Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-25-2013, 10:52 PM   #1
Senior Member
mythguy9's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 276
1 premium WR zoom VS. cheap WR zoom-premium zoom combo

I am looking for weather resistant zoom for field work (mainly forests, mud and rain, sometimes enjoys wet beach salty photos).

Pondering about the below options within a budget of slightly more than $1000:

Option 1: Pentax DA* 16-50mm (or equivalent) for $1000-ish

Option 2: Pentax DA WR 18-55mm kit ($300-ish) + Sigma 17-50 EX (or equivalent; $700-ish) = total $1000-ish

I may go for Option 2, but any opinions from you?

11-25-2013, 11:06 PM - 1 Like   #2
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,719
I had the Sigma, but sold it after I compared it with the DA*16-50. No regrets despite a SDM failure necessitating conversion to screw drive. It's a great lens.
I can't for the life of me understand why you'd want to get two zooms covering the same range.
11-25-2013, 11:56 PM   #3
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Auckland, New Zealand.
Posts: 328
QuoteOriginally posted by mythguy9 Quote
1 premium WR zoom VS. cheap WR zoom-premium zoom combo
I went with the DA 18 -135 WR (better IQ than the 18-55) for "wet work" and reach and pair this with the Tamron 17 - 50 for the dry and low light.

If I had my choices again I would go for the DA* 16 - 50 because of the IQ, speed and WR/AW and then pair it with the DA 55 - 300, which is now WR, for extra reach.

For your budget, option 1 makes sense to me.
11-25-2013, 11:57 PM   #4
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,535
I am quite happy with my DA* 16-50. When I got a small inheritance and bought the K10d, this was the zoom that came closest in field of view to the FA 24-90 I used with the MZ-S.
DxO does marvellous work with the distortion and so on.

11-26-2013, 12:05 AM - 1 Like   #5
Veteran Member
mtux's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,388
QuoteOriginally posted by ak_kiwi Quote
I went with the DA 18 -135 WR (better IQ than the 18-55) for "wet work" and reach and pair this with the Tamron 17 - 50 for the dry and low light.
I did the same thing, and agree to go for DA* instead
11-26-2013, 12:27 AM   #6
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Auckland, New Zealand.
Posts: 328
QuoteOriginally posted by mtux Quote
I did the same thing, and agree to go for DA* instead
Hmm - Thinking about that the DA* 16-50 may fit my needs better than the new 20-40 I was looking at....
11-26-2013, 01:22 AM   #7
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 931
Go for the DA*16-50 or the DA18-135. I have both. DA* for work and 18-135 for holidays.
11-26-2013, 03:04 AM   #8
Senior Member
mythguy9's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 276
Original Poster
Thank you all. It seems I have more reason to go for da* 16-50. Gonna save money for a while first. Cheers!

11-26-2013, 03:05 AM   #9
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Southern California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,181
Go for the DA*16-50; it's a good lens with very nice IQ for a zoom.

If you don't mind having them shipped overseas, Borrowlenses.com has them used if you want to save a few hundred dollars - about the same price I paid for a used one from a private party a couple of years ago. Or perhaps there will be a good sale on Friday!
11-26-2013, 03:05 AM   #10
Pentaxian
Heie's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 960
QuoteOriginally posted by felixkh Quote
Go for the DA*16-50 or the DA18-135. I have both. DA* for work and 18-135 for holidays.
Ditto.

I LOVE my DA* 16-50

Also...this may be the first thread to collect such warm praise for the DA* 16-50. Most of the time it's "STAY THE F. AWAY! IT WILL FAIL ON YOU! IT'S STUPIDLY OVER PRICED, ESPECIALLY SINCE IT WILL FAIL ON YOU!"

Nice of you all to come out of the woodwork like this in support of what many consider their most critical lens

-Heie
11-26-2013, 06:32 AM   #11
Pentaxian
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,828
If WR is important to you, there is no reason not to get the 16-50. Getting a cheaper WR lens like the 18-55 or 18-135 AND a non-WR high-quality lens like the Sigma 17-50 makes little sense.

The only reason to get a 18-55 and another lens on a similar range is if you're interested in a lens like the Sigma 17-70, which covers a broader range, with better close focusing, etc. But that's clearly not what you're looking for.
11-26-2013, 06:57 AM   #12
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 3,307
I prefer option 1, the single lens solution. It eliminates the "do I need WR or wider aperture" decisions from the two lens option 2.

Personally, I am hoping for good Black Friday sale prices on the 16-50 for my own option 1.
11-26-2013, 08:21 AM   #13
Veteran Member
sterretje's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Roodepoort, South Africa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,534
QuoteOriginally posted by ak_kiwi Quote
Hmm - Thinking about that the DA* 16-50 may fit my needs better than the new 20-40 I was looking at....
I'm still waiting for that 12-35WR that is / was somewhere on the roadmap. Totally off-topic, I know,
11-26-2013, 08:57 AM   #14
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,797
I keep a da18-135 for family outings or inclement weather, and a Tamron 28-75 2.8 for indoor events like weddings.
They both get used regularly and I find it an easy choice.

I appreciate the light weight and zoom range of the DA 18-135 when running around an amusement park with the grandkids.
The Tamron is super sharp wide open and is also light weight.

I haven't experienced the 16-50 IQ but if it is like my DA*300 I would probably want it but I think I still would keep the 18-135 since I expect the 16-50 is heavy.
11-26-2013, 10:56 AM   #15
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,535
QuoteOriginally posted by crewl1 Quote
<snip> I expect the 16-50 is heavy.
Yes it is, but with the grip on my K10d it balances beautifully. Extra advantage - my wife finds the combination too heavy for her.
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!
equivalent, k-mount, option, pentax, pentax lens, premium wr, slr lens, weather resistant, wr, zoom
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax 20-40mm DC WR Limited and Q 08 Wide Zoom Officially Announced Adam Pentax News and Rumors 131 11-08-2013 08:28 PM
Epson Ultra Premium Photo Paper Luster and Premium Photo Paper Glossy compared bwDraco Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 5 04-24-2013 02:52 AM
Pentax Zoom 90 WR - Has anyone used in concert setting?? cody59 Pentax Compact Cameras 5 08-31-2012 08:43 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:18 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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