[DJDee]

Hello Everyone,

I recently picked up a K3 after a long hiatus in thephotography world (I grew increasingly frustrated with my K5 results – auto focus issues). I am now back and loving it more than ever but I could use some assistance with lens selection.

When I picked up my K3 I also grabbed the 15mm Ltd. which I have found to be an amazing lens, but not something I see myself using too much except in very specific situations. I do have a two week period to try it out and potentially return it (9 days left). I originally purchased this lens in preparation for a trip I will be making to South Africa in December. Now that Ihave had a chance to experiment with it and look at the other options, I am utterly lost at what will suit my needs for this trip the best. I have a few thoughts in mind and any other suggestions would be fantastic.

So without further ado, here is what I am thinking:

1) Option 1

a. Keep the 15mm Ltd.

b. Purchase a 35mm Ltd. (I love doing macro)

c. Purchase a DA* 60-250mm

2) Option 2

a. Return the 15mm Ltd.

b. Purchase a DA* 16-50mm

c. Purchase a DA* 60-250mm

3) Option 3

a. Return the 15mm Ltd.

b. Purchase a 20-40mm Ltd.

c. Purchase a DA* 60-250mm

I like the idea of only needing to bring 2 lenses on thetrip (especially if they are weather sealed). I am trying to balance weight, performance,and convenience. Cost is not too much of a factor, but I don’t want to go crazy.

So if anyone has any thoughts on the above or any suggestions that I may have overlooked, I would be grateful!

Thanks everyone!

P.S. I currently have a Pentax-FA 1.4 50mm and Pentax-DA16-45mm F4 from my K10D days as well as some old manual focus lenses.

[Canada_Rockies]

Given the budget, I would personally use your Option 2. My DA*16-50 is a weather resistant lens with a relatively fast aperture and a very useful focal range. In my case, budgets indicate that I have a DA 55-300 rather than the DA* 60-250 which is a much superior lens, particularly the f/4 aperture which would greatly enhance the AF capabilities of any camera body over the f/5.8 of the DA 55-300.

I also prefer constant aperture zooms over variable apertures. The only zoom I have with a variable aperture is the 55-300. Again this is a budget thing. I have nothing against the lens, but it is a budget lens, even if the IQ is a bit better than the average budget lens.

[kh1234567890]

Return the DA15 and get a DA21 instead.

[wtlwdwgn]

Everyone will have a different opinion but I like my DA* 16-50 so I would go with option 2. If you're going out in the field to catch wildlife you could add the HD 1.4x TC for a little extra reach. Just my $0.02.

[DJDee]

Return the DA15 and get a DA21 instead.

Thanks KH. That one does look like a fantastic lens, but it just adds to my indecision! Any suggestions on lenses to go with it?

[j2photos]

I wouldn't normally say this but ditch the 15, get the 20-40 and 60-250. Those are two fantastic lenses both WR. The 20-40 will cover you wide to portrait and the 60-250 fits the telephoto length.

[percy]

i wouldn't normally say this but ditch the 15, get the 20-40 and 60-250. Those are two fantastic lenses both wr. The 20-40 will cover you wide to portrait and the 60-250 fits the telephoto length.

+1

Although it's not as wide a range as the 16-50, the 20-40 is nevertheless a very nice little lens and has the advantage of being a lot smaller and lighter.
I tried a Sigma 17-50 for a while (a nice enough lens) but am now back to using the 20-40 as I prefer the smaller and lighter lens.

[freerider]

If you got a good deal on the 15mm and it's a good copy, I would keep it. I sold off two copies of this lens and regretted it both times.

I would then go the 20-40mm/60-250mm route.

[ChristianRock]

I'm with freerider. 20-40 + 60-250 would make a killer combination. If you can keep the 15mm alongside that trio, it's a very small addition to the setup that wouldn't take up much space and might come in handy. If you find that you never use it because 20mm is wide enough, sell it.

[UncleVanya]

The 20-40 seems like a great lens - small and weather resistant, with a very usable range. It seems like a great option for both landscapes and cityscapes/street shots in urban areas.

The 60-250 is a big lens. How often will you need the really long end of the focal length? This lens will often require a tripod or at least a monopod.

The DA* 50-135 is another option that might work if having the more limited telephoto isn't a major issue. The 50-135 is cheaper and lighter and faster and is easily hand held due to speed, length, and weight (or so I'm told. My copy hasn't arrived yet - still waiting for a tracking number.

Perhaps if you can afford to add the HD teleconverter you could make this work.

As for macro grab the Raynox add on lenses for the 20-40 with or without the teleconverter or bring a manual prime lens to reverse mount on one of the lenses you take.

[DJDee]

Thanks Everyone!

So the general consensus is go with the 20-40 and the 60-250. I would love to keep the 15 but I may pick it up closer to the time of my trip so I have something a bit more useable throughout the year. Does that sound like a good plan?

---------- Post added 01-19-15 at 02:08 PM ----------

The 20-40 seems like a great lens - small and weather resistant, with a very usable range. It seems like a great option for both landscapes and cityscapes/street shots in urban areas.

The 60-250 is a big lens. How often will you need the really long end of the focal length? This lens will often require a tripod or at least a monopod.

The DA* 50-135 is another option that might work if having the more limited telephoto isn't a major issue. The 50-135 is cheaper and lighter and faster and is easily hand held due to speed, length, and weight (or so I'm told. My copy hasn't arrived yet - still waiting for a tracking number.

Perhaps if you can afford to add the HD teleconverter you could make this work.

As for macro grab the Raynox add on lenses for the 20-40 with or without the teleconverter or bring a manual prime lens to reverse mount on one of the lenses you take.

This is a good point too. I am just worried about the reach when I go out on safari. Also, here in Canada the 50-135 is priced the same as the 60-250 (where I am anyway). I did have my concerns regarding the weight - is it that much of an issue?

[savoche]

You haven't told us what you're planning to do in SA. If a safari is included you'll definitely want a long lens. Get the 60-250. I prefer the 55-300, but that's all about size and weight, not quality.

For other things, it's hard to say what's right for you. My take is a flexible zoom (18-135 - slow, but does "everything") and a few primes for special cases. I don't go without the 15 ltd but it's not the lens for everybody. And something fast for low light.

I don't think the 20-40 would be a lens for me, but a lot of people really enjoy it. Depends on how and what you shoot, I'd think.

[DJDee]

You haven't told us what you're planning to do in SA. If a safari is included you'll definitely want a long lens. Get the 60-250. I prefer the 55-300, but that's all about size and weight, not quality.

For other things, it's hard to say what's right for you. My take is a flexible zoom (18-135 - slow, but does "everything") and a few primes for special cases. I don't go without the 15 ltd but it's not the lens for everybody. And something fast for low light.

I don't think the 20-40 would be a lens for me, but a lot of people really enjoy it. Depends on how and what you shoot, I'd think.

Thanks Savoche. My apologies for not being more specific with what my plans are - everything is still up in the air. I know we plan to do a couple of safaris, visit Victoria Falls/Devil's Pool, Capetown, etc. We will be staying for a month so I guess I am looking for a versatile kit that will be useful for almost any situation (except maybe low light indoor).

I have been considering the 55-300, but we may be doing some early morning/late evening excursions and I have concerns about the speed. Are those ill-founded?

[reytor]

I'd go with the two DA* lenses + the new 1.4x TC. 20-40 will not be wide enough for Victoria falls (my guess).
For me the weight of the 60-250 has never been a problem, but this is something every individual has to decide. It is one fantastic lens though.
You may also consider the 18-135 + DA*300mm + TC. Very light and flexible combo, but you may want to keep the 15mm in that case.

[nomadkng]

Thanks Savoche. My apologies for not being more specific with what my plans are - everything is still up in the air. I know we plan to do a couple of safaris, visit Victoria Falls/Devil's Pool, Capetown, etc. We will be staying for a month so I guess I am looking for a versatile kit that will be useful for almost any situation (except maybe low light indoor).

I have been considering the 55-300, but we may be doing some early morning/late evening excursions and I have concerns about the speed. Are those ill-founded?

well you are in the world of two extremes. first, I've never felt happy the ultra wide perspective of the DA15. I know it makse big panoramas but the distortion started getting to me. and it was not wide enough at times. so I ended up with a sigma 10-20 for the really wide.

the other end is safari, where you can never have enough MM. 500mm makes you wish you had 600 and 600 makes you wish you had a 1.4 TC.

I personally think the 20-40/60-250 kit is nearly all inclusive but add a DA*300 and leave a 1.4 TC permanently attached for the safari. since you seem intent on all pentax and all weather sealing, that's probably the best way to go.

NOW, if it were my trip, I'd do things a little differently because I find weather sealing to be a tad overrated. My go to lens is the Tamron 17-50, to the point where the 10-20 stays home a lot. if I need panoramas, I stich purposefully taken shots together in photoshop. next, I'd take a Sigma 50-150 (the 50-135 SDM is tooooo slow and unreliable)(I've owned both and like the Sigma alot) and the final lens I'd take would be the Sigma 500 (or Pentax 560) with a 1.4x TC. My budget won't allow the 500's just yet which is one reason the safari is still a couple years away. But I just can't imagine having anything LESS than 500mm for safari shots based on everything I've read. Yes it's big and bulky, but you aren't going to get "zoo" close to anything most of the time.

As far as the DA 55-300. No. Just no. Slow, inaccurate focus and mid level IQ. I don't know how often you get to go on a safari, but for me it would be a bucket list trip. There's no way I'm taking a consumer level zoom with me.