Whats your backup WR lens?

Conqueror · 06-07-2013, 03:16 PM

So I've got mostly primes:

K-7
15mm DA f4
35mm FA f2
50mm M f1.7
100mm WR f2.8
55-300mm DA f3.5-5.8

and the 18-55mm WR kit lens

I'm quite happy with this setup and think that's a reasonable spread of focal lengths. It'd be nice to one day get the 31mm FA if I can manage to - probably because I like the FA 35mm so much.

At the moment if I need WR I've got the 18-55mm unless I turn to the 100mm.

The 18-135mm WR looks good, but will it leave one itching for the 50-135mm DA*? and then it continues you then want the 16-50mm DA*?

**Aristophanes** · 06-07-2013, 03:51 PM

I think the Pentax mind map for lenses sees the 18-135 WR kit pairing with the DA 55*/1.4, and the DFA 100/2.8 Macro.

What's missing is a DA WR wide angle.

carrrlangas · 06-07-2013, 03:51 PM

I thought the DA18-55 WR was my back up... Until I realized most of the photos I liked the best were taken with it (can´t switch to primes becouse of weather,etc)...
So I bought a DA16-50... Glad I did, quality is amazing
But the DA18-55 is so little and well biult, I don´t know if I should sell it or not...
DA18-135 is bigger than DA18-55 so I don´t see convinience...

Biro · 06-07-2013, 03:52 PM

When I gave my K200D to my niece, I bought her both a DA 18-55 WR and a 55-200 WR. But, for a long time, the only WR lenses I had for myself were the DA* 16-50 and DA* 50-135. The problem is, I don't use those lenses much at all. They haven't given me any trouble but they are big and heavy, and tend to get left home. YMMV. I tend to use my DA Limited primes, the DA 12-24 and the DA 55-300. Now, I do have the D FA 100 WR, which is a great but a very specialized lens. So, last week, I ordered a DA 18-135 from Adorama just so I could have one flexible zoom with WR and reasonable size and weight when I need it. It would have been nice if my DA 18-250 had WR.

Biro · 06-07-2013, 03:54 PM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

I think the Pentax mind map for lenses sees the 18-135 WR kit pairing with the DA 55*/1.4, and the DFA 100/2.8 Macro.

What's missing is a DA WR wide angle.

Yes, as is a 135-300/400 WR to go with the 18-135.

**crewl1** · 06-07-2013, 03:55 PM

The 18-135 is a great lens and my go to option for family acivities.
I believe it stands on its own.
The DA* lenses are in another class alltogether.

VisualDarkness · 06-07-2013, 04:21 PM

For zooms I have my 18-55 WR that I rarely use anymore since I have longer lenses and is more of a tele guy. My walk around now is mostly the Da*55/1.4 with the Da*300/4 for the unexpected wildlife appearances.

ikershaw · 06-07-2013, 04:48 PM

Originally posted by Biro

Yes, as is a 135-300/400 WR to go with the 18-135.

I second that motion! Lets hope that is the tele-zoom on the Pentax roadmap due to appear this year.

jimr-pdx · 06-07-2013, 05:07 PM

I was satisfied with the 18-55WR but wanted something faster in that range, so I picked up a 17-35 Tamron and found a great deal on a 50-200WR. That lens is very good but overshadowed by the 55-300; I did not like the latter on my K-01 and find the 50-200 a better fit for that camera. I find the 50-200 to be more consistently smooth with bokeh, and I'm OK with the reduced range for the reduced bulk. I had the 18-135 but don't want that much cash committed to a zoom so I traded it off for a DA70 and am quite happy

.

Docrwm · 06-07-2013, 05:39 PM

18-135 is a great all-arounder and I don't feel any need for a back-up WR lens. If they offered the 55-300 in WR THAT I would buy.

L33tGreg · 06-07-2013, 06:21 PM

I'm a prime guy, so I say DA*55. I love mine almost as much as my Ltds. It's a great lens, good (but some what long) focal length, quiet and well built. My biggest gripe with having it as my only WR option is that it is long, but I'm not out in bad weather often and since I'm used to "lens of the day" prime shooting, it's not that bad to have to deal with. Sure I might not get certain shots, but I will find others.

Biro · 06-07-2013, 07:21 PM

Originally posted by Docrwm

18-135 is a great all-arounder and I don't feel any need for a back-up WR lens. If they offered the 55-300 in WR THAT I would buy.

+1. While I'd love a DA 135-400 matched to the 18-135, I'd jump on a DA 55-300 with WR in a second.

Conqueror · 06-10-2013, 01:47 PM

Interesting point about the 50-135mm DA* being big and heavy.

It looks an awesome lens. But I guess in the long term the size will matter.

carrrlangas · 06-10-2013, 01:53 PM

I just got a DA16-50 to replace the DA18-55WR and I am feeling the difference in size and weight more than I´d like to.

Driline · 06-10-2013, 02:53 PM

Originally posted by Conqueror

Interesting point about the 50-135mm DA* being big and heavy.

It looks an awesome lens. But I guess in the long term the size will matter.

My WR lens is the DA*50-135. The weight does not bother me. I had the DA 18-135 WR but found the image quality at the long end suffers quite a bit. I traded it off to fund the DA*50-135. It was a smart move. There is no comparison between the two IMHO. You have a nice set of quality lenses and I'm afraid you might be disappointed with the IQ of the 18-135 or perhaps I had a soft copy?

06-07-2013, 03:16 PM	#1
Conqueror Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: UK Posts: 440	Whats your backup WR lens? So I've got mostly primes: K-7 15mm DA f4 35mm FA f2 50mm M f1.7 100mm WR f2.8 55-300mm DA f3.5-5.8 and the 18-55mm WR kit lens I'm quite happy with this setup and think that's a reasonable spread of focal lengths. It'd be nice to one day get the 31mm FA if I can manage to - probably because I like the FA 35mm so much. At the moment if I need WR I've got the 18-55mm unless I turn to the 100mm. The 18-135mm WR looks good, but will it leave one itching for the 50-135mm DA? and then it continues you then want the 16-50mm DA?

06-10-2013, 02:53 PM	#15
Driline Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,697	Originally posted by Conqueror Interesting point about the 50-135mm DA* being big and heavy. It looks an awesome lens. But I guess in the long term the size will matter. My WR lens is the DA50-135. The weight does not bother me. I had the DA 18-135 WR but found the image quality at the long end suffers quite a bit. I traded it off to fund the DA50-135. It was a smart move. There is no comparison between the two IMHO. You have a nice set of quality lenses and I'm afraid you might be disappointed with the IQ of the 18-135 or perhaps I had a soft copy? Last edited by Driline; 06-10-2013 at 03:01 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Whats the overall average lens review rating of your bag? Tongue in Cheek!	robbiec	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	71	08-12-2013 12:21 PM
K-30 WR body + spare battery + 18-135mm WR lens + 18-55mm WR lens = £738	jido	Pentax Price Watch	4	01-16-2013 04:36 AM
Whats your Kr's shutter count at now?	Classico	Pentax K-r	35	07-22-2012 11:42 PM
If your lens is not WR then your K5	kshapero	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	7	02-16-2012 07:04 AM
Whats your favorite camera/lens combo?	yeatzee	Photographic Technique	31	09-29-2010 12:36 PM

06-07-2013, 03:51 PM	#2
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	I think the Pentax mind map for lenses sees the 18-135 WR kit pairing with the DA 55*/1.4, and the DFA 100/2.8 Macro. What's missing is a DA WR wide angle.

06-07-2013, 03:51 PM	#3
carrrlangas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Joensuu (Finland) Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,761	I thought the DA18-55 WR was my back up... Until I realized most of the photos I liked the best were taken with it (can´t switch to primes becouse of weather,etc)... So I bought a DA16-50... Glad I did, quality is amazing But the DA18-55 is so little and well biult, I don´t know if I should sell it or not... DA18-135 is bigger than DA18-55 so I don´t see convinience...

06-07-2013, 03:52 PM	#4
Biro Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 1,200	When I gave my K200D to my niece, I bought her both a DA 18-55 WR and a 55-200 WR. But, for a long time, the only WR lenses I had for myself were the DA* 16-50 and DA* 50-135. The problem is, I don't use those lenses much at all. They haven't given me any trouble but they are big and heavy, and tend to get left home. YMMV. I tend to use my DA Limited primes, the DA 12-24 and the DA 55-300. Now, I do have the D FA 100 WR, which is a great but a very specialized lens. So, last week, I ordered a DA 18-135 from Adorama just so I could have one flexible zoom with WR and reasonable size and weight when I need it. It would have been nice if my DA 18-250 had WR.

06-07-2013, 03:54 PM	#5
Biro Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 1,200	Originally posted by Aristophanes I think the Pentax mind map for lenses sees the 18-135 WR kit pairing with the DA 55*/1.4, and the DFA 100/2.8 Macro. What's missing is a DA WR wide angle. Yes, as is a 135-300/400 WR to go with the 18-135.

06-07-2013, 03:55 PM	#6
crewl1 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Los Angeles, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,807	The 18-135 is a great lens and my go to option for family acivities. I believe it stands on its own. The DA* lenses are in another class alltogether.

06-07-2013, 04:21 PM	#7
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	For zooms I have my 18-55 WR that I rarely use anymore since I have longer lenses and is more of a tele guy. My walk around now is mostly the Da55/1.4 with the Da300/4 for the unexpected wildlife appearances.

06-07-2013, 04:48 PM	#8
ikershaw Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 43	Originally posted by Biro Yes, as is a 135-300/400 WR to go with the 18-135. I second that motion! Lets hope that is the tele-zoom on the Pentax roadmap due to appear this year.

06-07-2013, 05:07 PM	#9
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	I was satisfied with the 18-55WR but wanted something faster in that range, so I picked up a 17-35 Tamron and found a great deal on a 50-200WR. That lens is very good but overshadowed by the 55-300; I did not like the latter on my K-01 and find the 50-200 a better fit for that camera. I find the 50-200 to be more consistently smooth with bokeh, and I'm OK with the reduced range for the reduced bulk. I had the 18-135 but don't want that much cash committed to a zoom so I traded it off for a DA70 and am quite happy .

06-07-2013, 05:39 PM	#10
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	18-135 is a great all-arounder and I don't feel any need for a back-up WR lens. If they offered the 55-300 in WR THAT I would buy.

06-07-2013, 06:21 PM	#11
L33tGreg Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Charleston, SC Photos: Gallery Posts: 369	I'm a prime guy, so I say DA*55. I love mine almost as much as my Ltds. It's a great lens, good (but some what long) focal length, quiet and well built. My biggest gripe with having it as my only WR option is that it is long, but I'm not out in bad weather often and since I'm used to "lens of the day" prime shooting, it's not that bad to have to deal with. Sure I might not get certain shots, but I will find others.

06-07-2013, 07:21 PM	#12
Biro Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 1,200	Originally posted by Docrwm 18-135 is a great all-arounder and I don't feel any need for a back-up WR lens. If they offered the 55-300 in WR THAT I would buy. +1. While I'd love a DA 135-400 matched to the 18-135, I'd jump on a DA 55-300 with WR in a second.

06-10-2013, 01:47 PM	#13
Conqueror Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: UK Posts: 440 Original Poster	Interesting point about the 50-135mm DA* being big and heavy. It looks an awesome lens. But I guess in the long term the size will matter.

06-10-2013, 01:53 PM	#14
carrrlangas Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Joensuu (Finland) Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,761	I just got a DA16-50 to replace the DA18-55WR and I am feeling the difference in size and weight more than I´d like to.