[SaltyPentax]

So I have the 16-50 and just ordered the 60-250 (after weeks of agonizing over reviews). In fact, I'm still second guessing the decision. I was tempted by the Tammy 70-200 and the 50-135. I'm not sure how much I will miss the 2.8 for isolated subjects. If I had gone with the 50-135 I would have also wanted the 300*. I'm afraid I would have missed both the wide and long ends of the Tammy - the reason why it fell from the list.

I finally decided that the 60-250 was the most versatile option - especially if I get a teleconverter.

I'm in Europe for another few weeks so won't get to play with my new lens until home. However, I'm really feeling doubt about my potential satisfaction for its mid-range portrait ability. I'm thinking mostly candid outdoor shots - wife, kids, and limited money making events.

So, WR not essential, but a plus.

DA* 55? 100WR Macro? Maybe one of the limiteds?

Any advice or input would be appreciated.

Thank you!

Nakomis

---------- Post added 04-06-14 at 03:42 PM ----------

Or maybe there is room for both the 50-135 and the 60-250 in the same camera bag. The 135 when space is limited or portraits will dominate, the 250 when there could be the long wildlife opportunities... Hmm, they would look nice together

[cofra]

A fast portrait lens is what I would miss the most. Like a 50mm 1.4.

[DSims]

Between 50-135, 300, 55, FA77 (or FA*85) and what you have, you'll have to sort out your options in the end. Macro 100 is not a good fit for these needs. 60-250 is questionable for typical portrait use (but I'm sure you can still get some good stuff out of it).

50-135 plus 300 does make a good combo in place of 60-250. And 55/77/85 is not redundant just because you have a 50-135 (even as good as it is). Size and fast aperture (plus AF speed in the case of 77 and 85) still make them very useful additions. If you have only the 60-250 then one of these faster "portrait" primes could become even more of a necessity, but I wouldn't go without one (I chose the FA*85) even as an owner of the DA*50-135.

[jimr-pdx]

I'd think a 70 or 77 would pair nicely with the 16-50 and give you fine portraits. Another choice would be a fast middle zoom like 28-75 Tamron or 24-70 Sigma.

[SaltyPentax]

So should I sell the 60-250 and buy the 50-135 and 300? Or buy a good prime and teleconverter to go with my 60-250? Or buy the 50-135 and keep the 60-250?

[VisualDarkness]

You won't regret the DA* 55/1.4 it's one heck of a lens, especially for portraits.

[GlennG]

I'm thinking mostly candid outdoor shots - wife, kids, and limited money making events

Nakomis, one option is to just try to use only the 16-50 and 60-250 and see how you like just that. They are great lenses, and maybe you will find that they suit you well. "Candid" to me implies that you may want to retain some versatility and spontaneity, so these lenses may work well, especially outdoors.

[wtlwdwgn]

For the time being I'd stick with the lenses you have until you figure out what will work best for your next subject. A nifty fifty is a good option for portraiture, so any good fifty, like the 55 f/1.4 if you have the funds, otherwise an S-M-C Takumar 50 f/1.4 or 55 f/1.8, or a K, M, or A 50 f/1.4 or f/1.7 will work as well. Just remember, the goal of LBA is to never ever sell a lens, only to buy more, more, more.....uh, I'm getting dizzy! Have to find another lens.

[Bob from Aus]

I have both the 50-135 and the 60-250. After two years of owning the 60-250 I feel it is the kind of lens that people should consider swapping systems for. Mine is nothing short of brilliant and it goes with me everywhere. The 50-135 only comes out for events, weddings etc. The 60-250 can focus surprisingly close up as well. I think your current two lenses is a brilliant start.

I would be tempted to get an older second hand pentax lens just for portraits. I find my 70mm sigma macro is to sharp. The 77ltd I think is now over priced.

I love my 35Ltd macro. Like your other two lenses it's at the top of the class. It does more than one job and it won't matter how many lenses you end up getting or where you go you will want to pack it into your kit.

[Ex Finn.]

How about adding the 15 ltd and the DA*300 to round up the lineup.

[peterjcb]

If you can swing it, the FA 31 limited is an incredible lens and probably the most useful.
I was fortunate to find a mint condition used copy and will never sell it.
The DA15 F4 limited is also on top of almost everyone's bucket list.

[SaltyPentax]

Thanks for all the great input! I know there are some lenses worth switching platforms for, I dream of the F* 300, but I truly think this forum is a reason to shoot Pentax! Such a great resource!

I think a couple of older primes could be a good way to settle on the right FL, but I suspect the 55* will be next on the major purchase list. I'm outdoors enough to really value the weather sealing.

Anyway, thank you all for your input. It's great to hear the advice and wisdom!

[howieb101]

Well if you are prepared to go non-Penrax how about the Sigma 85mm F1.4 hsm. A class act by all accounts.

[DSims]

Reading your original post again - about how your portraits will be candid - I'd say get an F or FA135. It's reasonably priced (relatively speaking) and it's so small that they really will be candids - no one pays attention to you when you have a lens that looks even less intimidating than a DA18-55. It even has IF, so it gives no semblance of zooming or movement when you focus. You can get headshots while the "victims" think you're shooting a wide shot of 5+ people!

The DA*50-135 is just as good for this IQ and capability wise, but it looks much more intimidating.

[mattb123]

I agree with all the 60-250 praise. I love mine but it doesn't come if I'm going light, that's for sure. The photos with it just pop.
I have a Tamron 28-75, DA 50 1.8, and a sears 135 2.8 for portraits, depending on what I'm going for. A 70 or 77 would probably be great.