[TaoMaas]

Ron I think you are missing the point. While having the full range of the best lenses Pentax makes might be ideal for some, it might not be the best solution for the pocket of each user.

Sorry, but I think you kinda missed Ron's point, which is that the answer depends upon what the question is. You placed a monetary restriction on things (which is fine, btw, and probably a sensible decision! lol). The OP seemed to place a "zoom" restriction on things. Each photographer is the ultimate decider for what's right for them...and that's why threads like this one are so hotly contested. We're all different.

[normhead]

It works well, but it can be hard to hold the camera in one hand an manually focus the lens in low light situations

Just after the 560mm was released, I was in the company of a Pentax rep, who seemed determined that I try it out... I finally went over and, put my camera on the back of the tripod mounted lens and dutifully tried a few clicks. I said, "it's too big to carry" He said "but we really tried to keep the weight down." I said " I can carry it but it doesn't fit in a back pack like my A-400, it's not to heavy, it's physically too long. It would get broken off in my pack." If I had a picture of his very sorry looking disappointed face, I'd post it for all to see.

[Lowell Goudge]

I've been seeing a lot of "Please help me choose a lens" threads lately, and I can understand it. It takes a lot of time and effort to read all the reviews, learn MTF charts, read more reviews from other sites, read marketing literature and then figure out what to buy in your budget.

What makes me an expert? Probably nothing, but what I have done is owned many of the lenses or it's contemporaries over the last 10 years that I have been in Digital Photography. I have logged hundreds, possibly thousands of hours reading reviews and mtf charts for these lenses, and I have shot 10's of thousands of pics with these lenses. I am not a pro, but I consider myself an advanced amateur. I do not have an unlimited budget, but this is nearly a self financing hobby, so I have justified expenses accordingly.

Below is a summary of what I would buy/have bought/currently use (and would consider worthy of a Pro's kit) and I'm offering it as a starting point for all the questions of "What lens should I buy.." with the caveat that I am a zoom shooter (gasp of horror) because of my style and locations. So if IQ is your first priority, followed by versatility and price here's your choices:

Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 - Yes it's 5.6 but this is a landscape lens and if you are shooting below f8 you are doing something wrong.
Tamron 17-50 f2.8 - I have owned the sigma 17-70, sigma 17-50, sigma 20-40, pentax fa20-35, da15, da40, fa35 all in this focal length. The Tamron wins for flare control + sharpness + diffraction control + versatility + price. This is really where my zoom bias comes into play. Honorable Mention goes to the Sigma 18-35, but it's an $800 lens and I'm not sure one can get 2-3x as much quality out of it.
Any 50 Macro - Honestly you are literally splitting hairs over the various AF 50 macros out there.
Sigma 50-150 f2.8 - I know it's not fair to include a discontinued lens, but I have owned the DA*50-135 and this lens blows it away in focusing and reliability. IQ is equal. Sorry Pentax but until you put a DC motor in the 50-135, it's not even a contest. Instead of the 50-135 I'd even recommend the next lens on this list.
Tamron 70-200 f2.8 - Only lens in this range available for Pentax shooters since Sigma is discontinued, and I much preferred Sigma, but the Tamron is not bad. It's not in my bag, but would be if I needed it. It beats out the 60-250 because of the extra stop and I just don't trust SDM.
DA*300 f4 - The only choice for Pentax shooters to reach Pro IQ AND stay around 1k. Sorry DA55-300, you can't play in this sandbox. You're a great value but you are slow and slower and your IQ is a step above kit lens, but not in the same league as ANY of the lenses mentioned here in your focal length. I'm not going to include legacy or discontinued glass, because there is no telling what would be available on the market and when. Besides, if you have your heart set on an FA*300 f4.5 then you don't need my recommendations anyway.
For 400mm, buy a Pentax TC and mount it to your DA*300. No other way to get pro IQ with a pentax. the sigma 120-400 is basically equal to the DA55-300 in terms of IQ. Good but not what I would consider awesome. The Bigma 50-500 and Little Bigma 150-500 are better than the 120-400 but still not quite there. For under 2k though, they are really your only options to get to 500mm. Which leads to....
500mm - There are 2 Pro IQ lenses out there- The Sigma 500 f4.5 and Pentax 560 f5.6. Both cost around 5k, both are amazing lenses. I'd be happy with either after I get my inheritance from a long lost rich relative.

There you have it. A 5-6 Lens kit from 10mm to 500mm that will go anywhere and have you covered from landscapes to critters. Let the debate begin...

Years ago I posted a way to get an ideal lens kit.

It was more generic, but yours this fits the bill

I said you need zooms from 10-12 mm up to 150/200mm with as much of this range as possible at F2.8, and of wild life was an interest a means of getting to 400/5.6.

Add in macro and specialty lenses and you are set.

[northcoastgreg]

If you want the perfect lens kit ... look at what type of photography you do the most and invest more of your money into the focal ranges that suit your needs.

I agree, but would take it even farther to include apertures and the overall rendering of the lens. If you're a portrait photographer, you probably want fast lenses and the quality of the bokeh will be important to you. As a landscape photographer, I look for slow glass (which is not always easy to find, as manufacturers tend to do their best work with their fast glass) with an emphasis on color and contrast. I'm drawn to Pentax precisely because I can find what I want in this regard at reasonable prices. For a zoom landscape kit, you can do fairly well with the following:

DA 10-17 f3.5-4.5
DA 12-24 f4
FA 20-35 f4 and FA 24-90 f3.5-4.5 or DA 17-70
DA* 60-250 f4

Or you can assemble a landscape prime kit:

DA 15 f4
DA 21 f3.2
K 28 f3.5
K 35 f3.5
M 50 f1.7
M 135 f3.5

Either kit will produce excellent results and allow the photographer to capture just a bit different from those shooting other brands. The primes in particular have a unique character that sets them apart from virtually everything else on the market.

---

Last edited by northcoastgreg; 11-27-2014 at 09:00 PM.

[normhead]

I agree, but would take it even farther to include apertures and the overall rendering of the lens. If you're a portrait photographer, you probably want fast lenses and the quality of the bokeh will be important to you. As a landscape photographer, I look for slow glass (which is not always easy to find, as manufacturers tend to do their best work with their fast glass) with an emphasis on color and contrast. I'm drawn to Pentax precisely because I can find what I want in this regard at reasonable prices. For a zoom landscape kit, you can do fairly well with the following:

DA 10-17 f3.5-4.5
DA 12-24 f4
FA 20-35 f4 and FA 24-90 f3.5-4.5 or DA 17-70
DA* 60-250 f4

Or you can assemble and landscape prime kit:

DA 15 f4
DA 21 f3.2
K 28 f3.5
K 35 f3.5
M 50 f1.7
M 135 f3.5

Either kit will produce excellent results and allow the photographer to capture just a bit different from those shooting other brands. The primes in particular have a unique character that sets them apart from virtually everything else on the market.

I recently had a chance to purchase that 20-35, because I have nothing in that range to cover those focal length in FF I was interested. How is that lens?

[B Grace]

Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 - Yes it's 5.6 but this is a landscape lens and if you are shooting below f8 you are doing something wrong.
Tamron 17-50 f2.8 - I have owned the sigma 17-70, sigma 17-50, sigma 20-40, pentax fa20-35, da15, da40, fa35 all in this focal length. The Tamron wins for flare control + sharpness + diffraction control + versatility + price. This is really where my zoom bias comes into play. Honorable Mention goes to the Sigma 18-35, but it's an $800 lens and I'm not sure one can get 2-3x as much quality out of it.
Any 50 Macro - Honestly you are literally splitting hairs over the various AF 50 macros out there.
Sigma 50-150 f2.8 - I know it's not fair to include a discontinued lens, but I have owned the DA*50-135 and this lens blows it away in focusing and reliability. IQ is equal. Sorry Pentax but until you put a DC motor in the 50-135, it's not even a contest. Instead of the 50-135 I'd even recommend the next lens on this list.
Tamron 70-200 f2.8 - Only lens in this range available for Pentax shooters since Sigma is discontinued, and I much preferred Sigma, but the Tamron is not bad. It's not in my bag, but would be if I needed it. It beats out the 60-250 because of the extra stop and I just don't trust SDM.
DA*300 f4 - The only choice for Pentax shooters to reach Pro IQ AND stay around 1k. Sorry DA55-300, you can't play in this sandbox. You're a great value but you are slow and slower and your IQ is a step above kit lens, but not in the same league as ANY of the lenses mentioned here in your focal length. I'm not going to include legacy or discontinued glass, because there is no telling what would be available on the market and when. Besides, if you have your heart set on an FA*300 f4.5 then you don't need my recommendations anyway.
For 400mm, buy a Pentax TC and mount it to your DA*300. No other way to get pro IQ with a pentax. the sigma 120-400 is basically equal to the DA55-300 in terms of IQ. Good but not what I would consider awesome. The Bigma 50-500 and Little Bigma 150-500 are better than the 120-400 but still not quite there. For under 2k though, they are really your only options to get to 500mm. Which leads to....
500mm - There are 2 Pro IQ lenses out there- The Sigma 500 f4.5 and Pentax 560 f5.6. Both cost around 5k, both are amazing lenses. I'd be happy with either after I get my inheritance from a long lost rich relative.

This is an interesting list but I have to ask what form of the photography hobby would a person using such a collection practice? I guess I don't see any focal length shorter than about 24mm (effective so, say, 16mm on an APS-C camera) as a landscape lens and I've never shot any lens longer than 300mm nor have I felt the need to do so. I am a hobbyist photographer though.

I've always considered the hobby of shooting Pentax gear as one of utilizing its particular image quality. Saying this as respectfully as possible, once you collect a series of lenses such as those on the OP's list you have no reason not to move to Canon or Nikon. A similar collection of lenses for a D810 would make an interesting kit. Or you might as well give up the chase and just move completely to Micro 4/3rds.

[IchabodCrane]

Lots of good discussion in this one. Here's a new twist... what are some good collections to use for a fast-paced tour? Needs are minimal amount to carry and relatively few lens changes along the way. Shots likely dominated by landscapes and interiors though not exclusively.

[normhead]

Lots of good discussion in this one. Here's a new twist... what are some good collections to use for a fast-paced tour? Needs are minimal amount to carry and relatively few lens changes along the way. Shots likely dominated by landscapes and interiors though not exclusively.

You've got some issues...
Landscape... = 100 ISO , as long an exposure as necessary , ƒ5.6 (or sharpest part of the lens) or possibly ƒ8 0r 11 if necessary.
Interiors, without people- same as landscape.
With people... ISO 400-800, (ISO 6400 if you have a 645z) , as fast a shutter speed/aperture combination as you need to freeze the movement of the people...

SO as soon as you list these things you've created an impossible situation and you're talking about best compromise, which is always personal.

For me, 18-135 for outdoors, Sigma 8-16 for interiors (OK if it has to be Pentax substitute the 12-24)
21 ltd, 31 ltd, 55 1.4 and 77 ltd for interiors with people, although you'd be surprised how well you can do in doors if you leave the 18-135 on the camera and just use the primes when it's too slow.

Altogether, that's a reasonably light to carry camera bag, that does everything on a vacation.
Of course everyone's definition of "reasonably light" will be different.

[Des]

I am shocked that no one has suggested the DA 560mm f5.6 as a solid choice for an everyday walkaround lens.

It's an ideal walkaround lens if walking around the Serengeti (although you might then be more worried about being eaten than about the suitability of the FL).

[Sandy Hancock]

I am shocked that no one has suggested the DA 560mm f5.6 as a solid choice for an everyday walkaround lens.

Hopeless for hand-held selfies though.

[y0chang]

My current kit is :

DA 12-24mm
Tamron 28-75mm

Then add either 50 f1.4 prime
Sigma 170-500mm
Or DA 55-300mm

I want a 60-250 or 70-200mm to fill in the gap at the tele end...but the 28-75 works great with the 12-24mm

[Des]

Hopeless for hand-held selfies though.

How do you know?

[Mikesul]

I am shocked that no one has suggested the DA 560mm f5.6 as a solid choice for an everyday walkaround lens.

Well there might be reasons on one suggested it!

[c.a.m]

Hopeless for hand-held selfies though.

Where's your imagination?

Mount it and the camera on a monopod... an instant selfie-stick, no?

- Craig

[Des]

Just after the 560mm was released, I was in the company of a Pentax rep, who seemed determined that I try it out... I finally went over and, put my camera on the back of the tripod mounted lens and dutifully tried a few clicks. I said, "it's too big to carry" He said "but we really tried to keep the weight down." I said " I can carry it but it doesn't fit in a back pack like my A-400, it's not to heavy, it's physically too long. It would get broken off in my pack." If I had a picture of his very sorry looking disappointed face, I'd post it for all to see.

At least the disappointment shows they care.

I wonder whether Ricoh-Pentax will have a user reference group in designing the new lenses to avoid this sort of problem. There's a lot riding on the forthcoming 70-200-ish and 100-450-ish lenses for the brand, as they will fill key gaps in the lineup (which are implicit in Nomadkng's list).