[jmdeegan]

So, I just got back from a cruise (pictures will be uploaded for c and c, most aren't great, but I learned the k10d i think).

Some experiences and observations I had lead me to consider buying at least one new lens, possibly two....

1-I found myself wanting more reach than my longest (the 50-200 DA) can provide. It was not often, but that was mostly due to the fact that I did not pack the legit tripod with me on this trip, so I was working to minimize camera shake so I did not use the lens as much--but when I did, I was wishing for more. How much more? Don't know really. Was thinking I could go in the sub 300 range with a pentax, sigma or tamron covring up to around 300mm--but then, is only another 100mm worth a whole new lens?
Not sure I am ready, willing or deserving to purchase the Bigma at this point, but I do think having reach out to 400mm would be nice, if affordable.

2-At least in this vacation, I found myself using 3 lenses in rotation-the 10-17, which I love, the 18-55 and the 50-200. I think I used my 40 Limited maybe 5 times, and the 50 1.7 never came out to play. But of my rotation, I was sometimes either annoyed or concerned about swapping lenses (in part because it was a lot of beach locale, so that concerned me). So it had me wondering how much better say, the 18-250 would be, over what I currently have (meaning I'd possibly move from a 3 lens rotation down to two...).

3-Considering ditching the 40 limited (or the 50 1.7). Leaning toward the limited being the odd lens out because it should net me a decent amount in resale, and with luck it will help fund the lens I next decide on. Which could be a longer tele, or even the sharper 16-45 to replace the 18-50, which as far as I can tell is taking most of my shots right now

thoughts, suggestions, experience from those in similar scenarios would be appreciated. And just to give an idea of what I will use the lenses for---mostly family vacations, and when I travel for business (20-30 weeks out of the year). The business trips I would have more leeway on what I bring and what I can photograph, creatively speaking. I'd prefer not to break the bank right now (ie, no bigma), but I don't want to go so cheap when another 100 or 2 would be wiser.

thanks!

[jmdeegan]

right now, the ones I am kicking around:

upgrading the lens variety i have now (something to replace the 18-55, something to cover the 50-200), but that does those ranges better than currently available.

one new option is to go the tamron or pentax 18-250 route, get my desired extra reach (not a ton, but some), and avoid changing lenses as often-though i do love the fisheye, so that won't be avoided

or, since the price seems to be coming down on the 50-135, there's that possible option as well, except i have a hunch the bulk of my pics are being shot below that range at the moment.

any thoughts?
my curse is ill be very close to adorama and b and h this week....and everything ive read on the da* and the 18-250s have me thinking either, in their own right, would be good choices...

[philipweber]

I was in the same boat (no pun intended) and bought the Pentax 18-250 to replace my 18-55 and my 50-200. So far, it's been great.

I also really enjoy my 12-24 for wide angle but it sounds like you already have that covered.

My newest (and last for a while) are the 100mm Macro and the fantastic 31mm ltd. Prime...an amazing lens. That gives me a 4 lens rotation and really, all I'll need. You might really want to look at a prime, as long as the cost isn't prohibitive.

I hope this helps!
Phil

[TheWengler]

I think I'm going to move from the Pentax 16-45 and Tamron 70-300 to the Pentax 18-250 along with a flash. I also have the 50mm f/1.4 for portraits. The weakest point of the 18-250 is from 200-250. From your comments it seems like you'd be using that range a lot. It may not be the best choice if you expect really sharp photos there. Do you find yourself wanting a faster telephoto lens or just a longer one?

[jmdeegan]

Right now, I'd probably say a longer one--the ones I have, as slow as they may be, I haven't noticed enough that I'd complain about it. And a lot of "issues" I might have, are likely at least in part due to my early stages of learning my DSLR, and in terms of some of the trip pictures, the lack of a tripod (exacerbated by the fact that I was taking hand held shots,some zoomed to 200mm, from a moving cruise ship....).

If the weakest part of the 18-250 is the extra 50mm that I'd be liking, I guess the next question is, how weak is it?
Budget-wise and in terms of sheer convenience/laziness, the one-lens-takes-all would be great...but from a quality perspective, I don't know how much better the 18-250 would be over the existing assortment I have.

I do have 2 primes (the 40mm limited and the 50mm 1.7) and neither saw a great deal of usage on the trip. I think I had the limited on a couple times, I don't think I took the 50 out at all. Part of it was due to no filters on the lenses, and I was using my polarizer a lot, But more was due to needing/wanting to cover a range, not just one set distance.

I love the reviews and the recent price drop for the 50-135, except I think purchasing that won't help my issue, per se---still running just the kit under 50, and still not getting more reach over 200. So not sure that would be a wise purchase, as good as the lens may be.

then again, I hear the QC issues of the lenses under 50mm I was thinking about (from Pentax), so I am wondering if they would be wise moves too. Or if it's time to add a non-Pentax lens to my bag.

[jmdeegan]

Just as an example, I was thinking of adding something like this to my kit, as it is cheap, and some sample images I've seen from it I thought were quite good...though, I know you get what you pay for.....

Pentax smc P-FA 75-300mm f/4.5-5.8 AL (Silver) - Telephoto Auto Focus Zoom Lens |BeachCamera.com

but then I've got the funky lens overlaps issue, unless I do upgrade the kit lens with something else, like this
Tamron 28-75mm F/2.8 SP AF Macro XR Di LD-IF For Pentax, With 6-Year USA Warranty |BeachCamera.com

still some coverage overlap, and Ill give up a few mm on the low end.....

I need to review my pictures so far, because I think the tamron would hit my photo taking sweet spot. Is there an easy way to do that, sort by focal length in PS/PSE or anything else?

[JamesD]

It seems to me that there are compromises and trade-offs no matter what course you take. For me, the 18-250mm is perfect. While I realize that it might not be the sharpest lens in the bag at the extreme ends of its focal length, the fact that it covers that incredible range and gives me a one-lens-does-all convenience is more than enough to entice me to get one. We travel a lot and I want one lens on my camera without the worry of having to drag a lot of lenses around, without the worry of dust while changing lenses and without the concern of missing a shot because I was in the process of changing. These factors are over-riding ones for me but perhaps not for you. And from everything I've read, the lens appears to be reasonably sharp and have reasonable chromatic aberration control. AND the price is certainly within my budget.

[Finn]

If you don't mind MF, here are a couple:

KEH Camera: Pentax Manual Focus - Fixed Focal Lengths - 300 F4 SMC (77) WITH CAPS 35MM SLR MANUAL FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS

KEH Camera: Pentax Screwmount - Fixed Focal Lengths - 300 F4 SMC TAKUMAR (77) 35MM SLR MANUAL FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS

KEH Camera: Pentax Screwmount - Fixed Focal Lengths - 400 F5.6 SMC-TAKUMAR MANUAL APERTURE (77) 35MM SLR MANUAL FOCUS TELEPHOTO LENS

[jmdeegan]

I didn't think I would mind MF, but I think I am generally happier with the more current lenses.

I agree with James, in that I think the 18-250 would probably be good enough for the most part--though I still end up wondering/wanting for the longer reach, to 300mm or more.

So the 18-250 is still on the list, as are some other tamron and sigma lenses.

LBA is really dangerous.....

[travis_cooper]

Sorry for my ignorance, but what is LBA? Something about buying lenses? Lens Buying Addiction?

[jmdeegan]

either really good sarcasm or a really good guess, but yes, you are correct.

Considering I've only had the k10d a few months, I am on a really wicked pace in terms of LBA....at least, I think so.

[m8o]

Considering I've only had the k10d a few months, I am on a really wicked pace in terms of LBA....at least, I think so.

can't tell... you don't have your lens list in your sig or profile.

[roscot]

There is also the DA* 60-250 f4.0 coming out next spring. Should be a very good lens.

Have you sat and analyzed all your shots for most used FLs? If not, it would be a very useful exercise to help you narrow down your needs.

Try using Exposure plot. It is a free very useful bit of software.
You can get it here:
vAndel.nl - The Wega2 site

[TheWengler]

It seems to me that there are compromises and trade-offs no matter what course you take. For me, the 18-250mm is perfect. While I realize that it might not be the sharpest lens in the bag at the extreme ends of its focal length, the fact that it covers that incredible range and gives me a one-lens-does-all convenience is more than enough to entice me to get one. We travel a lot and I want one lens on my camera without the worry of having to drag a lot of lenses around, without the worry of dust while changing lenses and without the concern of missing a shot because I was in the process of changing. These factors are over-riding ones for me but perhaps not for you. And from everything I've read, the lens appears to be reasonably sharp and have reasonable chromatic aberration control. AND the price is certainly within my budget.

Is this lens soft on the wide end too? How much do you find you need to stop down to get a reasonably sharp image?

[jmdeegan]

I will try that software-that was something I was trying to find before. My suspicion is that most are under 100mm--not that it will stop me from wanting the longer reach either. There were some I needed better than the 200 could give me.....

I will update my sig/profile....

As for the projected 60-250 da*, I guess based on other comments, I'll believe it when it gets to market...but I am not keen on waiting that long for a bigger budget lens, and isn't it somewhat odd that they just recently deliver a 50-135 da*, and not long after would release another * lens which overlaps a good portion of the range? seems kinda odd to me