[eddie1960]

I'm sorry, but this sounds a little trollish to me?

Anyway, Pentax has the widest variety of sealed lenses available from any manufacturer. They range from the (cheap) 18-55 WR and 50-200 WR, to the DA * lenses (16-50, 50-135, 60-250, 55, 200, and 300). There is even a weather sealed macro (100 mm).

Beyond all this, having a sealed body is definitely worth something, even if your lens isn't sealed and as Marc said, you can put a baggy over your lens...

Actually Vincent the list of weather sealed lenses from Nikon is far larger now. it wasn't always that way but they seem to have made a concerted effort in the last few years, ranging from entry level (ie 28-300 3.5-5.6 vr) to the high end (600f4.0). most however just seem to have the most basic vaiant on WR (so a gasket at the body) and not the multiple seals of a DA* .

Film/Digital
14-24 f2.8
16-35 f4 VR
24 f1.4 AF-S
24-70 f2.8
24-120 f4VR
28-300 f3.5-5.6 VR
35 f1.4 AF-S
50 f1.4 AF-S
50 f1.8 AF-S
55-300 f4-5.6 VR
70-200 f2.8 (I and II)
85 f1.4 AF-S
200 f2 VR
200-400 f4 VR (I and II)
300 f4VR
400 f2.8 VR
500f4 VR
600f4 VR

DX Digital Only
10-24 f3.5-4.5
12-24 f4
17-55 f2.8
18-200 VR (I and II)
18-70 f3.5-4.5
35 f1.8
60 f2.8 AF-S Micro

[sterretje]

My WR kit is the 18-55 + 100 Macro.

That's how I composed my kit as well. But I usually don't carry the 18-55 around and use the FA31Ltd, even if it rains.

[Giklab]

You forgot the 16-85 AF-S DX, but it also only has an ass gasket. Few of those lenses would be a match for even the "simple" WR. And when one looks at the price...

[HockeyDad]

So as a relative newbie who's now completely obsessed with the K-30... can you more experienced folks give a little more detail about your techniques in the rain? I read, "Put a bag over it." and I wonder, does that involve taping around the lens hood so that the front element is still exposed or pulling it tight and shooting through the bag? Is moisture in the lens a big deal? Like if I used tape to seal around the mount and shot with a manual lens, would it be ok in pouring rain?

I know the questions may sound naive but until this thread, I've been thinking 100% weather sealed or stay on the porch.

[eddie1960]

tape around the hood or end of the lnes, don't cover the glass
moisture in the lens can lead to fungal growth so if they don't dry out properly it is not good. pouring rain I'd use a bag, if you would need an umbrella then you need a bag over the lens, if it's light rain you'd walk about in then tape at the base is fine, just wipe down things well (and if it does get we store the lens in a drying environment (ie with silica bags or bowls of rice)
Obviously the ideal situation is use a DA* setup or lenses rated WR, but there are workarounds as noted (mostly ugly but it's not a fashion competition)

[TER-OR]

Why not investigate whether anyone has the WR choices available for rental? That way you can decide which fits your needs before pulling the trigger. I like the 18-135 as a walkaround lens, and after renting the 60-250 I would not like to lug that brute around for any extended period.

[bdery]

You forgot the 16-85 AF-S DX, but it also only has an ass gasket. Few of those lenses would be a match for even the "simple" WR. And when one looks at the price...

If we include every lens with an o-ring, then Pentax's lineup is larger too. Even the 17-70 has a nice ring, but it's not labelled WR. Reviews from sites such as D P review do mention that some high-end Nikon bodies have seals, but they stress out (and Nikon does too) that they are not fully resistant. In Pentax world, to be labelled WR it must be fully sealed. Otherwise we could say that every K and M lens ever made is WR because it won't stop working under a downpour...

That's how I composed my kit as well. But I usually don't carry the 18-55 around and use the FA31Ltd, even if it rains.

When I know the weather is risky, I bring my WR kit, and put the 50 and 21 in a safe bag, to be used as needed.

[Andrew2208]

oh yes im now in a bit of a pickle i wanted the 2.8 tho :/ the nice wide aperture but i dont think 135 is enough zoom :/

[Anvh]

Sigma is also sealing some of their EX lenses.

[eddie1960]

Sigma is also sealing some of their EX lenses.

3 of which are supposed to come out in K mount

[Anvh]

I'm still hoping for the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8, would be a good lens to ad to the DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 =]

[eddie1960]

I'm still hoping for the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8, would be a good lens to ad to the DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 =]

It would be. I've been waiting on the wr 12-24 to come out in the K mount as they originally announced way back

[Anvh]

I never understood why Hoya never brought out the DA*11-16 f/2.8 Tokina has it and it looks like a wonderful lens.
Many users desribe it as prime like.

[eddie1960]

I never understood why Hoya never brought out the DA*11-16 f/2.8 Tokina has it and it looks like a wonderful lens.
Many users desribe it as prime like.

Not sure where that lens co-development deal is now. it may have ended. Hoya was too cheap to commit to that. lens returns are far less instant than camera bodies. higher end lens runs may last 2-3 years between production runs (or even longer on very high end models) to make the run large enough to lower overall average cost
It would be a really nice lens to have though good match for the 16-50 and 50-135, just need a DA* 135-400 to complete the field

[jatrax]

just need a DA* 135-400 to complete the field

+1 on that