[normhead]

Just take the Sigma 18-200 and forget the hassle... if you do buy a lens, get the Sigma 8-16 or the 15 Ltd., just based on weight and portability the 15 might be the best choice. Personally I'd rather have a 15 than a 16-45. Most of the 16/45s range is covered by other lenses you have. But I don't see 15 anywhere. The next lens I'd consider taking with your kit would be the 100 macro and TC. I just hate to go travelling without a macro. You can kill a lot of time waiting around on a vacation and a macro goes a long way towards giving you something to do, where ever you are.... next would be the Sigma 30 1.4. Just to give you a low light option.

You've got some nice choices there already, and really, you can only use so many lenses, the 18-135 is an upgrade to your 18-200, but why not go for something that isn't redundant and expand you range?

[VoiceOfReason]

My small kit is the 18-135 WR, Sigma 8-16, Sigma 70-300 and since they take almost no space the DA40xs and F 50 f/1.7 along with the K5. I also have my K-01 full spectrum with Tamron 17-50 on it, though to tell the truth when I REALLY want to travel light the K5 and 18-135 cover most of what I want.

Out of what you have:

Pentax 01 Standard Prime (Q)
Pentax A SMC 50mm f2 K
Pentax DA 18-55 f3.5-5.6 AL WR Zoom lens
Pentax DA 18-55 f3.5-5.6 AL WR Zoom lens
Pentax DA 18-55 f3.5-5.6 AL Zoom lens
Pentax DA* 60-250mm f4 Zoom ED [IF] SDM
Pentax DAL 18-55 f3.5-5.6 Zoom K
Pentax F SMC 100-300 f4.5-5.6 Zoom K
Pentax F SMC 35-105 f4-5.6 Zoom K
Pentax F SMC 35-70 f3.5-4.5 Zoom K
Pentax FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro K
Pentax M SMC 100mm F4 Macro M42
Pentax Super-Takumar 55/1.8 M42
Sigma 100-300mm F4.5 - 6.7 DL Zoom
Sigma 18-200 f3.5-6,3 DC Zoom
Sigma 28-300 f3.5-6.3 DL Hyperzoom K
Sigma 30mm f1.4
Sigma 70-300 DG
Takumar Bayonet 1:2.8 28mm K
Takumar-F Zoom 70-200mm f4-5.6
Vivitar 50mm Macro focusing 2 x Tele Converter, K mount

I would keep the following:
Pentax 01 Standard Prime (Q)
Pentax DA 18-55 f3.5-5.6 AL WR Zoom lens
Pentax DA* 60-250mm f4 Zoom ED [IF] SDM
Pentax FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro K
Sigma 28-300 f3.5-6.3 DL Hyperzoom K or Sigma 70-300 DG
Sigma 30mm f1.4

I would sell the rest and buy better ones.

[SpecialK]

I went to NYC for 8 days with a 10-17, 12-24 and 17-70. Only for about 3 shots did I want something longer. I always recommend the 12-24 for travel because it is good in cramped areas such as Europe. The 17-70 has the close focus ability and good general walk-around range. The fisheye results are hard to duplicate with other lenses and I always get a few great shots with it.

[p38arover]

As one can see from the responses, not everyone agrees and hence the reason I'm having problems.

Yes, I agree I have too many lenses. That list is from my spreadsheet and many are marked to be sold. I just have difficulty getting around to selling stuff so I tend to accumulate.

I know if I get rid of some, there will be less objection to buying good glass.

In retrospect, I would have saved money by buying good glass instead of accumulating lots of average glass.

Some lenses have come with more recent camera purchases, given to me, or left over from my stolen Spotmatic.

Interesting that some say to take the FA 100mm F2.8 macro. It's a lens I've hardly ever used (ditto the M 100mm f4 macro) so I hadn't even considered them. I bought them to try macro work but never did much. I get depressed looking at my attempts and comparing them to eaglem's work.

Re cameras, the *istD is the camera that, with a couple of lenses, is intended to be an outfit that can get thrown into the boot of the car and just stay there for when needed or into the top box on the motorbike. An outfit that won't cause me any heartburn should it get lost, damaged, or stolen.

The K100D and a few lenses are with my daughter for her use.

Re the Q in low light, yes, I tried it recently in the very early morning (from pre-dawn) at a hot air balloon launch, in conjunction with my k-5 which had the DA* 60-250. The Q hung from my wrist and could be swung up for quick pics. Results from the Q were, regrettably, noisy.

Another thing I should consider is that if I buy a lens from a shop within a month of departure, I can get a refund of the GST from Customs at the airport. I can't do that with most eBay purchases or forum purchases.

---------- Post added 2nd Mar 2014 at 09:59 ----------

I should mention my interests are engineering and architecture, e.g., bridges, old ships, locomotives, aircraft, cars, buildings - almost anything man-made but I have almost no interest in art apart from the technical skill to make the object.

I'm not a person photographer. I rarely ever take pictures of people (I have very few of my wife and kids). I try to avoid having people in pictures wherever possible, even if it means taking several pics and merging them.

I do not photograph sport as I have absolutely no interest in any form of sport.

I'm not sure I need really good glass for landscapes.

I will be photographing castles from the cruise boat on the Rhine so will need good and/or long glass; bridges and ships by Isambard Kingdom Brunel in the UK. Isambard Kingdom Brunel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

---

Last edited by p38arover; 03-01-2014 at 03:44 PM.

[DSims]

In retrospect, I would have saved money by buying good glass instead of accumulating lots of average glass.

This happens to many of us. When you know the replacement is good quality it's strong motivation for selling the other stuff.

Re cameras, the *istD is the camera that, with a couple of lenses, is intended to be an outfit that can get thrown into the boot of the car and just stay there for when needed or into the top box on the motorbike. An outfit that won't cause me any heartburn should it get lost, damaged, or stolen.

The K100D and a few lenses are with my daughter for her use.

Makes sense. Most of my "cheap but quality" lenses are with my daughter and her K-r.


I was surprised when I realized (my opinion) that you can nicely round out your kit with good lenses for a very reasonable cost - three DA lenses at approx. ~US$200 each, plus a Takumar F70-210/4-5.6 for <US$100. This must be less than you spent for either your DA*60-250 or K-5, and seems easy to justify in light of the cost of a 7 week trip to Europe.


Honestly, at these prices I wouldn't worry about the WR too much. One of my first experiences with not worrying about it was traveling in late fall/early winter in Noosa, when I just let it rain for a while on my K100D Super and original (non-WR, non-DA L) DA55-300. Nothing bad happened.

[p38arover]

I was surprised when I realized (my opinion) that you can nicely round out your kit with good lenses for a very reasonable cost - three DA lenses at approx. ~US$200 each, plus a Takumar F70-210/4-5.6 for <US$100. This must be less than you spent for either your DA*60-250 or K-5, and seems easy to justify in light of the cost of a 7 week trip to Europe.

Honestly, at these prices I wouldn't worry about the WR too much. One of my first experiences with not worrying about it was traveling in late fall/early winter in Noosa, when I just let it rain for a while on my K100D Super and original (non-WR, non-DA L) DA55-300. Nothing bad happened.

Yes, the DA lenses aren't that badly priced at the moment. My wife said "Just buy the water resistant lens that you need".

You mention three DA lenses. Which would you suggest?

I'd find it hard to justify the F 70-210/4-5.6 when I already have a Takumar-F 70-200mm f4-5.6. I've owned that since 1989 when I bought it with my SFx.

I spent A$1200 for the DA*60-250 (secondhand off the forum) and A$715 for the K5 with 18-55 WR lens (both new) on clearance from the importer.

I don't mind the Sigma 18-200 despite negativity from some reviewers. The biggest problem, for me, was on my two trips to Washington/Oregon, owing to grey weather, I often had to push the ISO to 1600 firstly on the *istD and, on the second trip, the K100D and that made for noisy images. Unfortunately, I occasionally forgot to drop the ISO when the weather improved.

I had better pull my finger out and start taking good images of the lenses I wish to sell and to get them advertised.

P.S. I just noticed my Tokina 400mm SD f5.6 isn't on the list. I wonder what else is missing.

[JPT]

I'm from the UK and I lived on a town by the Rhine for a while. The stretch I know best is from Koblenz to Mannheim. It's going to be a great trip!

I can understand you don't want to lug your DA*60-250 around with you, but it really would be my dream lens to have on a Rhine cruise. The river is wide - nearly 500m at some points but somewhat narrower when it goes through hilly areas - so you'll probably be further from the points of interest than you think. There are numerous castles, towns and vineyards to the side of the river and quite high up on the hills. Also, since the boat is not completely still, you'll want to shoot at the widest aperture to keep the shutter speed down. If you decide not to bring the DA*60-250, I'd consider getting a cheap DA55-300 to use instead, even the DAL version.

I'd also definitely bring the Sigma 30mm f1.4, because a lot of towns in Germany and the UK are atmospheric at night. I also like that focal length for portraits of my travelling companions which include a bit of context.

I don't have any experience with the DA16-45 myself, but I'm considering getting it myself, because it seems to be a great value lens and a worthy upgrade to the DA18-55, which I usually bring when I travel for reasons of practicality, but end up disappointed with the results.

[ChristianRock]

One of the favorite things to do in the forums is to see what we would walk in someone else's shoes

First, I'd leave the Q at home. Yes it sounds crazy but two reasons:
1. It's an awesome trip, take only awesome pictures. So carry only one camera, the one that will take the best pictures.
2. Even though it's small, if it's not going to get used most of the time, it's just added weight.

Second, looking at your lenses list, I'd do a "cleanup" and get better stuff. So of course you need to do what you need to do, but here's what *I* would do:

SELL:

Pentax A SMC 50mm f2 K - get an f/1.7 or f/1.4 when you can - or the DA 50 1.8, if you enjoy the nifty fifty.
Pentax DA 18-55 f3.5-5.6 AL WR Zoom lens
Pentax DA 18-55 f3.5-5.6 AL WR Zoom lens
Pentax DA 18-55 f3.5-5.6 AL Zoom lens
Pentax DAL 18-55 f3.5-5.6 Zoom K
Pentax F SMC 100-300 f4.5-5.6 Zoom K
Pentax F SMC 35-105 f4-5.6 Zoom K
Sigma 100-300mm F4.5 - 6.7 DL Zoom
Sigma 18-200 f3.5-6,3 DC Zoom
Sigma 28-300 f3.5-6.3 DL Hyperzoom K
Sigma 70-300 DG
Takumar Bayonet 1:2.8 28mm K
Takumar-F Zoom 70-200mm f4-5.6
Pentax M SMC 100mm F4 Macro M42
Vivitar 50mm Macro focusing 2 x Tele Converter, K mount - for macro, just get an inverter ring instead, better to invert than to add more glass that won't perform so well... or, keep it if you use it a lot.

KEEP:
Pentax DA* 60-250mm f4 Zoom ED [IF] SDM
Sigma 30mm f1.4
Pentax F SMC 35-70 f3.5-4.5 Zoom K
Pentax FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro K
Pentax Super-Takumar 55/1.8 M42

BUY:
Pentax DA 18-135mm WR - enough has been said... you need an OK lens that is WR.
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 - You say you love to take architectural shots. Well, this is an affordable way to get awesome architectural pictures, and because the lens isn't that fast, it's relatively compact - as much as a super wide angle zoom can be...
or
Pentax DA 15mm f/4 Limited - if you can live without the zoom. Just imagine the starbursts!

For the trip I'd take the two lenses on the Buy list (the 18-135 and whichever wide angle you choose), plus the Sigma 30 1.4 as the main walkaround lens - day or night, you'll be alright!

[tibbitts]

Without commenting on anything else, the issue with the 16-45 is front barrel play. Maybe therer are 16-45s out there without enough play to affect image quality. I didn't think mine had enough play to affect performance in the 6mp era, but whether the play got worse or the sensors got better, now the play can affect performance. So you'd need a plan to deal with that if you encounter it.

[TER-OR]

When I bought the K10 years back it came with the gen1 18-55, and I immediately bought the 16-45. It was my go-to indoor lens before buying the 18-135, and I used it outdoors a lot which brought a little risk.
It's never failed to perform well when on the K5 or the K10, I think it's a good value. I don't use it as much anymore, but since I do have a nice polarizer for it I do use it occasionally. I do still use it when I know I'll be indoors most of the time because I think it's better at the short range than the 18-135.

I haven't noticed any troubles with barrel alignment. I'm not carting it around while on dog walkies anymore, though.

[pacerr]

If you don't already know UWA's the only reasonable answer is to rent, or buy one and re-sell it if necessary, and learn for yourself. The first hand education factor is worth the effort and minimal cost. The DA 16-45 is a VERY capable lens in any case. If you like the FL range you won't be displeased.

[If you want to borrow one for the cost of shipping PM me.]

[DSims]

You mention three DA lenses. Which would you suggest?

I was talking about the ones I'd mentioned; the DA16-45, the DA35/2.4, and the DA50/1.8. The DA16-45 was US$245 at KEH last time I looked, and the other 2 are under US$200 new.

---------- Post added 03-04-14 at 01:56 AM ----------

I'd find it hard to justify the F 70-210/4-5.6 when I already have a Takumar-F 70-200mm f4-5.6. I've owned that since 1989 when I bought it with my SFx.

I think the F70-210 is a better lens than the F70-200, that's all. I have one and can vouch for the IQ. In fact, it's the reason I didn't get the DA*60-250 - it can produce images nearly as good. Not that it's a better lens, or as fast, or has as much range, but it's a great substitute for the DA*60-250 when you want something smaller, lighter, and less expensive.

---------- Post added 03-04-14 at 02:01 AM ----------

I can understand you don't want to lug your DA*60-250 around with you, but it really would be my dream lens to have on a Rhine cruise.

Yes, it's a little hard to understand why you wouldn't take such a good lens when you already have it. Isn't that what you bought it for - to use it? And this seems like exactly the time when you need it most! You're so fortunate you already have it - usually posters on the forum want one for a trip, but will have to rent or buy one first just so they can take it with them!

[p38arover]

One of the favorite things to do in the forums is to see what we would walk in someone else's shoes

First, I'd leave the Q at home. Yes it sounds crazy but two reasons:
1. It's an awesome trip, take only awesome pictures. So carry only one camera, the one that will take the best pictures.
2. Even though it's small, if it's not going to get used most of the time, it's just added weight.

Second, looking at your lenses list, I'd do a "cleanup" and get better stuff. So of course you need to do what you need to do, but here's what *I* would do:

SELL:

Pentax A SMC 50mm f2 K - get an f/1.7 or f/1.4 when you can - or the DA 50 1.8, if you enjoy the nifty fifty.
Pentax DA 18-55 f3.5-5.6 AL WR Zoom lens
Pentax DA 18-55 f3.5-5.6 AL WR Zoom lens
Pentax DA 18-55 f3.5-5.6 AL Zoom lens
Pentax DAL 18-55 f3.5-5.6 Zoom K
Pentax F SMC 100-300 f4.5-5.6 Zoom K
Pentax F SMC 35-105 f4-5.6 Zoom K
Sigma 100-300mm F4.5 - 6.7 DL Zoom
Sigma 18-200 f3.5-6,3 DC Zoom
Sigma 28-300 f3.5-6.3 DL Hyperzoom K
Sigma 70-300 DG
Takumar Bayonet 1:2.8 28mm K
Takumar-F Zoom 70-200mm f4-5.6
Pentax M SMC 100mm F4 Macro M42
Vivitar 50mm Macro focusing 2 x Tele Converter, K mount - for macro, just get an inverter ring instead, better to invert than to add more glass that won't perform so well... or, keep it if you use it a lot.

KEEP:
Pentax DA* 60-250mm f4 Zoom ED [IF] SDM
Sigma 30mm f1.4
Pentax F SMC 35-70 f3.5-4.5 Zoom K
Pentax FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro K
Pentax Super-Takumar 55/1.8 M42

BUY:
Pentax DA 18-135mm WR - enough has been said... you need an OK lens that is WR.
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 - You say you love to take architectural shots. Well, this is an affordable way to get awesome architectural pictures, and because the lens isn't that fast, it's relatively compact - as much as a super wide angle zoom can be...
or
Pentax DA 15mm f/4 Limited - if you can live without the zoom. Just imagine the starbursts!

For the trip I'd take the two lenses on the Buy list (the 18-135 and whichever wide angle you choose), plus the Sigma 30 1.4 as the main walkaround lens - day or night, you'll be alright!

The Q will be my backup camera that I can also slip into a pocket. I don't take awesome pics. Mine are rather mundane. I don't have an eye for getting a good image nor the patience to sit around and wait for the right moment.. Mine are usually documentary shots of no value or interest to anyone else.

I suspect you're right about the lenses. Most of that stuff I don't use or have used it very, very rarely, i.e., when I first got them.

I bought a Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 today (secondhand but in excellent condition - it looks brand new). I saw it advertised on Gumtree and bought it this afternoon. I'm looking forward to trying it out tomorrow. The seller also has a Rokinon 8mm fish-eye for sale and wanted me to try it out but I felt it was a little too specialised.

If I get the 18-135, I think most of my needs are then covered with about 4 lenses.

---------- Post added 4th Mar 2014 at 23:37 ----------

Without commenting on anything else, the issue with the 16-45 is front barrel play. Maybe therer are 16-45s out there without enough play to affect image quality. I didn't think mine had enough play to affect performance in the 6mp era, but whether the play got worse or the sensors got better, now the play can affect performance. So you'd need a plan to deal with that if you encounter it.

That doesn't sound like something I want to chance. There's too much money involved. Thanks for that info.

---------- Post added 4th Mar 2014 at 23:39 ----------

If you don't already know UWA's the only reasonable answer is to rent, or buy one and re-sell it if necessary, and learn for yourself. The first hand education factor is worth the effort and minimal cost. The DA 16-45 is a VERY capable lens in any case. If you like the FL range you won't be displeased.

[If you want to borrow one for the cost of shipping PM me.]

Your offer is exceedingly generous!

However,as you can see from above, I bought a 10-20 today. I'm not sure that I've ever seen Pentax lenses for rent in Australia.

---------- Post added 4th Mar 2014 at 23:45 ----------

I was talking about the ones I'd mentioned; the DA16-45, the DA35/2.4, and the DA50/1.8. The DA16-45 was US$245 at KEH last time I looked, and the other 2 are under US$200 new.

---------- Post added 03-04-14 at 01:56 AM ----------

Ahh. I'm not sure about primes. I don't use what I've got. I tend to stick with zooms.

I think the F70-210 is a better lens than the F70-200, that's all. I have one and can vouch for the IQ. In fact, it's the reason I didn't get the DA*60-250 - it can produce images nearly as good. Not that it's a better lens, or as fast, or has as much range, but it's a great substitute for the DA*60-250 when you want something smaller, lighter, and less expensive.

---------- Post added 03-04-14 at 02:01 AM ----------

I shall have to set up some side by side shots using the Sigma and Takumar Zooms in that range to compare them with the DA*60-250.

Yes, it's a little hard to understand why you wouldn't take such a good lens when you already have it. Isn't that what you bought it for - to use it? And this seems like exactly the time when you need it most! You're so fortunate you already have it - usually posters on the forum want one for a trip, but will have to rent or buy one first just so they can take it with them!

Purely for weight reasons. I bought the lens for motorbike racing photography where I can use a tripod. I'm hopeless with a monopod.

[ChristianRock]

Congrats on the 10-20, let us know how it goes during your trip! You say your pics aren't interesting to others, but with a good lens and a good subject, as you will no doubt find many during your trip, I suspect they will end up being very interesting

You say you don't use primes much, but I do hope you'll take the Sigma 30 1.4, even if just so you'll have something to take pictures when light is low and having the fast aperture means getting an unblurred shot.

[jon404]

Take the 16-45mm. Take a Ricoh GR.
Have a great trip!