a back-up to my 16-50 just in case I had SDM problems. But, as it turns out, I enjoy the 16-45's color, contrast, sharpness and low distortion at 16mm. It's a tad soft at 45mm but nothing I can't deal with. Just remember, the 16-45 is at its longest physically when you are at its shortest/widest focal length.

The 55-300 has pleased me just as much. I recommend the original, non-kit DA version for its higher build quality. If you can get either lens at a good price, I say go for it. Neither is as big or heavy as a DA* zoom and the only thing they may lack is WR. I also own the 18-250. Sure, it's not as sharp as a prime and there's some barrel dstortion at 18mm, but it's surprisingly good from 28-200mm. I've gotten a lot of great shots with it.

Because these modest, consumer zooms have pleased me so much, I think I would be inclined to go for the 18-135 if I decided I wanted a single-lens solution with WR. The key is having realistic expectations for these low-to-mid level lenses. I am not poo-pooing my DA* zooms or DA Limited primes. But not everyone can afford them and the lenses I've described above may surprise you with how good and fun they can be.

[Spotmatic]

I've used the Pentax DA 17-70 for two and a half years. It was always my main lens. However, just before the warranty expired the SDM went on it. Fortunately the two year CDN warranty had it fixed and back in about three weeks. However now, after very limited use since the return from repairs, the lens will not lock focus at above 60mm. I sent it back to Pentax and it will cost $220 (including return shipping) for the repairs. They mention a circuit board replacement in the estimate. In the lens reviews, many owners have mentioned this problem. The result is that it has two defects, the SDM and the long range focus lock.

Images were good to great and the Photozone review is pretty good but I found it inconsistent. I had many a badly focused image, even with the K-5. Personally I would not consider this lens; unless you want to buy mine (it comes with a new SDM motor and circuit board!).

I needed a walk around lens so I bought the new 18-135 and a dealer offered lifetime warranty. I'm curious if the new DC motor will last longer than the SDM, This lens is quiet, fast focusing, weather sealed, and reasonably sharp. It also has a quality feel to it. I think it is the ideal walk around lens. I can see myself adding a DA 15 or 12-24 someday and maybe a 55-300 if I'm using the long end of the zoom range. Overall I'm pleased with it. Maybe Pentax has learned from past mistakes.

The SDM failed in my 17-70 too. It was repaired under warranty and sold. I recently got the 18-135 and actually like it. I got a 62 mm Marumi polarizer on flea bay for $42.95. No, it is not razor sharp but it is more than 'good enough'.

+1 on the DC motor longevity...fingers crossed.

[DanielT74]

I would suggest the 17-70mm. It's a very good lens, fast accurate focus, some weather sealing, sharp and contrasty. You can't do much better unless you go to the FA*28-70 and there you gain more microcontrast (3d feel) and better bokeh and lose about $700 over the price of the DA 17-70, weather protection and pick up a lot of bulk.