[hjoseph7]

My first set of lenses came in the mail yesterday a Used Pentax 16-mm F4. I was expecting this lens to be extremely noisy since it uses the older screw-type AF that is built in the camera not the lens, but surprisingly I didn't find the lens noisy at all ?


It is much quieter than my Canon 35mm f2 which sounds like a hornets nest. All I hear is mild whirr then the lens locks. I tested it in all type of lighting and the lens locks pretty quickly, I would say in about -1/2 second. This lens is sharp as "Heck" on my K5 IIs even at 16mm. The zoom barrel is a little loose though, but is no deal breaker. This lens is so sharp that I can read the lettering on labels that are about I/4 inch in height from about 8 feet away !

My other 2 lenses are in the mail. I found a pretty "cheap" 35mm f2.8 Macro on eBay, so instead of the cheaper 35mm f2.4 I purchased it. Unfortunately, I went over my budget so the 70mm DA will have to wait. Or I might just save-up and get the 77mm FA just because I like the way it looks.

I did get the 50mm f1.8 which should be arriving late today, or tomorrow morning, or even next week due to the holiday.

[DSims]

Sounds good. I hope your "cheap" DA35 macro doesn't fall within the ~1/3 of eBay lenses with problems.

Everything else sounds great. The sensor and the improved AF system of the K-5 IIs can really take advantage of those lenses!

[rbefly]

Hello hjoseph7, welcome to the Forum!
Yes, the DA 16-45mm is a fine lens, maybe not a Ltd or * but way better than any kit zoom. Mine has a bit of barrel wobble too, but nothing serious and it's been a durable workhorse for me. You're lucky to get a good one now, they're becoming scarce on the used market.
I don't own the DA 35 Macro, but understand it's a great lens.
Now, the DA fifty will fit perfectly with the zoom, giving you the option of a short, fast tele for candids, low-light, indoor and night shooting. Another good choice, imo.
Good luck with the new gear, post some photos!
Ron

[DSims]

My first set of lenses came in the mail yesterday a Used Pentax 16-mm F4. I was expecting this lens to be extremely noisy since it uses the older screw-type AF that is built in the camera not the lens, but surprisingly I didn't find the lens noisy at all ?


It is much quieter than my Canon 35mm f2 which sounds like a hornets nest. All I hear is mild whirr then the lens locks. I tested it in all type of lighting and the lens locks pretty quickly, I would say in about -1/2 second.

Pentax may already have the best performing screw-drive AF system on the market - no one else is motivated to do this because they keep releasing new lenses with in-lens focus motors (perhaps Nikon still has a little motivation here).

[hjoseph7]

The quality from Pentax is beyond belief. I had some happy times with Canon cameras, but I often complained about the lack of weather resistance, lack of features, a claticky-clack shutter and outrageous prices which I got stomped on by Canon fans as the company dragged their feet. I was planning to go Olympus because they had a pretty good(but HUGE ?) weather-resistant camera that was built like a tank. However Pentax clearly outmaneuvered them. Olympus has some pretty good lenses, but they failed with that 4/3 system in my opinion. Pentax makes lenses just as small plus, the K5 is no bigger than my manual Nikon FM2 ! I am very happy with this decision so far... I finally caught up technically with my Panasonic point-and-shoot and then some.

[DSims]

I had some happy times with Canon cameras, but I often complained about the lack of weather resistance, lack of features, a claticky-clack shutter and outrageous prices which I got stomped on by Canon fans as the company dragged their feet.

I think this is a good way of describing it - it really does seem as if Canon has dragged their feet for about 5 years or so - especially at the low end of the DSLR range. At the high end they've finally improved hi-ISO performance (although now Sony's suddenly kicking their (and everyone else's) butt with the A7S) and at the low end they're finally releasing some (relatively) good IQ lenses. But despite this it still feels as if they're dragging their feet, as you say.


It appears Canon fans are among the most vicious (and perhaps blind) around - not sure if this has gotten worse as Canon's fallen behind. They have so much going for them, and I frequently buy Canon in most every other (non-still-camera) product category, but they seem to have become complacent in the DSLR market. My first 3 digital cameras were Canon compacts, and they were quite good. But virtually nothing from them camera-wise seems to appeal to me any more.

[ChristianRock]

That's a good setup you are putting together, hjoseph. If you are happy with the zoom, wait until you get the primes

I also agree on the 77 vs the 70. It's more expensive but the 70 is closer to the 50 so you'll end up picking only one if them to take with you. I think with the 77, being longer, there's more chance you'll need both. There's also the DFA 100 f2.8 that is even longer and might satisfy your tele needs for now, plus closer portraits and macro at a greater distance. And it's WR. As much as I love the pics I see that were taken with the 77, the 100 might be just as appealing IQ wise, and goes well in a 35-50-100 setup to use along the 16-45 (which covers well the wide end)

[DSims]

I also agree on the 77 vs the 70. It's more expensive but the 70 is closer to the 50 so you'll end up picking only one if them to take with you. I think with the 77, being longer, there's more chance you'll need both. There's also the DFA 100 f2.8 that is even longer and might satisfy your tele needs for now, plus closer portraits and macro at a greater distance. And it's WR. As much as I love the pics I see that were taken with the 77, the 100 might be just as appealing IQ wise, and goes well in a 35-50-100 setup to use along the 16-45 (which covers well the wide end)

The images the FA77 produces are substantially different from the DA50. The FA77 performs well enough that you don't lose much IQ by shooting wide open. The f/1.8 aperture makes is useful in many more situations, so that (at least to me) it's nearly as versatile as a DA*50-135 - despite not having the zoom.

The D FA 100 WR is a great lens, and the rounded aperture doesn't hurt either. If you're shooting macro it's nearly unbeatable (short of a couple of exotic MF ~100 macros for around $2000). And it takes good non-macro shots too. But outside of macros, I'd say the FA77 is more versatile. I've replaced the FA77 with the FA*85 and it's my most used lens (the FA77 was close to being the most used before I got it).


In other words, saving for a used FA77 makes sense.