Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-29-2013, 02:41 PM   #16
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 66
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by RKKS08 Quote
As a general purpose lens a WR which covers all standard focal lengths: the 18-135 WR.
135 is already 4x-5x magnification compared with the standard view, and anything longer would be mainly for sport events and wildlife.

For indoor without flash the sigma 1.4/30.

If you think IQ won't satisfy you (your remark about the 18-55 seems to indicate this), you may have to spend something more than the limit you set.
I didn't mean to suggest that the 18-55 wouldn't satisfy me, but instead that what I had been reading was that the 18-55 wasn't all that great and that while the 18-135 was a very nice lens it was no better than the new(er) Sigma 18-250. Soooooo, I figured i could kill several birds with one stone by getting the Sigma and then have some money to spend on a good prime. Now most of my information WAS from just googling until I happened upon PentaxForums, so obviously I am very much more interested in what all the folks here have to say based on real world experience, and thanks by the way to all of you for the information you are sharing, I greatly appreciate it and am learning a lot. But to re-iterate I didn't mean to bash the 18-55.

05-29-2013, 02:51 PM - 1 Like   #17
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by djam Quote
I didn't mean to suggest that the 18-55 wouldn't satisfy me, but instead that what I had been reading was that the 18-55 wasn't all that great and that while the 18-135 was a very nice lens it was no better than the new(er) Sigma 18-250. Soooooo, I figured i could kill several birds with one stone by getting the Sigma and then have some money to spend on a good prime. Now most of my information WAS from just googling until I happened upon PentaxForums, so obviously I am very much more interested in what all the folks here have to say based on real world experience, and thanks by the way to all of you for the information you are sharing, I greatly appreciate it and am learning a lot. But to re-iterate I didn't mean to bash the 18-55.
No worries, the Kit lenses get bashed all the time Seriously, the 18-55WR is a good performer with some range but if you really want the 18-250 then great. I have an old 18-250 that is a Pentax/Tamron and its a nice walk-around lens if I can only take 1 lens. Among the primes the new 35/2.4 and 50/1.8 are inexpensive, good performers, with the most modern coatings. I have each and they're both very nice little lenses. I prefer the 35 on the APS-C sensor as the 50 is a bit long IMHO.
05-29-2013, 02:55 PM   #18
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 66
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by boriscleto Quote
To help you judge what kind of FOV you want, check out the indoor pics in these 2 sets. They were taken with a 135/2.8 in rooms much smaller than an auditorium or gymnasium.

Beaver Lake - Wild Wings Raptors Apr 20, 2013 - a set on Flickr

In the second set I was much closer...but I still did some cropping.

Montezuma NWR & Audubon May 04, 2013 - a set on Flickr
Wow, those are awesome pics. Is that lens really under $300?
05-29-2013, 04:13 PM   #19
Veteran Member
tclausen's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,399
Alright, so as this question got promoted to its own thread, I'll repeat my suggestions here...

If OP wants to take mainly in-door photos of chorus events etc, as he wrote in one of his postings, then I'd humbly submit that an overriding criteria would be "fast fast fast lens" - so f/2.8 or better. In the Pentax range, that'd not be the 18-135, but rather the DA*50-135/2.8.

Or, being not a great fan of zooms at all myself, perhaps the 200/2.8 - although in my experience, that's on the long end for most human-sized (i.e., not organized in the Superbowl) events? [I've long cursed Pentax for not making a modern Ltd or DA* 135mm/1.8 prime - this is the reason...]

I'm not well enough versed in off-brand lenses to know if there's anything to recommend there, though....but I definitely agree with Adam that buying a "superzoom" is not going to do any modern Pentax justice, and likely not going to satisfy the OPs expectations.

05-29-2013, 04:32 PM   #20
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,296
QuoteOriginally posted by djam Quote
Wow, those are awesome pics. Is that lens really under $300?
I got mine for less than $100. It was part of a package that included an A28/2.8, A50/1.7, a Super Program, and an AF200T flash. I paid $190 w/ shipping...but that was 3 years ago. You might still be able to find deals like that if you look hard enough.

If you want the autofocus F or FA version you can expect to pay more than $300...

Last edited by boriscleto; 05-29-2013 at 04:47 PM.
06-02-2013, 05:30 PM   #21
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 66
Original Poster
Narrowed it down to.......

First off thanks everyone for your help. I have narrowed down my lens selections and want to get some thoughts on which way to go. I am thinking of getting the 18-135 WR and then picking up a cheap FA 100-300 for when I need some reach. Then I could shop around for a decent prime like the DA 35. The second option would be to get the 18-55 WR and the 55-300 DAL and then look for a decent prime.

As I mentioned in my earlier post I will be using this lenses in low light high ISO indoor school events, but also some landscape type shots as well. I am leaning toward the fist option because I like the flexibility of the 18-135 with the weather sealing when I am bicycling. However, I am concerned about the results I can expect from the FA 100-300 as compared to what I might get from the 55-300 DAL. Thoughts?

My camera arrived yesterday, and I haven't purchased a lens to try on it yet. What a terrible feeling! My paralysis by analysis is rearing its ugly head!!!
06-02-2013, 05:34 PM - 1 Like   #22
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,134
I think the 18-135 supplemented by a DA or DA-L 55-300 would do.
06-03-2013, 04:09 PM - 1 Like   #23
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
I would go old school and get a 28mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4, and 135mm f/3.5, all manual focus and top optical and build quality, for well under your budget. But that's me.

Really depends on your style of shooting and willingness to learn. The question cannot be answered without applying further constraints.

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!
camera, combo, k-mount, lens, lenses, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-mount lens variety...what should i get? chuck-e-cheese Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 05-07-2012 10:35 PM
need to replace my 18-55 kit lens... what should i get?? lguckert79 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 02-22-2012 04:49 AM
What should I get? freddykrueger Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 12-27-2011 08:57 PM
What 300mm Zoom Lens should I get? chukers Pentax K-r 34 03-10-2011 09:07 PM
What lens should I get jennia3003 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 09-22-2008 01:05 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:46 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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