[jddwoods]

Hi,
I bought Macro 100WR a couple months ago and I'm totally spoiled by its IQ (not only macro capability) - so any of my lenses doesn't perform as good as this nice glass.
After I recently sold some of my unused equipement, I changed mi mind about spending my funds (originally saved for new body). Now, I'm interested in purchase some high quality lens.
I have a "travel kit": 18-135WR and 55-300WR. I have also a Fish Eye (thanks to Your advice and don't regret it).
And I have DA 35 2.4 and Macro 100WR for times, when I'm preferring uncompromised quality instead of versatility. And I have some nice old glasses too (50, 135). My budget is about up to $1200 - and I don't think that I would spend such money in future just for lens/lenses So I would take extreme care about selection this lens/lenses.

I would ask You for recommendations of some high quality lenses which will perform superb IQ and handling on k-5ii even on a new 24 Mpix sensors (in case of future body update).

I don't care about FF, I'm satisfied with APS-C.
I don't need long tele, I'm shooting wildlife only occasionally.
I'm often shooting closeups, but often is 100mm too much.
I don't know - primes or quality zoom? I don't mind changing lenses. But some type of WR will be bonus.

Is for example DA*50-135 worth primes in such FL? And what about SDM?
And what about 20-40WR limited? It will save me of buying 21 and 40?
Or is best way to go with primes?
Or something from sigma or tammy?
I prefere buying new, becouse used market in our country is near to nonexist for Pentax brand.

Thanks for all recommandations.

I have a good collection of lenses: DA15, DA21, DA35 Macro, DA40, DA70 limiteds, F28, DA 17-70, DFA 100 Macro WR and DA* 200. The ones that get the most use and I could not live without are the DA 21 Ltd, DA 35 Macro Ltd and the DFA 100 Macro WR. These three cover most of my needs and are the sharpest of all, with the DA 40 mm and 70 mm limiteds also very sharp. You know how good the DFA 100 WR is, you would not be disappointed with Limited primes.

[Nicolas06]

Hi,
I bought Macro 100WR a couple months ago and I'm totally spoiled by its IQ (not only macro capability) - so any of my lenses doesn't perform as good as this nice glass.
After I recently sold some of my unused equipement, I changed mi mind about spending my funds (originally saved for new body). Now, I'm interested in purchase some high quality lens.
I have a "travel kit": 18-135WR and 55-300WR. I have also a Fish Eye (thanks to Your advice and don't regret it).
And I have DA 35 2.4 and Macro 100WR for times, when I'm preferring uncompromised quality instead of versatility. And I have some nice old glasses too (50, 135). My budget is about up to $1200 - and I don't think that I would spend such money in future just for lens/lenses So I would take extreme care about selection this lens/lenses.

I would ask You for recommendations of some high quality lenses which will perform superb IQ and handling on k-5ii even on a new 24 Mpix sensors (in case of future body update).

I don't care about FF, I'm satisfied with APS-C.
I don't need long tele, I'm shooting wildlife only occasionally.
I'm often shooting closeups, but often is 100mm too much.
I don't know - primes or quality zoom? I don't mind changing lenses. But some type of WR will be bonus.

Is for example DA*50-135 worth primes in such FL? And what about SDM?
And what about 20-40WR limited? It will save me of buying 21 and 40?
Or is best way to go with primes?
Or something from sigma or tammy?
I prefere buying new, becouse used market in our country is near to nonexist for Pentax brand.

Thanks for all recommandations.

A few things that i have noticed with my own set of lenses:

DA21, DA35 f/2.4, FA50, DA17-70, DA50-135:

- Everytime I check, with all my lenses, going from K5 (low pass filter, 16MP) to K3 (no low pass filter, 24MP) the difference is sharpness is REALLY visible. This is true on the DA21, the DA35, the FA50 and the DA50-135 (the 17-70, I just doesn't it anymore so I don't know really). Noticably, the DA21 can have soft corner (or I don't know maybe it is field curvature). The FA50 need to be stopped down a little (like f/2.8) to be very sharp,.. And the DA50-135 can need f/4 at times.

But all they give increadible shoots, even more with a K3. I think this is the property of all quality lenses. But maybe, I do'nt know if you already have a K5-IIs, you'll gain only half of the sharpness gain, I had from K5 to K3... So maybe this is not as interresting for you; But anyway, if you don't take your time looking at corners a good lens will improve with 24MP compared to 16MP, no doubt. What I really gained in particular for landscapes is that I can do a pano with one shoot, crop it to 3:1 or 2:1 with only a small portion of the image kept and the result remain really great. With the K5, it was so-so. You could do it, but in practice you were limited to the amount of acceptable crop. Here 24MP without low pass filter give you plenty of room.


You ask for the 50-135... This one is really really good in term of the picture it produce, but might not be exactly at the level of a good prime. Bokeh is nice, colors great. The range and versability of zoom is wonderfull. The quality allow you to crop a lot even at 135mm so if you need a little more than 135 like 200mm, this is no problem. Don't need another lens. It perform better with K3 than K5 for AF, but again with a K5-IIs, half of the problem is solved for you. You still have too big AF sensors, but they perform well in low light already. Anyway don't try it for very fast AF like sport. I did it, it works, but it is not the strong point. What I liked most about it was the good (but neutral) bokeh), the fantastic sharpness and that despite being too big already, this is far smaller and lighter than all the classic 70-200 you can find everywhere.

I think this 50-135 is not at the level of very good prime you can have on the same range like DA70, FA77, DFA100. Honestly through, it really compared to FA77 I think the difference will be the most visible with a really faster apperture and FA rendering with very good transition. With DA70 from the photos I have seen, this might not be that big of a difference. I would not say the DA70 is not better. Just that the difference start to be thin. I'd guess the DFA100 macro is the same but this is difficult to say as people tend to show macro work with it, so difficult to compare...

I'am thinking more of FA77 theses days because of the size of this 50-135... This is too big! And I can see the difference in rendering for FA77. But I think I'll miss to go up to 135mm ... I was thinking of maybe adding the new teleconverter but unsure it is a good idea at all... Why not adding the DFA100 macro, but this guy is only 100mm, not 120 or 135mm.

[Jannis]

I find the report of your experience with the Limiteds and the DA* 50-135mm very interesting. I wonder if others here might have arrived at a not too dissimilar perspective. I am curious, though, about this implicit "cut-off" point serial number [?] -wise for getting a potentially less troublesome example of that DA* zoom. I just haven't seen this laid out explicitly in the forums as yet (I'm sure I could have missed a pertinent thread or two predating my own arrival here). As a potential purchaser of a secondhand example, I do have misgivings regarding the issue you mentioned.

I understand completely your feeling that the DA15mm might be too wide for you; but in my own case, it was the users'/enthusiasts thread here which finally demonstrated to me the true versatility and utility of this lens, thus justifying the cost.

As for zoom lenses, as a class they tend to be rather inconsistent sample to sample; and shot to shot, as well. So if you haven't put the practical virtues of the Tamron 17-50mm out of your mind completely, you might at some point consider giving one another go. They aren't selling for a great deal used these days, so having one on hand, given the compact size and low carry weight, might be worth it to you for some applications. That's the view I came to, at least.

Maybe piece variations is here more pronounced, that it need to be. Maybe, If there were other samples of primes (each one was there only in one exemplar) and other piece of 50-135, everything would be different.

The date of produce is quite hard to find, I'm clue from paperworks in case, and I phoned to local Pentax service.
I have 50-135 two days now, and I'm absolutely happy with it. It has the same "magic" as 100WR has for me (and 35ltd). Only problem is focusing on small objects like eye, with MF I can acquire stunning sharpness even on 2.8. But this is problem of big AF point (focused on eyebrow) of my K-5ii with every lens.
And for Tamron 17-50, I would give it another chance. I haven't sold it, only lent it to my friend (for possible sell).

And about purchase of another lens (35ltd and maybe 15ltd) I would thinking about in another period of time. Right now, I had spent more than monthly salary for 50-135, so I must wait.

[Kayaker-J]

Yep. I wouldn't be pushing anything on you! My DA15mm is brand new to me, so you can see everything I have seen at this point. My Tamron was acquired at a "market best" kind of price at auction from the original owner; who plainly hardly used it, as there is zero dust to be found inside the exposed glass elements. If I feel I'm not getting satisfying results in that range between the DA15 and the SMC-"K" 28mm & FA 31, I'm willing to run through at least one other sample of the Tamron to see if results differ: zoom lenses of a certain price are just like that; you can't reasonably expect anything different. That's the point I was making. To be exacting, you'd have to say the same concerning just about any lens, even the Limiteds. Dead-on consistency just isn't in the cards at prices most folks would consider reasonable... if the requirements of the task are demanding enough. I'm old enough that I think about how many do-overs I'm going to have the chance to get. That goes with the territory, too.

---

Last edited by Kayaker-J; 07-05-2014 at 06:00 PM.

[Lowell Goudge]

For the OP. Don't get all wrapped up about something suitable for a K5 or a 24mp sensor. Look at the shots using even legacy glass on the Q. Scaled up to APS-C sensor size it would be a 167MP sensor. Any lens that can look sharp on a Q will work on anything you will ever plan to purchase