[RickyFromVegas]

DA 15mm ltd. : Bought it for nature, street, architecture purposes. Looks great, performs marvelously, and have nothing bad to say about it. It is, however, not my ideal focal length. Going to sell.
DA 40mm ltd. : My current favorite. Perfect FL, IQ, Size for most of my needs and interest. This one is going to accompany me wherever I go. (although I'm contemplating about selling this one and getting 43mm. Just a thought)
FA 50mm 1.4 : Since getting 40mmltd, it is now permanently residing on K1000. Nothing bad to say about this lens.

Those are three of my Prime Lenses.
I never really had any use nor love for longer range, so I might try and get 70mm+ lens sometime in the future for "just-in-case" situations, but that's a maybe, sometime, who knows? kinda thing.

[jsherman999]

Nice thread!

OK.




DA 15mm f/4 Limited: Wanted wide + small + good, so I could take it a lot of places without hassle, yet not feel I've compromised IQ. Pentax came out with this, I was hooked (& mind controlled ) Use it for architecture, landscape, abstract stuff, events, kid snaps.

DA 35mm f/2.8 Limited: This fought a long battle with the FA 35 f2 and FA 31ltd... and won. A most versatile and brilliant optic, used for close-focus, walkabout, very seldom full 1:1 macro.

FA 77mm 1.8 Limited: The best lens I own. An aristocrat. Used for portraiture, outdoor short telephoto, some indoor usage in larger rooms.

FA 50 1.7: Sharpest non-macro 50 you'll ever shoot. Used for situations where I want something shorter than the 77.

Takumars 24 3.5, 50 1.4, 55 2, 135 3.5, 150 f4: Mostly shot for fun these days, not utility. But oh, the fun! Nothing MFs as good as a Takumar. If they made lenses with this feel and build quality today they'd be $1K lenses each.

M's 85 f/2: My favorite MF lens of all time. Very much like the 77, very small, the producer of many 'wow' shots for me. Used mostly for fun, walkabouts, idle kid-snapping.

K's 135 f/3.5: Not used much - not sure why, maybe just like the Tak version better.

A's 50 1.7: Keeping in case I sell the FA 50 1.7. A superb short telephoto, so sharp.

Vivitar (Komine) 28 f/2.8 WA Close Focus: A couple of us 'discovered' this lens for the digital age back in early '08, and it remains a remarkable little optic. Fantastic contrast and killer sharpness, my best 28mm ever. Used for idle fun, flora.

Helios Biotar 44-M-4 58 f/2: Sold first version to Gus, he made me regret it with his continual stream of great images from it, so I bought another. Doesn't get used enough, though.

Cosina 55 f/1.2: One of my favorite lenses. The Gaping Eye of Hell. Used for casual shooting followed by jaw-dropping wonderment at the crazy/beautiful images it can produce.

Lester Dine (Kiron) 105 f/2.5 Macro: Bought mint from a Dentist for a song. Sharpness/Bokeh/contrast = a 1:1 machine that's too good to leave at 1:1. Used for portraits, street, some macro.


(If anyone's interested in my Nikon-mount itemization, let me know )

.

[kenafein]

In order of purchase.


Tamron 75-300mm f/4.0-5.6: This was my first purchase other than the kit. It was a highly reviewed cheap telephoto on Amazon. I like this lens fine, but I haven't used it in awhile. My photography has improved since then. I need to pull this out and take some more pictures. I keep this lens because I can't afford upgrading to a DA 55-300 at the moment, and I'm not sure how much of an improvement that would be.

FA 50/1.4: This was my first prime lens, when I started photography and after reading various sources I thought "Oh I have to have a prime lens, must get this lens." It's a great lens so those sources weren't wrong. It was something to grow into and learn to appreciate. I doubt I'll ever sell it.

Takumars 55mm/1.8, 105mm/2.8, 135mm/3.5:I bought these to play around with manual focus and for some cheap quality lenses. I've sold off a few of my original stock, including my beloved 35/3.5. These are my play lenses, but I need AF for an active baby/toddler.

Helios 44-2 58mm/2.0: I picked this up on the cheap out of curiosity. It's currently my favorite portrait lens. Beautiful colors, interesting bokeh and fun fun fun. I love the funky russian aperture controls, very innovative.

Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8: What a great lens! It's big, but it does everything in its focal length very well. If I can only bring one lens, and I think I might need more than one focal length, this lens is a no brainer.

Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro: Another great Tamron lens. This lens does everything it's supposed to from portraits to macro. I really love it, but I don't get to use it as much as I'd like, the Tamron 28-75 has decent macro ability and I have it with me more often. I'm debating whether I should sell it or not. I could use the cash, but I'd really miss this beauty.

Samsung 35mm f/2.0 D-Xenogon: This is a really great lens. I bought this because I found a super deal on new old stock. I planned on saving up for a 31ltd, but the price was too good to pass up. This one has been married to my K-r since I got it. It's great for capturing candid's of my daughter and for general purposes. I enjoy it being a bit wider than my FA50. This lens is good enough that I sold my 35mm Tak.

Pentax-A 28 f/2.8: I bought this to replace my M version and to see if I preferred the 28mm focal length to the 35. I haven't done enough testing on that yet, but I do like this lens. I may sell it because the Tamron 28-75 performs so well, but having a nice light prime is always enjoyable.

[paperbag846]

so i almost think now that i may revise my thinking to 8-10mm on ASP-C, or 12-15mm on film as the minimum focal length range

Wow! That is very wide.

I had fun with the 10-20 I played with for a short while, but I have little experience with those focal lengths. Granted, there are instances where I find my 15 not wide enough (although, for the types of things I shoot, not so often).

I was also asking because of the 200mm thing. That makes sense (pretty long in my book). However on film I feel that 200mm would fall a little short for a do-everything kit.

Great comments .

[SpecialK]

Pentax 10-17. Technically, my first lens. I like wide-angle, and the fisheye effect is great when it works. Had the Canon 15/2.8 in my film days.

Sigma 18-50 f2.8. Did not get a kit lens with the K100D. This was highly-rated and relatively reasonably priced. Got on the same weekend as the 10-17 and K100D. I eventually sold it.

Sigma 70-300 APO. Got on the same weekend as above to make a 3-lens kit. It was "the only budget zoom worth buying" when I was shopping in 2006. It was OK on the K100D. It eventually died an aperture-blade death and sits on my closet shelf for no good reason.

Pentax 50-200. Cheap and small. Very slightly better IQ than the Sigma 70-300. OK on the K100D, fair on the K20D. Traded it and cash for a Tele-Tokina 800/8 bazooka. Sold that because I could not manually focus it with any chance of decent result.

Pentax 12-24. Decided wide and rectilinear would be nice. Very nice. Probably the most useful focal length I have.

Tamron 90. Thought I might try macros. Don't do many of them, but the lens is very nice, and is also a medium telephoto.

Pentax 55-300. Thought it would be an upgrade to the 50-200 and 70-300 mentioned above. It was. Sold it after I decided I had too many long zooms, and it was third on the depth-chart.

Tamron 70-200 f2.8. Wanted fast and long, and this has excellent IQ. Monopod is handy :-)

Sigma 150-500. Decide this over the old discontinued or new more expensive Bigma or the so-so 170-500. Wanted it for airshows and that type of thing. Good not great IQ (but not quite as good as the Tamron 70-200).

Tamron 28-70. Has good reviews and one came up used locally. Thought it would complement the 12-24. It's nice, but I hardly use it after getting the...

15/21/40/70 Limiteds. Got them all at once on a whim. Thought I'd try them for a time and maybe change the way I approach shooting. Like the IQ, don't much like the mechanics of using primes.

FA50/1.4. Got it used because "you have to have a fast 50". Actually, you don't. Rarely used it. Fairly poor at the big apertures, so I tend to use the tiny 40 (even though it's only 2.8) instead. Someday I'll put it in the marketplace.

Had an Adorama 500/6.3 and Vivitar 600/8 mirror in my search for a decent long (but compact) lens - neither of those was the answer.

[ManuH]

I'm trying to be rational in my lens choice. I try to not duplicate uses and to cover almost everything (except very long telephotos: too expensive, too big and just difficult to get in Pentax anyway).

I'll go from wide to tele:

Sigma 8-16mm
This is replacing my just sold 12-24mm (great lens but too much overlap with the DA15 and DA16-50). I like to go wide, ultrawide, this lens has no competition for that use.

DA 10-17mm fisheye
People don't like fisheye but I really love that one. It goes even wider than the 8-16mm and does macro up to 1:2. It's very small and versatile, at 17mm it almost looks like a rectilinear.

DA 15mm
Already covered by zoom and my 12-24mm was as sharp if not sharper in the corner. But I like its ability to focus closer than any other wide-angle zoom (except the fisheye) and above all it's compactness. I also realized that I was often locked at 16mm with my 16-50mm. And I just love the sunrays it produces without effort.

DA* 16-50mm
My workhorse, sharp, weather resistant, silent and fast. Great but it's a brick.

DA 18-55mm WR
I wanted a cheap WR zoom when walking with the kids. IQ is more than good enough for that use. And it's small and more fun to use than the 16-50mm.

DA 21mm Ltd
Like all the DA Ltd, it's small and highly enjoyable. I like the FOV, wide without being too wide.

FA 35mm f/2 Sigma 30mm f/1.4
The Sigma is replacing my FA 35mm f/2 (to go onto the marketplace shortly). I realized that I used the FA35 almost only for low-light. Otherwise I prefer to use the DA40mm. and f/2 is just one more stop than f/2.8 so I decided to get something really faster, the Sigma which does the job.

DA 35mm Ltd D-FA 50mm f/2.8 macro
I made the mistake of buying the D-FA 50mm because what I wanted in the first place was the 35mm Ltd. But actually I made 2 of my most successful images to date with the D-FA 50mm. It's a great macro but I prefer the FOV and the small size of the just acquired 35mm Ltd. The D-FA 50mm will have to go onto the marketplace shortly.

DA 40mm Ltd
My first Ltd, got on the cheap for 200$ 3 years ago. It's so tiny it's always in the bag. I love the IQ and made good pictures with it. Even if the 35mm Ltd is the more logical choice I will never sell it.

FA 50mm f/1.4
Maybe replaced later with the DA* 55mm but the size is too big and not enough better optically I think. I love the 50mm, I have so many good portraits with it.

DA* 50-135mm f/2.8
In the beginning of 2008 what I really wanted was a 70-200mm f/2.8 or the promised DA* 60-250mm f/4. But they were not available at all. So I settled on the DA* 50-135mm. Great lens in this range. But like the 16-50mm it's so big I prefer to use a prime whenever possible. Usually I'll use it for action shooting.

FA 77mm Ltd
Yes great lens but I don't use it that often. The focal length just doesn't click that much for me. For portraits I find that it flattens faces, maybe good for young models but for middle age people IMHO.

D-FA 100mm WR
This just replaced my sold D-FA 100mm. I like to have a good macro and it may replace the DA* 50-135mm when size is an issue. I got the WR mainly for the size, build and MF feeling.

DA 55-300mm
My longest lens. Not very exceptional but good enough and very light and compact. I may get something better later, a 50-500mm or a 60-250mm.

My wish list:
- a fast WA prime, maybe the Samyang 24mm f/1.4
- a fast cheap Samyang 85mm f/1.4
- maybe the 18-135mm to replace the 18-55mm when IQ is not primordial
- maybe replacing the 16-50 with the Tamron 17-50 because of size and weight
- maybe the Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8
- maybe a Sigma 50-500mm
- I'd like a 200mm macro or a Voigt 125 but I'm not doing enough macro to sunk that much money in it.

But I feel my setup is quite complete. I don't really new lenses, I need more time for shooting and using what I have.

[interested_observer]

Wide to Long...

• DA 10-17/3.5 - I like the wide end and this covers it nicely. I have taken some of my best shots with it. This, along with the 16-45 was my first upgrade. Somewhat of a specialty lens, it does take great images, but you can overdose on the FE.
• DA 12-24/4 - Complements the 10-17. Great IQ and sharpness. One of my favorites. I had to save quite a while for this one. Wonderful lens, with very well controlled distortion. That is one of the reasons I went with it rather than the Sigma 10-20 (the 8-16 was not out yet).
• DA 16-45/4 - Again complements the 12-24. Replaced the kit lens and this lens was it, until the 12-24 arrived. The three 10-17, 12-24 and 16-45 really complement each other with continuous field of views, extremely well.
• K 28/3.5 Shift - I wanted to see how this would work for panoramas. A very different lens with a learning curve. This is really a true specialty lens. I really wanted to experiment with this on flat panoramas, as opposed to rotating the camera around a nodal point to get the adjoining shots. I still am learning on this lens - even after a year.
• Contax Zeiss 28/2.8 Distagon - Tied for my best lens. Very sharp and great IQ. Yes between this and the 31, I have over indulged in this focal length. These have to be two of the best, sharpest, highest image quality lenses available. Each one has its own character - and that is why having these two lenses makes it so interesting. The hard decision is which one to use....
• FA 31/1.8 Limited - Tied for my best lens. Very sharp and great IQ. As said before on the CZ28, I have a wealth of glass. I actually purchased a DA21Ltd from an online used camera store, and this one showed up since they had the picture and serial number listed. I would have never bought it for myself, but it is a wonderful lens, that is difficult to completely describe with words. Its a joy to use. This lens actually started me on panoramas using longer focal lengths.
• A 50/1.7 - Tiny lens, sharp and fast. I don't use it nearly enough. This is my $12 special, and its really a nice lens. Really pocket sized.
• DA 55-300/3.5 - 4.5 - This covers everything for me up to 300. Does a wonderful job. I had a FAJ 75-300 and this replaced it. It does everything well. Its not a prime, but its light and portable. Fits in my backpack extremely nicely.
• Contax Zeiss 85/2.8 Sonnar - Wanted something very high quality, and sharp for distant panoramas. Having and using the CZ28 and the FA31Ltd together convinced me that I needed something a bit more than 50 and sharper with better IQ than the 50-300 to try to do some longer focal length panoramas. This is the lens. Its actually very small, same dimensions as the CZ28 which is a bit smaller than the FA31. It is sharp from wide open through the entire aperture range.

... No wish list - I just need to shoot more - shooting is learning. I have more than enough glass to learn from....

---

Last edited by interested_observer; 09-02-2011 at 06:56 PM.

[Roland303]

I'm currently trying to complete my basic lens lineup, covering the range from 8mm to 300mm. I actually photograph mostly at the extreme ends of the spectrum, super wide angle for landscape and architecture and telephoto for birds, mammals and some insects plus macro for insects and anything else interesting. Here's what I have so far and what is still on my list of need-to-get:

Sigma 8-16 My newest addition. I take a lot of photos at the wide end, mostly for landscape, architecture and wanted to go even further wider for more extreme effect. This lens looks like it will stay a member of my photo bag. It is nice and sharp, renders great colours. A little big though. A wider complement to my 16-45.

16-45 This was my first digital lens I bought along side my first DSLR, the K10D. I wanted something better than the kit lens at the time and it didn't disappoint. By far my most used lens, it's sharp wide open, has great colour rendering but the CA's in the corners can be a bit of a problem. I wouldn't say that I "enjoy" using the lens, it just gets the job done. Eventually want to replace it with the DA* 16-50 or Sigma 17-50. Part of my travel set but will now have to decide between this and the Sigma 8-16.

A 28/2.8 Bought because I wanted a small, light weight semi-wide prime. Not a bad lens but not outstanding either. Will be replaced with the DA 21 Ltd and FA 31 Ltd. Part of my travel set.

A 50/1.4 My first manual lens in the digital age, which I really like but don't use often enough. Used mainly for portrait (which I don't do much of) and street/walk around. Love it's small size. I'll keep the lens but eventually would like to replace it with the DA*55/1.4.

DA 70 Ltd I wanted to experience what the Limiteds were all about plus I wanted to have a great medium telephoto portrait lens. Well I'm hooked on Limiteds now and although I don't shoot many portraits, I love to use this lens for street and landscape shooting. A fun lens which I enjoy using. It's also part of my travel set.

A 35-105 Bought this lens as a place holder until I get the DA* 50-135 but like it enough I might not part with it. Again, love the small size but does have some weight to it and wished it had a built-in lens hood like the M 135. Renders wonderfully, nice colours, sharp and neat semi-macro function. Use it for anything and everything, very versatile. Part of my travel set.

FA 100 Macro My first true macro lens and my next most frequently used lens. Tack sharp wide open, great rendering. Used for all sorts of subjects from macro to landscape. Unfortunately it has taken a back seat to another lens (see below).

M 135/3.5 Like the above lens, bought this until saved up enough dosh for the DA*50-135, but I also wanted a medium telephoto for travel that was small and light weight which it is. Used for landscape primarily. Really hope Pentax eventually releases a DA 135 Ltd.

A* 200/4 Macro I can't talk enough about how great this lens is combined with the K5. My jaw drops to the ground when I see what this duo can provide. I just love the extra working distance I have in regards to photographing insects and spiders and how it isolates the subject from the background. Probably not as versatile as the FA 100 but it is becoming one of my most used lenses. Surprisingly small for a 200 lens but not a travel lens.

DA* 300 My other workhorse lens which I absolutely love. Construction, silent SDM, tack sharp and colours are what I like about the lens. A great butterfly lens and used mostly for birds, animals and landscape. I have lugged this lens with me up mountain trails and even though it can get heavy I'm always glad I did when it comes to photographing bears, mountain goats, wild flowers etc.

So that is my lineup as of now, nearly complete but missing out on a few key lenses which I hope to acquire in the next couple of years:

- DA 21
- FA 31 and/or Sigma 24/1.4
- DA* 50-135

Long term replacements:

- DA* 55
- DA* 16-50 or Sigma 17-50

Wish:

- DA 135 Ltd (or something near this range)
- DA* 20/1.*
- DA* 500/4

[TOUGEFC]

My lenses and why I have them.

DA15: Wide and small with outstanding IQ! Its in a league of it own, there is no other lens under 21mm like it, use it for tight spaces, landscape, architecture and good family fun.

Sigma 30mm f/1.4: love the 3d pop it gives images use it most for enviromental portraits.

FA43: Bought this MIJ copy brand new a year ago for $369 Love using it for landscapes and enviromental portraits.

A 50 f/1.7: Very rarely use it and its primary use for reverse macros.

DA*55: My latest lens, now i dont have to use my other lenses in the rain anymore but it surely is a killer portrait lens that I like ALOT. This lens doesnt get the respect it deserves, too bad for those who dis-miss it! They are missing out on this.............. BIG TIME!

FA77: My personal favorite, I use this lens alot, I almost shot an entire wedding just using this lens! I think that says enough!

[DirkG]

Why I have such and such lenses, or why I keep them ? There is a difference between the impulse to acquire and the decision to retain. Regarding the former, I have bought lenses (and then more lenses) driven by

- an initial total ignorance of what, for me, would be the most useful focal lengths, or other relevant features
- a mild obsession for ever better image quality
- a tendency towards systematicity (like wanting more lenses of a given series if your first purchase in the series is convincing)
- a curiosity for the unusual.

Inevitably, this leads to overkill. Now that I have a better idea of what I find useful, I am downsizing primarily on the basis of image quality (and convenience).

[Lowell Goudge]

Wow! That is very wide.
I had fun with the 10-20 I played with for a short while, but I have little experience with those focal lengths. Granted, there are instances where I find my 15 not wide enough (although, for the types of things I shoot, not so often).
I was also asking because of the 200mm thing. That makes sense (pretty long in my book). However on film I feel that 200mm would fall a little short for a do-everything kit.

Great comments .

I find that even with digital I use my 70-200/2.8 a lot. I have the first version sigma which is probably the sharpest especially wide open. Spen 4 years shooting my daughters stage performances in high school. Have probably 3000 shots that I would otherwise NOT have. The other advantage with the non HSM sigmas is the excellent telecoverters. The IQ does not seem to suffer with even the 2x, so this is part of my path to 400mm plus

When I travel the 70-200 stays home unless there is a planned wild life excursion. My minimum travel kit is the 10-20 and a tamron 28-75/2.8. To fill the gaps I take my FA-J 18-35 that came with my *istD

[Frogfish]

Why I have such and such lenses, or why I keep them ? There is a difference between the impulse to acquire and the decision to retain. Regarding the former, I have bought lenses (and then more lenses) driven by

- an initial total ignorance of what, for me, would be the most useful focal lengths, or other relevant features
- a mild obsession for ever better image quality
- a tendency towards systematicity (like wanting more lenses of a given series if your first purchase in the series is convincing)
- a curiosity for the unusual.

Inevitably, this leads to overkill. Now that I have a better idea of what I find useful, I am downsizing primarily on the basis of image quality (and convenience).

Oh this is me to a T !

The answers here have started to become just lists of people's lenses rather than how they started, the mistakes they made and what they would do differently (all important to someone just starting or building up, their kit).

I would think it important for me to say that I started by buying cheaper lenses and usually zooms (except for a 43 Ltd that I picked up for $200 before I even had a Pentax - really, that's indeed what switched me onto Pentax !) and I then progressed through several levels of steadily improving lenses before finally finding lenses I was satisfied with. For the most part I bought used lenses so I can't say that I lost money on those lenses and the better lenses I ended up with are a mixture of used and new. However I think the learning experience was valuable because I learnt a lot about the differences and what to expect from each lens.

Anyway I now have a lot of lenses (my definition of 'a lot' is very different to that of Rio and Digitalis !) but these are the ones I won't sell unless I make the step up to a better lens (which I've put in parentheses after the lenses I own). I think it is of course important to decide what aspects of photography interest you however I'm sure there are many others out there like me that find most areas interesting and worth experimenting with. I should also add that I have now gravitated to some MF primes and most of my favourite lenses are now primes - when I started out I couldn't imagine MF and Primes composing the better (and most used) part of my kit.

Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 (Pentax 12-24) - great lens, would only change for the Pentax.
Pentax 15 f4 Ltd - just bought it and love it already.
Contax Zeiss 28 f2.8 - brilliant MF lens comparable to the 31 Ltd.
Sigma 30 f1.4 - wonderful sharpness and low DoF. Sometimes gets a bad rap ... except by those who own it. Great lens !
Pentax 43 Ltd - what more can be said about this lens ? Wonderful rendering and just stunning sharpness.
Voigtlander 50/1.8 (VL 58/1.4) - little brother of the 58/1.4 ... and just as sharp with just as gorgeous colours and '3D' rendering !
Contax Zeiss 85/1.4 - another brilliant MF lens from Zeiss. Considered one of, if not THE, low DoF portrait lens around this focal length. Just superb.
Tamron 90 Di Macro (Pentax 100 WR - just for the WR) - just a superb macro lens and excellent portrait / street lens too. Has a just gorgeous bokeh.
Sigma 50-150 f2.8 - just a very useful, very sharp, very fast, HSM lens. Excellent for some of the sports pro shoots I have done as a back-up shooter.
Pentax DA*300 - for birding, sports etc. Wonderful lens, just incredibly sharp !
Pentax AFA x1.7 - wonderful TC that works with most of the lenses I want it to work with. Almost no IQ/sharpness degradation.

What I'd like to add :
Tamron or Sigma 70-200 f2.8 for sports.
Pentax 60-250 f4 - for when I need a flexible or long zoom to add to my primes.
Porst or Cosina 1.2 (MF) for the bokeh alone !
Various Zeiss (MM), Voigtlander & Leica (R) lenses converted to PK.

[Silverstierna]

The answers here have started to become just lists of people's lenses rather than how they started, the mistakes they made and what they would do differently (all important to someone just starting or building up, their kit).

Great comment, thats exactly the information that should accompany the lens list....
I wish I had more experience with diffrent lenses, but I had my Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 for a very long time before I started my Lens Buying (now with the A at the end), and my mistake was just the replacement for that lens. I purchased the Sigma 24-70 F2.8. Great lens but not at all what I needed in terms of what I actually take pictures of. I read many diffrent reviews about all kinds of lenses and when I finally made my purchase I was sure I had made the right one.... Reading some of the input so far in this thread would have made me think about my lens purchase in a diffrent way. The 17-70mm was a great first upgrade lens and If some one wanted to have just one lens a stick with it, that lens works really well for most situations. It did however make me lazy in the way I took pictures and I didn't really learn how to possition myself in perspective to the subject etc.
After making the mistake of purchasing the 24-70, I realized that I wanted something Wide, something Macro and something Long, my next step was to think of how/when/where etc, I take the pictures when I use the Wide range of the lens ( I could only compare by memory of my 17-70) then the Macro, then the Long.

My conclusion was this:

15mm - Wide and sharp ( although now I am thinking that I probably needed somthing wide and fast for indoors and for my kids, I guess once I have tried it out I'll know)
35mm Macro - Regular and Macro ( made a compromise I probably wanted the 31mm and the 100mm Macro but I had to settle for somthing less pricy, I am hoping that the 35mm will be a good allround lens for me)
50-135mm or 60-250mm Long and Zoom ( Love the 135mm but sometimes I feel its too short, purchased the 135mm for the 2.8 but I am now thinking I want the added range more than the 2.8 )

I just got my lenses 4 hours ago so I have not yet been able to use them, ( beside the initial ripping the package up, drooling and jumping around )
After I have used them for a while I will either realize that I made a mistake or that I didn't. Thats how it works for most people I guess but with this thread maybe people can get there a little sooner.... and having to spend way less money.

I only "lucked out" in being able to purchase some very nice lenses at the same time. My Kitchen renovation contractors didn't show up and I decided to do the work my self.... It worked out and I though I would pay myself for my very hard labour ( Give me a break, I am just justifying my LBA here....)

Anyways for people that have "lived and learned" that experience is priceless for someone that has not.

[Jason 407]

Here are my lenses and why I have them:

DA* 16-50: Didn't know what I was doing when I bought my first SLR (K10D), but thought I needed a fast wide-short telephoto zoom. This looked like a big improvement over the kit so I bought it.
FA 43: Ditto: No idea what I was doing when I bought my first kit. Someone told me I needed a fast 50, and this was the top-of-the line from Pentax at the time. I kind of wish I'd bought a 31 instead, but it was more expensive (but cheap compared to now) and bigger. This is actually my favorite lens and I'd have a REALLY hard time parting with it, even though it kind of doesn't fit with the ultimate kit I'd like to build.
K55/1.8: I wanted to play with some manual primes, and this one seemed to have a good reputation. I got a decent price and bought it. Now the aperture doesn't work right and I don't use it and wouldn't miss it.
Vivitar 28/2: I was looking for a fast 'normal' (that fast fifty I thought I needed?) after I figured out kind of what I really need or would use on APS-C. This presented itself for a decent price, but I'm not 100% sure I like it that much. I might look to upgrade this with maybe a SIgma 30/1.4 or the 31 ltd. An A28/2 would be nice, but I could get the Sigma new for just a bit more than I've seen that lens go for. The FA 35 might work, but I'd like more space between the 43 and the ~30mm.
Super-Tak 200/4: I wanted to play more with manual focus and I wanted to experience a Takumar. I like it but don't use it much. I think I'd be better served with something like the 50-200.

I recently bought the M150, but haven't received it yet. I wanted a slightly faster, much more compact telephoto and this looked like a good option. I also like that it uses the same 49mm filter thread that most of the shorter primes use.

I'm actually thinking I'd like to end with the 21/30/43/70/100WR/150 as my prime lineup. I'd also like to add the 15 in the future. I've got a long way to go to get there, though.

[Tonto]

Yay this is a good one for me as I don't have many lenses!

Sigma 17-70 - was my first lens I got with my K7, great alround lens, only thing I miss is maybe abit faster sometimes with the K7 but is great on our KX so lives on that alot.2.8 at 17mm is great for dinner get togethers with friends. 70mm is livable for portrait length so all around a great walkaround. Macroish ability is handy as too. 17mm reach is just enough.

Pentax DAL 55-300 - its a steal and goes to 300mm! If I had my time again would get DA 55-300 for its quickshift focus, it does make all the difference. Its also suprisingly small. One thing I really want on this one is a Rayonax closeup filter as I often do nature walks with this one and want to take shots of the odd flower.

Pentax A 70-200 - Got it initially to go with the 17-70, but now I take it out for macro shoots, has good close focus ability and renders in a word 'delicately'. Now makes a good second tele if we take out both cameras. I can see myself replacing this with a 70-200 2.8 one day though.

Pentax DAL 18-55 - Came with the Kx! Do use it abit as the 17-70 is pretty bulky and on a bright sunny day the 18-55 is 'fast enough' on the Kx. Prefer the colours over the Sigma and the body will lens correct which is important as my wife usually shoots straight to Jpeg on the Kx and posts online right away. Other plus is it is another wide if we both go out shooting, I'm keen to replace this with a DA18-135 as that would really work well with the Kx and great in yuck conditions with the K7.

Pentax FA31 - Do I need a reason? Got mostly for two person shots at night with the K7, The more I use it the more I find myself using 30mm on other lenses so I use it more!