[Foma2]

Hi. I finally got a Pentax DA* 16-50 F2.8 lens from CR Kennedy Australia for $880 , and my understanding it should be a perfect addition to my 50-135 DA* F2.8, which I purchased on Black Friday from B&H for $750 (+ shipping ~$100). Now, please do not call me an idiot , I am wondering what's the best way to use them ?
No, I am not kidding. It is a serious decision making for me when I am going outside

Let's say I am going to a playground with my son. Which one to take ? Probably 50-135, or 16-50 ?
Going to a zoo. 50-135 again ?
Taking pictures at a birthday party inside - 16-50 ?
Bigger party or major celebration in the park like - 50-135 ?
Sightseeing - 16-50 ?
Wild nature - 50-135 ?
Indoor sport - 50-135 ?
Outdoor spot in low light - 50-135 ?
What if gonna do sightseeing and there is a chance of taking shots of birds and/or animals - bothe 16-50 and 50-135.
Or let's say I am going to wildlife park - so 50-135 is a definite choice, but want to take a few panoramic shots - than 16-50 as well ?


And if I need both, what do you think about this exchange case :
Lowepro S&F Lens Exchange Case 200AW LP36260-0AM B&H Photo


Sorry for probably asking a kind of vague question. I appreciate if people will just share their thoughts on how they see these ttwo lenses doing their best.

Attached Images

 

[hoanpham]

Let's say I am going to a playground with my son. Which one to take ? Probably 50-135, or 16-50 ?

One of them, but they are different. I like 50-135 for portraits and bokeh, but 16-50 can also be used, esp when background should be blurred, but still in context.

Going to a zoo. 50-135 again ?

Yes or longer, prefer DA200 or DA300.

Taking pictures at a birthday party inside - 16-50 ?

Yes, mostly. 50mm is good for portraits too.

Bigger party or major celebration in the park like - 50-135 ?

Yes, mostly. and 50mm is wide enough for most cases.

Sightseeing - 16-50 ?

Definitely. My most used for sightseeing was FA35/2, also perfect for portraits, whole day.

Wild nature - 50-135 ?
Indoor sport - 50-135 ?
Outdoor spot in low light - 50-135 ?

Prefer longer, but that should be ok.

What if gonna do sightseeing and there is a chance of taking shots of birds and/or animals - bothe 16-50 and 50-135.
Or let's say I am going to wildlife park - so 50-135 is a definite choice, but want to take a few panoramic shots - than 16-50 as well ?
And if I need both, what do you think about this exchange case :

Just bring a larger bag if you need 2 lenses. it's easier to swap lenses, as you have room for 2 inside the bag while to dismount one of them.
Also I try to bring one lens only, either a zoom or a prime. Sightseeing = light weight, as you may walk many hours.
AF might be slow for sports, manual focus works better for me.

[asp1880]

I usually try to imagine how far away I'll be from my subjects.

Outdoors in open spaces I often take a long lens and set my "photographer's eye" (that sounds really pompous I know) to spotting tight, far shots that work well with a long lens. OTOH, if you want to shoot your kids, they'll often keep quite close to you. Take the short lens. Except when they run free on the playground. Take the long lens then. You might want to chase them around in the climbing frames. Take the short lens.

I also consider which kind of images I want to take. I might be going outdoors but if I'm in the mood for closeup work of course I take a short lens and I prepare myself for a lot of walking, bending and kneeling.

If you'll be shooting in tight spaces, typically indoors, take the short lens unless you have something special in mind.

Regards,
--Anders.

[VisualDarkness]

I would bring both, they both fit in a regular camerabag together.

[Rondec]

To me, the 16-50 is a standard walk-around lens, while the 50-135 is telephoto with a special focus on protraiture. You can use a 50-135 is a party setting, but you will end up with a lot more head and shoulder (or just head) shots of people with less "context." As to zoo lens, it depends on the zoo. You could certainly take shots with a 50-135 without problem, although they might need some cropping to "get them there."

[TenZ.NL]

Let's say I am going to a playground with my son. Which one to take ? Probably 50-135, or 16-50 ?

Mostly 16-50, allthough the 50-135 would get you some nice portraits

Going to a zoo. 50-135 again ?

Better take a 200 or 300mm

Taking pictures at a birthday party inside - 16-50 ?

Yep, 16-50

Bigger party or major celebration in the park like - 50-135 ?

Both, with 2 bodies.

Sightseeing - 16-50 ?

In urban surroundings, yes most of the time

Wild nature - 50-135 ?

300mm minimum

Indoor sport - 50-135 ?

Probably but a longer focal lenght would be better (depends on the sports and the location)

Outdoor spot in low light - 50-135 ?

See above but even more chanche that 135mm is on the short side

What if gonna do sightseeing and there is a chance of taking shots of birds and/or animals - bothe 16-50 and 50-135.

DA18-135 because by the time you swapped lenses the animal will be gone

Or let's say I am going to wildlife park - so 50-135 is a definite choice, but want to take a few panoramic shots - than 16-50 as well ?

Yes, or you can stitch.

And if I need both, what do you think about this exchange case :
Lowepro S&F Lens Exchange Case 200AW LP36260-0AM B&H Photo


Sorry for probably asking a kind of vague question. I appreciate if people will just share their thoughts on how they see these ttwo lenses doing their best.

Looks like a nice bag but is it also capable of holding your camerabody with the 50-135 attached?

Speaking from my own PoV: you can`t shoot everything. Either take your pick or bring the lot. So I usually take one lens and set my mind to that specific lens. If something comes up that requiers a totally different focal length, I don`t shoot it. I set my goals, choose the lens and forget about the other stuff (e.g. If I go wide, I don`t look for birds and visa versa).

For now: Just shoot both lenses as much as you can and master them. You will learn which lens to take for the occasion.

[lytrytyr]

Hi.

Welcome to the forum!

I am wondering what's the best way to use them?

Two bodies, one on each.
Like TenZ.NL said.

[VisualDarkness]

To me, the 16-50 is a standard walk-around lens, while the 50-135 is telephoto with a special focus on protraiture. You can use a 50-135 is a party setting, but you will end up with a lot more head and shoulder (or just head) shots of people with less "context." As to zoo lens, it depends on the zoo. You could certainly take shots with a 50-135 without problem, although they might need some cropping to "get them there."

I'm the exact opposite, if I just want one walk around lens I mostly bring something like my 55mm or longer and if I bring a secondary lens it's something wider.

[VisualDarkness]

Originally posted by Foma2
Indoor sport - 50-135 ?
Probably but a longer focal lenght would be better (depends on the sports and the location)

Originally posted by Foma2
Outdoor spot in low light - 50-135 ?
See above but even more chanche that 135mm is on the short side

Well, often wide lenses brings me more interesting sports shots but often tele is easier, so I usually switch under the games to get the variation.

Sigma 20mm F1.8



28mm, Pentax 17-28mm Fisheye



135mm, Sigma 70-200mm





(I really need to upload more recent shots, like sport shots with my DA* 300mm)

[TenZ.NL]

Nice shots, Visual!
Personnaly I would bring 2 bodies for such an event but everyone has their own shooting style offcourse

I`m under the impression that the OP is still exploring and devolping his style, that`s why I said "master those lenses"

[VisualDarkness]

Nice shots, Visual!
Personnaly I would bring 2 bodies for such an event but everyone has their own shooting style offcourse

Thanks, I have a lot of better ones, at least in my eyes, but I haven't uploaded them to flickr.
I would love a second body, but it comes down to money and prioritizing other gear so far.

[TenZ.NL]

Thanks, I have a lot of better ones, at least in my eyes, but I haven't uploaded them to flickr.
I would love a second body, but it comes down to money and prioritizing other gear so far.

Yeah, I know...choices, choices
I just kept my good ol`K20d as backup and use it with the lower focal lengths which helps to keep the ISO acceptable

[Foma2]

Thanks, everyone.
I can see that 16-50 would allow more context and can still be OK even for indoor sports.
50-135 is more for wild life (a bit short I know but can be still OK) and more portrait style shots, which can be OK as well at outside parties.

In regards to a second body, as a matter of fact I've got one sitting on a shelf doing nothing since I got a K-01 camera. It is my 3 year old Pentax K-x. Good camera but with appauling video capabilitis (almost unusable for me) and definitely not as good sensor as the one used in K-01, which IQ is almost in par with K-5.
So, I am wondering which lens to be hooked to a 2nd camera, i.e. to K-x ? IQ and video of what kind of shots I can sacrifice ? Also, K-x has good burst mode in raw, K-01 is pathetic with 1 fps (I know a workaround with braketing, or another option is to switch to jpeg but both are quite inconvenient to my taste).
It looks like when I need both lenses K-01+16-50 and K-x+50-135 is the best combination.

[fs999]

I use the 50-135 for macro (with extension tube), portrait and studio shots. It's sharp as a prime !

[Baard-Einar]

This is an intresting thread... I am thinking about selling mye 16-45 Pentax and my 28-75 Tamron and buy a 16-50.....