Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-04-2012, 05:13 PM   #1
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,533
why aren't 50-135 more popular?

why isn't a mid range 2.8 like the 50-135 pentax lens more popular? was looking for a similar older auto focus and it just doesn't seem like there is one out there.
50-135 seems to be the most suitable range for portraits... If I look at something like a 70-200 2.8 they seem to be a big long and heavy.
anyone feel the same?
Is there an auto focus that would fit this range without selling my family?

thanks

01-04-2012, 05:19 PM   #2
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 43,141
IMO, because it's neither wide enough nor long enough. A 17-50 or 28-70 is a better walkaround, while a 70-200mm is a better telephoto. I have the 50-135mm but I've only had it with me on one trip.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

01-04-2012, 05:34 PM   #3
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,533
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
IMO, because it's neither wide enough nor long enough. A 17-50 or 28-70 is a better walkaround, while a 70-200mm is a better telephoto. I have the 50-135mm but I've only had it with me on one trip.
If you were doing more casual portraits or weddings would you get that lens out more often?

thanks
01-04-2012, 06:09 PM   #4
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
I have to agree with both Adam and Slip. As a travel lens it does not cut it, but I can see it for weddings

01-04-2012, 06:24 PM   #5
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
It's SDM

It's the same 'length' a 70-200 2.8 was on film, though. I remember the halycon days of 2008, before people started writing about SDM problems, everyone seemed to love this lens, be saving for it, singing it's praises.... To this day I think it may be optically the best zoom I've shot.

Hopefully Ricoh can work with Tokina again to come out with an updated version with an SDM replacement drive. IMO the 50-135 deserves better.
01-04-2012, 06:34 PM   #6
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
I have to agree with both Adam and Slip. As a travel lens it does not cut it, but I can see it for weddings
It's a little big for a travel lens maybe... or maybe not, depending on your idea of 'big'.

The focal length is fine for a lot of travel opportunities, IMO:

50mm:



135mm:






But I think it really shines as a portrait lens, or kid-chaser:





01-04-2012, 06:47 PM   #7
Loyal Site Supporter
drougge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Malmö
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 787
As has been hinted, but hardly stated clearly, the reason you don't find old ones is because it's supposed to be a replacement for 70-200 lenses from before we lost half our sensor (film) area. Not that I understand why 50-135 wasn't considered a desirable range on "full frame", but there you have it, same reason we don't have 35-90 zooms made for APS-C.
01-04-2012, 07:13 PM   #8
Senior Member
AOShep's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eastern PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 293
I use the 50-135 for almost everything. Partly because it is the best I have. There are times I do want more on either end of the focal length and will eventually add a fast wide and super tele. I have used this lens for portraits, a wedding, indoor and outdoor sports, and wildlife. If I can have only one quality lens, this is the one.

01-04-2012, 07:19 PM   #9
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626
I would have gotten it if the Tamron 70-200 wasn't cheaper. Unfortunately, the Tamron 70-200 is cheaper.
01-04-2012, 07:29 PM   #10
Loyal Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,409
I've seen great shots with the DA 50-135/2.8 but got the Sigma 50-150/2.8 instead: longer, not SDM, better warranty.
01-04-2012, 07:51 PM   #11
Site Supporter
slip's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,533
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
It's a little big for a travel lens maybe... or maybe not, depending on your idea of 'big'.

The focal length is fine for a lot of travel opportunities, IMO:

50mm:



135mm:






But I think it really shines as a portrait lens, or kid-chaser:




these photos are outstanding! awesome lighting , great subjects, nice and sharp... can't ask for much better!

thanks for sharing, got to go, have to rob a bank for k5 and a 50-135

post more if you have them
01-04-2012, 10:20 PM   #12
Pentaxian
rvannatta's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Apiary, Oregon
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,176
QuoteOriginally posted by slip Quote
why isn't a mid range 2.8 like the 50-135 pentax lens more popular? was looking for a similar older auto focus and it just doesn't seem like there is one out there.
50-135 seems to be the most suitable range for portraits... If I look at something like a 70-200 2.8 they seem to be a big long and heavy.
anyone feel the same?
Is there an auto focus that would fit this range without selling my family?

thanks
it's a really nice lens. I've got one, but -- I usually have a DA*16-50 on my camera, but right after I got it I tossed it in the camera bag
just 'in case'. --- It turned out that the 'just in case' was a herd of elk about 50 yards away staring at me:
<click photo to expand>


the good IQ made the photo usable, but I had to crop it a lot more than I like. I now carry a DA 60-250 in my bag. If I had had it instead
the photo would have been outstanding instead of usable as I wouldn't have needed to crop it in photoshop.

On the other hand, my daughter who shoots school year book sports shots, has found the 50-135 a very useful lens. The speed helps in the
twilight hours of school sports, and the objects of the photos are at a predictible range.
01-05-2012, 03:08 AM   #13
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by slip Quote
why isn't a mid range 2.8 like the 50-135 pentax lens more popular? was looking for a similar older auto focus and it just doesn't seem like there is one out there.
50-135 seems to be the most suitable range for portraits... If I look at something like a 70-200 2.8 they seem to be a big long and heavy.
anyone feel the same?
Is there an auto focus that would fit this range without selling my family?
I don't have the DA50-135 and I probably wouldn't buy one unless I got a BIG inheritance. C'mon and DIE, somebody! But yes, it's a great range for people-shooting. My favorite portraiture zoom is a heavy old M42 Sears-Tokina 55-135/3.5 that cost all of US$8 shipped. It's a great range for everything from half-body to close-facial shots. Especially of soon-to-be-deceased relatives with generous wills. But I digress.

Too bad slightly slower constant-aperture midrange zooms don't have a market now. You can either spend a pile on an f/2.8, or pay less for less desirable glass like a DA18-135. I guess you'll have to sell your family. I have a grandson I'm trying to trade for a set of Limiteds. Any takers? He's only a little hyperactive.
01-05-2012, 03:46 AM   #14
Veteran Member
Lloydy's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Shropshire, UK
Posts: 1,114
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
I don't have the DA50-135 and I probably wouldn't buy one unless I got a BIG inheritance. C'mon and DIE, somebody! But yes, it's a great range for people-shooting. My favorite portraiture zoom is a heavy old M42 Sears-Tokina 55-135/3.5 that cost all of US$8 shipped. It's a great range for everything from half-body to close-facial shots. Especially of soon-to-be-deceased relatives with generous wills. But I digress.

Too bad slightly slower constant-aperture midrange zooms don't have a market now. You can either spend a pile on an f/2.8, or pay less for less desirable glass like a DA18-135. I guess you'll have to sell your family. I have a grandson I'm trying to trade for a set of Limiteds. Any takers? He's only a little hyperactive.
I love my old Vivitar S1 24-48 f3.8, it's just about the most versatile lens I've used. But it's MF which some people don't want, for AF I like my F Series 35-70 f3.5/4.5 which is another very versatile lens with excellent IQ.
01-05-2012, 05:14 AM   #15
Pentaxian
hoanpham's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Strand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,366
Tamron 28-75/2.8, DA*50-135, FA50 is my standard kit for a photo session.
DA50-135 had been with me on every events like weddings, school shoots, etc, but not without flashes.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
auto, focus, k-mount, pentax lens, range, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax India - Why aren't you in potentially one of the largest markets in the world? bhairavp Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 08-15-2012 03:23 AM
If you aren't using it, zip it up! The Jannie Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 09-16-2011 04:35 PM
Old manual Pentax prices aren't (that) bonkers whojammyflip Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 09-14-2011 10:21 AM
K-x colors don't aren't vibrant olivemike Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 04-04-2011 04:53 PM
Newish K-x, took photos but they aren't there! Muse Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 35 11-01-2010 05:19 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:21 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top