[Penta_Prisma]

Hi everybody,

i just bought my first Pentax SLR.

k-5 silver.

Photography for me is an hobby. don't sure where this hobby will take me in the future but for the time being i'm far to be a professional photographer.

i'm studying on the books of Scott Kelby in order to understand better new techniques etc.

i will receive the camera in about one week and i dind't purchase yet any lens.

for my needs i suppose the best option also to learn slowly slowly every aspect of the k-5 is a zoom lens useable almost in every condition and for many purposes. so maybe a 18-250 or similar.

since i read bad reviews about pentax lenses ( 18-135 and 18-250 ) does someone can suggest something ? i would really like to buy the da 16-50 and da 60-250 but they are too expensive for me.

there some other option also from other brands ?

thanks in advance for your help.

Six

[Lowell Goudge]

just as a simple observation, perhaps you should have considered the kit lens, i.e. the WR 18-55, when ordering the body.

That is enough to get you started.

You can still pick up an 18-55 relitively inexpensively and while there are better lenses available, not in terms of value for money.

You can then pick up any ~50-300 zoom, including some older FA lenses (80-300) that are good performers, and relitively in expensive.

with these 2 lenses, you are into photography without breaking the bank. THen as you shoot, learn, and find what you like to shoot, start getting really high quality lenses to expand your capabilities.

If you are serious about learning it will take you 6 months to start expanding a little beyond what a simple 2 lens kit will cover adequately.

Once you have learned the limitations, then go out and spend. I would never recommend to anyone on a budget to simply go out and spend a lot, without first exploring what they want to shoot, and how.

[Penta_Prisma]

thanks Lowell for your reply.
I appreciate your advice and agree with you.
still prefer only one lens to start with, with big focal range.
Budget : 700 euro
please if possible come with brand and model name.
thanks
i don't know which lenses are compatible , Sigma? Tamron ? which one of those around 700 euro is considered the best option ?
looking for something like 18-200 and similar

six

[Lowell Goudge]

thanks Lowell for your reply.
I appreciate your advice and agree with you.
still prefer only one lens to start with, with big focal range.
Budget : 700 euro
please if possible come with brand and model name.
thanks
i don't know which lenses are compatible , Sigma? Tamron ? which one of those around 700 euro is considered the best option ?
looking for something like 18-200 and similar

six

just a few comments about a super zoom (big focal range) as you put it.

These lenses have a lot of compromises, which may lead you to quickly look for alternatives. They are slower and not as sharp as the more conservative designs of a 3:1 zoom ratio lens, and this is especially true for the transition from wide to tele.

Also, these lenses generally "suffer" from another behavior, (I say suffer but perhaps exhibit is a better word), specifically, at other than infinity focus, the focal length is reduced as you get closer. This is a characteristic of internally focused elements.

this has been discussed on the forum. In reality it should not be too much of an issue except when you want to really zoom in on something both relitively small and relitively close.

One additional thing, and everyone will have a different perspective on this (pun intended) As I shoot more, I often find myself taking only lenses below 85mm or above 85mm. If I am out doing wild life I go long, if I am city bound I go wide. My last several trips to europe for example I took a range from of lenses 10-85mm and nothing longer.

Since you will be adding lenses later, and no super zoom goes below 18mm, why carry all the additional weight of a super zoom over an more reasonable 18-70 for example. If you are going to spend $700 on something, that would be my recommendation.

[Penta_Prisma]

ok. i also read about all the cons of these lenses ( super zoom ).
i'm pretty sure though i will not need to replace it soon in case i'll purchase it.
i used for 1 month, almost everyday, by brother's camera, canon 550d with super zoom 18-200 ( also from Canon ) and really loved the results.
also i think it will take almost 1 year to "understand" well the k5.

so now the question could be :

is Sigma 18-250 F 3.5 - 6.3 DC OS HSM compatible with the k5?

if yes there will be important differences as per image quality if compared to :

pentax da 18-55 / 3.5 - 5.6 AL WR
together with
pentax da 55-300 / 4 - 5.8 ED

thanks for your help

six

[elho_cid]

Actually it is more the lens than the camera that contributes to image quality and there is no such thing as high quality 10x zoom. OK, there is an exception in case of Canon 28-300L but that is a very expensive one.

Forget about the zoom and get DA35. Or if you must zoom get something reasonable like DA16-45. Or DA17-70.

BTW have you seen the test results of the Canon EF-S 18-200?
http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/400-canon_18200_3556is?start=2

That lens is horrible. If you liked that results, you will be happy with Pentax DA18-135 or DA18-250 (if you can still get one)

[kenafein]

The Tamron 28-75 is an excellent zoom, that delivers great quality images. It's not really wide or long, but the range it covers is very usable, and it's faster than the DA 17-70. 28mm on your camera basically covers your field of view of one eye, which is great and natural. The 75 end takes great portraits and serves as a respectable macro. You could spend a year with that lens with no problem. If I were in a budget crunch, and I had to sell off most of my collection, I'd keep the 28-75.

[Lowell Goudge]

OK I see all the responses here, so my take on the whole issue is as follows

if you want a super zoom, go out and get it, but don't complain when you can't get the reach you want, can't get the shutter speed you want and have a dark viewfinder.

You are essentually turning the K5 into an expensive P&S, but that is not really my issue.

I understand the liking of the big zoom range, but as others have commented, there is a huge impact on quality over zooms of more conservative ranges. You give up on edge sharpness especially as well as speed.

In truth you will have mostly a good lighting camera, but again, not my issue.

The reason I liken this to a big P&S is that with today;s sensor technology you give up very little with a high end P&S/ bridge camera over a DSLR with a super zoom. in addition the bridge camera has usually a faster lens (due to shorter focal length) reducing the impact of High ISO noise. But again we don't want to hijack this thread into a DSLR plus super zoom vs bridge camera


As for the specific question you ask, the sigma HSM lens is compatible with the K5 in pentax mount (obviously), but I doubt it will match the quality of the 2 lens kit.

I see you giving up half a stop across the board, plus 16% of the focal length range along with a big increase in size, when you don't need focal length,

One question not yet asked is exactly what do you plan to do with the camera? Maube intended use is a more deciding factor than anything else

[bassek]

for my needs i suppose the best option also to learn slowly slowly every aspect of the k-5 is a zoom lens useable almost in every condition and for many purposes.

Welcome to the forum!

Let me sum this up, a superzoom is useable only regarding a large focus area. So for outdoor use in good light it is OK. Apparently the discontinued DA18-250 was a good compromise, most of the superzooms are not.

But when you try to take indoor pictures or in low light conditions you need another type of lens.

A lens "useable in almost every condition" to me means a fast (f2.8 or faster) lens like the DA*16-50, tamron 17-50 or 28-70 among others.

I had a good p&s superzoom, and was not happy, now I shoot primes or short zooms. The idea is to change lenses. And to buy them. Or plan to.

Seb.

[RioRico]

We all have our preferences, sometimes with reasons! I dislike the short+long zoom kits, like 18-55 plus 50-200 or 55-300, because I shoot a lot between 35-70 and I hate swapping lenses around 50mm. Sure, I *could* use a kit of my DA18-55, F35-70, and Tamron 60-300 (all quite inexpensive) but I'd still be swapping lenses and missing shots. The IQ of a missed shot is zero. So I'm quite happy with my DA18-250; I don't miss shots.

My kit-building strategy has 3 phases: coverage, speed, and character. For coverage, I have the Tamron 10-24, DA18-250, and Lil'Bigma 170-500. For speed, I have the FA50/1.4 and various old manual f/2 primes at 24-28-35-58-85mm, and 16/2.8 and 100/2.8 and 135/2.5. For character (and specialties) I have the DA10-17, MacTak 50/4 and Vivitar Komine 90/2.8 macro lenses, and lots of weird and unique glass I've accumulated. Try enlarger lenses on bellows, eh?

My most minimal K20D kit: a Tamron 10-24 for tight spaces; a FA50/1.4 for dimness or action or DOF control; a DA18-250 for almost everything else; and a Raynox DCR-250 close-macro adapter. Others have other preferences, but for me, these deliver.

[regor]

You could get the 17-70 or the 18-135. But the K5 + 31Ltd Silver in your case would be an awsome combo.

[Penta_Prisma]

Thanks everybody for your precious help and suggestions.
I have a lot to read ( books, forums, blogs, reviews ) in order to understand all the nuances of your opinions.
the goal is to slowly slowly discover and learn more and more about digital photography and my specific camera. i'm really a beginner, maybe an amateur. for the future i don't know.
but even if i'm a beginner i would like in any case to spend my money in the best way, that means not buying something that after 6 months i will not use anymore because i need something with better quality and better performance.
i live in a very interesting city so the will is to start to go out on the streets and try to catch one after the other of these interesting things available at my eyes here everyday.
hunting ............
i love to shoot human faces ( this is tha main problem, i don't want them to understand that i'm taking a picture of them , so the need of a super zoom ) and also urban pictures where i try to "see" hidden geometric figures in buildings, streets, poles, and so on.
if i had the money no doubt about pentax DA 16-50, DA 50-135 and DA 60-250, all together.
I also read very good things about 31 limited silver but don't know the price.
To tell you the truth my real and original question keep being the same.
if apart from canon 28-300L there is another super zoom lens around 600-900$ that can accompany me in my first steps with the k5 taking in consideration that i'm a beginner-amateur.
i really don't like the idea of swapping lenses all the time.
i understand quality will be affected especially under some conditions ( low light, indoor pics ) but for the moment my priority is to learn. and would like to learn shooting the kind of pictures i mentioned.
if some of you know a super zoom lens of reknown quality around my budget please let me know. if not i'll think of another option ( like all of you are suggesting ).
thanks

Six

[twitch]

To tell you the truth my real and original question keep being the same.
if apart from canon 28-300L there is another super zoom lens around 600-900$ that can accompany me in my first steps with the k5 taking in consideration that i'm a beginner-amateur.
i really don't like the idea of swapping lenses all the time.
i understand quality will be affected especially under some conditions ( low light, indoor pics ) but for the moment my priority is to learn. and would like to learn shooting the kind of pictures i mentioned.
if some of you know a super zoom lens of reknown quality around my budget please let me know. if not i'll think of another option ( like all of you are suggesting ).
thanks

Six

The DA 18-135 WR appears to be your best option.

[civiletti]

The DA18-55 is a decent lens. The Tamron 17-50/2.8 is excellent and much less expensive than the DA16-50.

[Penta_Prisma]

good evening everybody :

some of you suggested DA16-45 Or DA17-70.
with regard to quality and performances which one of them is the best also compared to the tamron 17-50/2.8 ?
and just curiosity the DA 16-50 really beat all of them ?

thanks