Need opinions on a great do-all lens.

**NaClH2O** · 08-07-2012, 10:25 AM

As others have said there ain't no such thing. That's the bad news. The good news is that 2 or 3 lenses can get you to the same place. Here is what I'd suggest: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 excellent 'walk about' lens. I happen to disagree with maxfield above, my copy is at the least sharp, sharp throughout the entire zoom range, depends on what you mean by "sharp". For the second lens I'd go with the original Sigma APO EX 70-200 f/2.8 the non macro version. Lens is big but handholdable and very very sharp. Also has very good bokeh for a zoom. Unfortunately Sigma no longer makes this lens but it can be found second hand. Be sure to get the non macro version as when sigma added the macro elements the lens was no longer as sharp. I paid $650 for my copy and it is some of the best money I've spent on lenses.

NaCl(there are many other combos out there but this will pretty much cover the range you asked for and the IQ of both lenses is excellent)H2O

**mishmatta** · 08-07-2012, 10:28 AM

I have a friend who shoots canon. she just purchased a 24-70mm 2.4 lens. It's as crisp as anything and the images are fantastic. It's a great walk around lens. I honestly wouldn't mind something along this line, and then purchase a few more primes.

I think in my heart I'm a prime girl. I have NO complaints at all about my old cheap sears lens. If I could pick up a few more primes, nice primes, and a walk around lens too......

Someone mentioned the Tamron 28-75.... That may be a nice walk around lens. Again, I'm hoping it's sharper than the junk lenses I have now that I hoped would be decent walk around lenses.

**crewl1** · 08-07-2012, 10:33 AM

Best results for a sharp zoom I have had has been mentioned already, the Tamron 28-75.

For this criteria

Originally posted by mishmatta

No regrets on spending the $

I can personally attest that the DA*300 and DFA100WR do it for me, but then these are primes.

DSims · 08-07-2012, 11:50 AM

Interestingly, I had a Promaster 7 AF24-200 XLD (re-badged Tokina AT-X 242 AF lens), and it was actually pretty good:

DSims's Album: Tokina (Promaster) 24-200mm AT-X 242 AF Shots - PentaxForums.com

However, it wasn't that fast, and I could tell it wouldn't quite deliver the more interesting images I wanted.

I have to agree with Adam. Start with an FA*85 (or FA77 Ltd) and/or a DA*50-135, and build you kit out from there. One (or both) of these lenses will give you IQ that you are very happy with, and will work for a large percentage of your shots. Next, oddly enough, you might look for the rather affordable F24-50/4. And then I find my K200/2.5 is really a favorite of mine. Why have average IQ when you can have beautiful images? These lenses are all worth the investment you'll make. Once you have the 85/77 and/or 50-135 you'll have the IQ problem solved, and I think the rest will become clear.

hoanpham · 08-08-2012, 04:44 AM

And close focus/macro capability.
You haven't mentioned limitation of price, size and weight. So I still hope that ultimate lens can be found.

After all, we do have a interchangable camera system. A zoom 24-200/1.7 will be huge, weight a ton, astromically price to make the first one, and who will buy the first copy?
What about a pile of primes to replace a perfect zoom?

wildweasel · 08-08-2012, 09:27 AM

Although it's not quite as sharp and doesn't render quite as well as some of my primes, I really, really like my Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 DG macro, the non-HSM one. I read the reviews stating that the Tamron 28-75 is sharper, but decided I'd miss the 4mm off the wide more than I would the 5mm off the long end. So far, it's worked perfectly every time I've used it and it's sharp enough to count eyelashes even when I take pictures of bands with it. If the Tamron's even sharper than that, then it's a sharp lens indeed. The Sigma is a big and heavy lens but it's very comfortable to use, and balances well on the K5 and perfectly when I add a grip as well.

subidoc · 08-08-2012, 02:32 PM

If you want AF, then you have excellent choices in 15 & 21mm (if you want to go that wide) and faster glass with 31mm, 77mm - all Pentax. Sigma has the 105mm prime and interesting zooms that are F2.8. You don't have to buy everything now, but space it sensibly, and you will be in great shape. If you are a MF fan, and want "newer" MF glass, your options will be limited to used VL and Zeiss lenses. New is in sparse supply, not impossible to get, but far more overpriced now than 6 months ago.

psychdoc · 08-08-2012, 02:42 PM

You will need 2 lenses to fit your criteria; your options are:

tamron 17-50 or 28-75 for the wider lengths
pentax 50-135 or tamron 70-200 for the longer lengths.

Personally I use the tamron 17-50 with the pentax 50-135. I hate changing lenses. So I carry a k2000 and k5 when I can. If I cannot I use the pentax 18-135 with the k5. Not as good as these other but good enough in good light/outdoors

Docrwm · 08-08-2012, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by psychdoc

You will need 2 lenses to fit your criteria; your options are:

tamron 17-50 or 28-75 for the wider lengths
pentax 50-135 or tamron 70-200 for the longer lengths.

Personally I use the tamron 17-50 with the pentax 50-135. I hate changing lenses. So I carry a k2000 and k5 when I can. If I cannot I use the pentax 18-135 with the k5. Not as good as these other but good enough in good light/outdoors

Sounds like you need a 18-250

psychdoc · 08-09-2012, 04:07 AM

Originally posted by Docrwm

Sounds like you need a 18-250

Personally I tried it for 2 weeks. Didn't work out for me. Image quality just was not to my taste. Many people seem to like it though.

**mishmatta** · 08-09-2012, 05:42 AM

So here's a question. The tamron 28-75 everyone keeps talking about - is there ONE revision? And the pentax 50-135....Same question.

A lot of times I've noticed people review a lens and say the first one is sharp, but the second version lost the sharpness. Or when you look up the lens, there's different versions of that lens.

A lot of good suggestions so far from people and I'd like to look into the lenses suggested, however I don't want to make the mistake of buying the wrong "version".

I'm ok with manual - seem to use it more than AF even on the AF lenses. I've been able to pick up some old lenses that are manual for a cheap price.

**maxfield_photo** · 08-09-2012, 06:03 AM

Originally posted by mishmatta

So here's a question. The tamron 28-75 everyone keeps talking about - is there ONE revision? And the pentax 50-135....Same question.

As far as I know there have been no revisions to either lens. And if you prefer to focus manually, I highly recommend getting a good focusing screen that gives an accurate rendition of the DoF of the wide open lens. I bought a Katzeye with the optibrite treatment, and I'm in manual focus heaven. Now if only the viewfinder were bigger.

**crewl1** · 08-09-2012, 10:07 AM

I also believe there is only one version of those two lenses.
Something to note about Tamron 28-75: it is not a very nice MF lens as the focus throw is very short and at least in my copy not real smooth.
Best to use it in AF, it is excellent for that.

eddie1960 · 08-09-2012, 10:39 AM

The Sigma 24-70 2.8 as wildweasel mentioned is also quite good as zooms GO. the new version (HSM is supposedly better than my non HSM one.
Personally i'd rather have the DA ltd trio in a small carry bag and get better iq across the board tan carry a heavy zoom. I use my sigma only when i need the flexibility of the zoom for event photography.

civiletti · 08-09-2012, 11:01 AM

The OP needs a Phantasm 16-250/1.2. It'a a *great* lens.

08-09-2012, 05:42 AM	#26
mishmatta Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 59 Original Poster	So here's a question. The tamron 28-75 everyone keeps talking about - is there ONE revision? And the pentax 50-135....Same question. A lot of times I've noticed people review a lens and say the first one is sharp, but the second version lost the sharpness. Or when you look up the lens, there's different versions of that lens. A lot of good suggestions so far from people and I'd like to look into the lenses suggested, however I don't want to make the mistake of buying the wrong "version". I'm ok with manual - seem to use it more than AF even on the AF lenses. I've been able to pick up some old lenses that are manual for a cheap price. Last edited by mishmatta; 08-09-2012 at 05:49 AM. Reason: Forgot

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Fast lens opinions?	Codazzle	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	34	09-07-2011 10:59 PM
Opinions on this lens?	Jesse	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	06-26-2011 08:58 PM
Opinions on a good travel lens	andysask	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	17	05-01-2011 12:12 PM
Pentax 50mm 1.4 lens...opinions	kooks	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	04-13-2011 11:14 AM
Looking for lens suggestions/opinions	Al_T	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	12-30-2010 06:55 PM

08-07-2012, 10:25 AM	#16
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	As others have said there ain't no such thing. That's the bad news. The good news is that 2 or 3 lenses can get you to the same place. Here is what I'd suggest: Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 excellent 'walk about' lens. I happen to disagree with maxfield above, my copy is at the least sharp, sharp throughout the entire zoom range, depends on what you mean by "sharp". For the second lens I'd go with the original Sigma APO EX 70-200 f/2.8 the non macro version. Lens is big but handholdable and very very sharp. Also has very good bokeh for a zoom. Unfortunately Sigma no longer makes this lens but it can be found second hand. Be sure to get the non macro version as when sigma added the macro elements the lens was no longer as sharp. I paid $650 for my copy and it is some of the best money I've spent on lenses. NaCl(there are many other combos out there but this will pretty much cover the range you asked for and the IQ of both lenses is excellent)H2O

08-07-2012, 10:28 AM	#17
mishmatta Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 59 Original Poster	I have a friend who shoots canon. she just purchased a 24-70mm 2.4 lens. It's as crisp as anything and the images are fantastic. It's a great walk around lens. I honestly wouldn't mind something along this line, and then purchase a few more primes. I think in my heart I'm a prime girl. I have NO complaints at all about my old cheap sears lens. If I could pick up a few more primes, nice primes, and a walk around lens too...... Someone mentioned the Tamron 28-75.... That may be a nice walk around lens. Again, I'm hoping it's sharper than the junk lenses I have now that I hoped would be decent walk around lenses.

08-07-2012, 10:33 AM	#18
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	Best results for a sharp zoom I have had has been mentioned already, the Tamron 28-75. For this criteria Originally posted by mishmatta No regrets on spending the $ I can personally attest that the DA*300 and DFA100WR do it for me, but then these are primes.

08-07-2012, 11:50 AM	#19
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Interestingly, I had a Promaster 7 AF24-200 XLD (re-badged Tokina AT-X 242 AF lens), and it was actually pretty good: DSims's Album: Tokina (Promaster) 24-200mm AT-X 242 AF Shots - PentaxForums.com However, it wasn't that fast, and I could tell it wouldn't quite deliver the more interesting images I wanted. I have to agree with Adam. Start with an FA85 (or FA77 Ltd) and/or a DA50-135, and build you kit out from there. One (or both) of these lenses will give you IQ that you are very happy with, and will work for a large percentage of your shots. Next, oddly enough, you might look for the rather affordable F24-50/4. And then I find my K200/2.5 is really a favorite of mine. Why have average IQ when you can have beautiful images? These lenses are all worth the investment you'll make. Once you have the 85/77 and/or 50-135 you'll have the IQ problem solved, and I think the rest will become clear.

08-08-2012, 04:44 AM	#20
hoanpham Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Strand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,366	And close focus/macro capability. You haven't mentioned limitation of price, size and weight. So I still hope that ultimate lens can be found. After all, we do have a interchangable camera system. A zoom 24-200/1.7 will be huge, weight a ton, astromically price to make the first one, and who will buy the first copy? What about a pile of primes to replace a perfect zoom?

08-08-2012, 09:27 AM	#21
wildweasel Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Plymouth Posts: 359	Although it's not quite as sharp and doesn't render quite as well as some of my primes, I really, really like my Sigma 24-70mm 2.8 DG macro, the non-HSM one. I read the reviews stating that the Tamron 28-75 is sharper, but decided I'd miss the 4mm off the wide more than I would the 5mm off the long end. So far, it's worked perfectly every time I've used it and it's sharp enough to count eyelashes even when I take pictures of bands with it. If the Tamron's even sharper than that, then it's a sharp lens indeed. The Sigma is a big and heavy lens but it's very comfortable to use, and balances well on the K5 and perfectly when I add a grip as well.

08-08-2012, 02:32 PM	#22
subidoc Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Somewhere near the middle... Posts: 325	If you want AF, then you have excellent choices in 15 & 21mm (if you want to go that wide) and faster glass with 31mm, 77mm - all Pentax. Sigma has the 105mm prime and interesting zooms that are F2.8. You don't have to buy everything now, but space it sensibly, and you will be in great shape. If you are a MF fan, and want "newer" MF glass, your options will be limited to used VL and Zeiss lenses. New is in sparse supply, not impossible to get, but far more overpriced now than 6 months ago.

08-08-2012, 02:42 PM	#23
psychdoc Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Bham Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 949	You will need 2 lenses to fit your criteria; your options are: tamron 17-50 or 28-75 for the wider lengths pentax 50-135 or tamron 70-200 for the longer lengths. Personally I use the tamron 17-50 with the pentax 50-135. I hate changing lenses. So I carry a k2000 and k5 when I can. If I cannot I use the pentax 18-135 with the k5. Not as good as these other but good enough in good light/outdoors

08-08-2012, 05:04 PM	#24
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by psychdoc You will need 2 lenses to fit your criteria; your options are: tamron 17-50 or 28-75 for the wider lengths pentax 50-135 or tamron 70-200 for the longer lengths. Personally I use the tamron 17-50 with the pentax 50-135. I hate changing lenses. So I carry a k2000 and k5 when I can. If I cannot I use the pentax 18-135 with the k5. Not as good as these other but good enough in good light/outdoors Sounds like you need a 18-250

08-09-2012, 04:07 AM	#25
psychdoc Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Bham Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 949	Originally posted by Docrwm Sounds like you need a 18-250 Personally I tried it for 2 weeks. Didn't work out for me. Image quality just was not to my taste. Many people seem to like it though.

08-09-2012, 06:03 AM	#27
maxfield_photo Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Cincinnati, OH Posts: 1,216	Originally posted by mishmatta So here's a question. The tamron 28-75 everyone keeps talking about - is there ONE revision? And the pentax 50-135....Same question. As far as I know there have been no revisions to either lens. And if you prefer to focus manually, I highly recommend getting a good focusing screen that gives an accurate rendition of the DoF of the wide open lens. I bought a Katzeye with the optibrite treatment, and I'm in manual focus heaven. Now if only the viewfinder were bigger.

08-09-2012, 10:07 AM	#28
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	I also believe there is only one version of those two lenses. Something to note about Tamron 28-75: it is not a very nice MF lens as the focus throw is very short and at least in my copy not real smooth. Best to use it in AF, it is excellent for that.

08-09-2012, 10:39 AM	#29
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	The Sigma 24-70 2.8 as wildweasel mentioned is also quite good as zooms GO. the new version (HSM is supposedly better than my non HSM one. Personally i'd rather have the DA ltd trio in a small carry bag and get better iq across the board tan carry a heavy zoom. I use my sigma only when i need the flexibility of the zoom for event photography.

08-09-2012, 11:01 AM	#30
civiletti Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Oregon Photos: Albums Posts: 1,435	The OP needs a Phantasm 16-250/1.2. It'a a great lens.

Need opinions on a *great* do-all lens.

Need opinions on a great do-all lens.