Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-22-2015, 02:05 PM   #16
Junior Member




Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Sammamish, WA
Posts: 46
Original Poster
Thanks for the replies everyone! Really appreciated. Leaning toward either getting the HD DA 21 and then saving up for the FA 31 for portaits (already have a 50mm), or going the zoom route (either the 16-50 or the 16-85. I'd really prefer just getting the zoom, so if it's a good lens, is sharp and gives nice bokeh, that's the one for me. I'm less concerned about the upper end of the zoom, and would really like to have a WR lens that includes something around 16 for landscapes. I'm a trail runner, and take lots of action pics of my friends in the mountains, and love to get as much of the mountain scene in as possible, while also keeping as much sharpness and color as can be. Thanks again!

Have some of you used the 16-85 yet? If so, how's it going with it? (I just ordered the 55-300 as well, so between that and the 16-85, I should have a pretty solid set up for mountain, as well as in-town shooting, eh?)

03-22-2015, 02:30 PM   #17
Pentaxian
Paul the Sunman's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,838
QuoteOriginally posted by TrailRunner Quote
Have some of you used the 16-85 yet? If so, how's it going with it? (I just ordered the 55-300 as well, so between that and the 16-85, I should have a pretty solid set up for mountain, as well as in-town shooting, eh?)
There are four user reviews of the 16-85 posted already that may help, as well as the in-depth review. I haven't tried it myself, but it seems to cover your needs, especially when paired with the 55-300.
03-22-2015, 02:53 PM   #18
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Stavri's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: at a Bean & Leaf
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,832
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul the Sunman Quote
There are four user reviews of the 16-85 posted already that may help, as well as the in-depth review. I haven't tried it myself, but it seems to cover your needs, especially when paired with the 55-300.
This lens seems really impressive, matches the IQ of the DA* 16-50 and has zero CA. What a beast. Has anyone tested it on FF?
03-22-2015, 03:17 PM   #19
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
ivanvernon's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Medina, OH
Photos: Albums
Posts: 7,224
QuoteOriginally posted by Driline Quote
Another vote for the FA 31. You can buy a used version for ~ $800. I paid $750 for my Made in Japan version.

That's about what I paid, $740 plus $25 to ship from Japan, and I considered it a good buy considering the excellent condition of the lens when it arrived.

03-22-2015, 03:31 PM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by TrailRunner Quote
Thanks for the replies everyone! Really appreciated. Leaning toward either getting the HD DA 21 and then saving up for the FA 31 for portaits (already have a 50mm), or going the zoom route (either the 16-50 or the 16-85. I'd really prefer just getting the zoom, so if it's a good lens, is sharp and gives nice bokeh, that's the one for me. I'm less concerned about the upper end of the zoom, and would really like to have a WR lens that includes something around 16 for landscapes. I'm a trail runner, and take lots of action pics of my friends in the mountains, and love to get as much of the mountain scene in as possible, while also keeping as much sharpness and color as can be. Thanks again!

Have some of you used the 16-85 yet? If so, how's it going with it? (I just ordered the 55-300 as well, so between that and the 16-85, I should have a pretty solid set up for mountain, as well as in-town shooting, eh?)
To clarify a bit for your wide portrait needs, do you want the background to be blured to draw attention to the person or on the contrary you want the background to be perfectly sharp and recognisable?

The 16-85 while a bit on the heavy/big side look great for your trails needs, in particular if you don't want that much bokeh and want to include the background in the shoot.

The strength of lenses like FA31 or sigma 35mm f/1.4 or even a 16-50 is that their larger apperture would help blur the background much more when you are after the effect. They would work better to isolate the subject from the background.
03-22-2015, 05:22 PM   #21
Junior Member




Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Sammamish, WA
Posts: 46
Original Poster
Really appreciate you guys taking the time to address this question :-)
To give you a sense of what my shooting style is like: https://www.flickr.com/photos/28805392@N02/
I'm no pro, just a newbie enthusiast. But, I take my shooting seriously and aspire to be as good as possible.
Thinking more today, I think the form factor is actually quite important when it comes to running. I've been using a Sigma 10-20 a lot on the trail, and it's done pretty well, though it's not particularly fast. I run a lot at dawn (for a few reasons, early light shooting being among them), and so something faster than f4 would be nice. My 10-20 is big though, and challenging to run with in a small pack.

Leaning toward the DA HD 21 for small weight/form factor, while also producing sharp images, fast AF, and (hopefully) good bokeh. Had been thinking of a 20-40, as it's not too big, is faster than the 10-20 and is WR. But...seems like it's pretty inconsistent in it's reviews. Then there's the HD 15.... ;-)

While on the mountain, I try to use f8 and up for depth of field (to get as much in as possible). Color rendering a BIG deal.
Back in town, I like to get that non-busy bokeh when shooting family. Color rendering a BIG deal here too. Don't like flat color shots, and prefer getting as much as possible in that regard out of lens vs. trying to make something happen in PP.
I'm hoping to find something that moves between family and mountain well without changing lenses. Don't mind moving around for/with a prime a bit.
Additional thoughts? :-)

Last edited by TrailRunner; 03-22-2015 at 05:34 PM.
03-22-2015, 06:02 PM - 1 Like   #22
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,254
If you are prepared to insist on a good copy, I reckon the 20-40 limited might suit your needs perfectly. Although I returned mine due to weakness at the wide end, its bokeh, colour rendition and flare resistance was excellent - right up there with my DA21. At 40mm it was exquisite.

The weather resistance would be very reassuring in the conditions you experience.

03-22-2015, 09:28 PM   #23
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
mgvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: MD
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,029
Not having the money for the HD 20-40, I'm wondering how the older Tokina 19-35 f3.5-4.5 might compare with it. Anyone have comparisons?
03-22-2015, 09:31 PM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by TrailRunner Quote
Really appreciate you guys taking the time to address this question :-)
To give you a sense of what my shooting style is like: https://www.flickr.com/photos/28805392@N02/
I'm no pro, just a newbie enthusiast. But, I take my shooting seriously and aspire to be as good as possible.
Thinking more today, I think the form factor is actually quite important when it comes to running. I've been using a Sigma 10-20 a lot on the trail, and it's done pretty well, though it's not particularly fast. I run a lot at dawn (for a few reasons, early light shooting being among them), and so something faster than f4 would be nice. My 10-20 is big though, and challenging to run with in a small pack.

Leaning toward the DA HD 21 for small weight/form factor, while also producing sharp images, fast AF, and (hopefully) good bokeh. Had been thinking of a 20-40, as it's not too big, is faster than the 10-20 and is WR. But...seems like it's pretty inconsistent in it's reviews. Then there's the HD 15.... ;-)

While on the mountain, I try to use f8 and up for depth of field (to get as much in as possible). Color rendering a BIG deal.
Back in town, I like to get that non-busy bokeh when shooting family. Color rendering a BIG deal here too. Don't like flat color shots, and prefer getting as much as possible in that regard out of lens vs. trying to make something happen in PP.
I'm hoping to find something that moves between family and mountain well without changing lenses. Don't mind moving around for/with a prime a bit.
Additional thoughts? :-)
Your needs are potentially quite different between mountain and town and honestly not much explained.

My understanding is that for classical headshoot and head and shoulders portraits, you are already covered with your 50mm. This guy should do enough to blur the background.

Almost any lense would do in the mountains to shoot at f/8. Except if you want to frame the sun in the frame where you would need quite good flare resistance. 20-40 or a nice limited prime would help there. You might need to shoot at larger apperture at down/dusk and that would work for a wide angle to still keep all in focus, not so with a longer focal. The question would be what range of focals you really want? Something more of wide angle ? Or would you need also a tele?

At town what would you want, again? Is it the same requirement for wide portraits outdoor? Same very large framing we see for your mountain shoot when you take somebody running? Or just a full body portrait with no much arround? I mean if you want to get a large framing and still blur somewhat the background, this would be really f/1.4 or at worst f/2 you need and more likely a wide angle.

If you accept to take some distance with the subject, the 50mm could do it again and you have it already.

From your quite fuzy requirements (sorry, you just gave a few example spoke of mountain shoots, spoke a bit or portraiture in town, but not very precise if they are still need to be wide or in general how far you'd want to go on wide or tele ends) I would think that a lense like 16-50 f/2.8 would be great compromise. It would not be that bigger than 16-85. It would cover all your needs for wide shoots at f/8 but also to open more when light is declining at f/4 or even f/2.8 it would work well if the subject isn't too near in the mountains to still keep everything in focus at the wide angle. It is also WR and I think has great colors. This is not light through.

It should work reasonably well for wide portrait too with a blured background is you don't frame too large. It would also help a lot indoors to gather more light in general.

Alternative are:
- 20-40: small light, not that sharp but ok, great colors. Not very wide and a bit limited in apperture to blur background.
- 18-35 sigma f/1.8. Ultra sharp, lot of light gathering. More than you need for mountain, maybe helpfull to blur background if you still want large portraits in town. Carefull: huge/heavy and some issue with calibrating autofocus.
- 17-50 from sigma/tamron are not WR but far less expensive.

DA21 would not blur the background much in town (or not at all). FA28 f/2.8, FA31, sigma 35 f/1.4 etc I'am not sure they are wide enough. You are quite unclear for your need in town. In general your didn't specify much what you wanted to achieve here so advising any prime is very difficult. A small prime could help, but the DSLR would still be big you know you may need to compromize quality, wide apperture or zooming in the end. Honestly for a very light package and more for wide angle you'd have been better server with a small hybrid camera like the Fuji, than a DSLR.

But really express fully what you are after and also maybe consider you have different needs and so differents lenses might be needed.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
best wide angle portrait, bokeh, copy, feedback, japan, k-mount, lens, love, pentax, pentax lens, portrait, regard, resistance, round, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Please help me decide which to get WIDE ANGLE LENS rp_dxn Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 03-16-2014 05:10 PM
Vacation lens - which to get ? formercanuck Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 30 12-22-2013 09:50 AM
Not sure which camera/lens to get?? ausmoose Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 20 11-16-2013 11:06 AM
Which Wide Angle Portrait Lens Would You Choose? dynnel Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 04-16-2011 02:01 PM
need advice on wide angle lens which one to get dahlia Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 22 10-29-2010 01:23 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:40 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top