Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

Driline · 05-27-2015, 04:27 PM

Originally posted by hoopsontoast

I do like to shoot portraits (admitadly with a FA43, K85 and now FA135)

Which one is your favorite portrait lens?

hoopsontoast · 05-27-2015, 11:48 PM

Originally posted by Driline

Which one is your favorite portrait lens?

Probably, on APS-C a tie up between the FA43 and K55, I find the K85 and FA135 are a bit too long for the crop, I bought both with Film/FF in mind.

hoopsontoast · 05-28-2015, 11:49 PM

Thanks for all the replies, actually thinking of the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 instead now, it gives up the wide angle but gives me some extra reach. Yesterday I was doing some bits for my work (portrait/group shots) and found that it was all with my FA43 and FA135, the K85 was fine but MF was a PITA with a group of people.
I could easily have a WA Zoom or Prime later but I don't use the wide angle much, I did have a DA14 as my default, now if that was WR I could have forgiven its weakness (ultimate sharpness).
The Tamron 28-75 looks great value as well, I looked into the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 HSM but ALL the reviews state its not great wide open and genrally, apart from the built and HSM the Tamron is overall the better lens.

Of course we are out of the WR Lenses now, it seems a trade off of having WR and compromising with the DA*16-50 in sharpness/CA or DA16-85 in speed or going non WR and getting a better all round package with the Sigma 17-70C or Tamron 28-75.

Damit, I thought looking for a standard zoom would be easy, I have always generally gone the Prime route and found that much easier to decide!

Samoht · 05-29-2015, 05:01 AM

I'm in kind of the same situation. I got a Tamron 17-50 f2,8 today which is a great lens especially when looking at the price but it doesn't have any weather resistance or seal so I'm looking for a replacement.
And there isn't that much to replace it with if I want WR and f2,8. We have the DA 20-40 f2,8-4 WR but replace 17-50 with 20-40, nah. Then we have the DA 16-85 f3,5-5,6 where 3,5-5,6 grants for a nah as well. I have a DA 18-55 3,5-5,6 and really miss 2,8 the few times I've used it. And the DA 17-70 lacks WR so basically the only lens left for me is the DA* 16-50 but not as new, will look for a used example preferable not to old as rumors says a change was made to SDM in 2011-2012 or similar.

GlennG · 05-29-2015, 06:25 PM

Originally posted by GaryH

I just ordered the 16-85 today and plan to use it for travel. Hoping that it will be wide enough so that I can leave the 12-24mm home. I found that sometimes the 18-135 is not wide enough and can get kind of ugly at the edges. Especially when your main subject is not centered. Time will tell whether or not the 16-85 will be enough. I could also carry the 55-300 with it for a pretty light two lens kit.

I would be interested to hear, after you've experienced enough to say, how that two-lens kit works for travel. Seems that it could be near ideal, but that is on paper, assuming that you don't need real fast, that is. I've the DA 17-70 and 55-300 - really not bad as a travel combo.

IchabodCrane · 05-30-2015, 04:12 PM

Originally posted by Samoht

I'm in kind of the same situation. I got a Tamron 17-50 f2,8 today which is a great lens especially when looking at the price but it doesn't have any weather resistance or seal so I'm looking for a replacement.
And there isn't that much to replace it with if I want WR and f2,8. We have the DA 20-40 f2,8-4 WR but replace 17-50 with 20-40, nah. Then we have the DA 16-85 f3,5-5,6 where 3,5-5,6 grants for a nah as well. I have a DA 18-55 3,5-5,6 and really miss 2,8 the few times I've used it. And the DA 17-70 lacks WR so basically the only lens left for me is the DA* 16-50 but not as new, will look for a used example preferable not to old as rumors says a change was made to SDM in 2011-2012 or similar.

The DA 17-70 does have a mount seal so there's a modest amount of weather resistance it provides (for the body).

6BQ5 · 05-31-2015, 08:23 AM

If you are looking to go FF one day then don't discount the older film era lenses. Some are very, very good! Be ready for a different set of compromises though. These lenses are built differently and render differently.

hoopsontoast · 05-31-2015, 12:03 PM

Decided to go with a UWA (not 100% sure which yet) and the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. I have read lots of reviews that generally praise this over the other 28-70 models, and of course is FF/35mm compatable. Having thought about it I am not sure the WR will be of use for 99% of the photos I shoot.

6BQ5 · 05-31-2015, 12:06 PM

Originally posted by hoopsontoast

Decided to go with a UWA (not 100% sure which yet) and the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. I have read lots of reviews that generally praise this over the other 28-70 models, and of course is FF/35mm compatable. Having thought about it I am not sure the WR will be of use for 99% of the photos I shoot.

I thought about a Tamron 28-75mm with the idea that I can use it on an upcoming FF body. Be sure to check out reviews of this lens in other mounts, like Canon and Nikon, and see how this lens performs on a FF sensor. You may be surprised - I was! The data was not very positive. APS is just fine though.

hoopsontoast · 05-31-2015, 11:32 PM

Originally posted by 6BQ5

I thought about a Tamron 28-75mm with the idea that I can use it on an upcoming FF body. Be sure to check out reviews of this lens in other mounts, like Canon and Nikon, and see how this lens performs on a FF sensor. You may be surprised - I was! The data was not very positive. APS is just fine though.

Yeah I had seen the APS-C vs FF reviews on the 28-75. It should suit my APS-C needs and I can use initially on the FF as/when I get it, it should be fine on the MZ-S

I think the upcoming D-FA 24-70 f2.8 would be ideal!

forestskier · 06-27-2015, 04:53 AM

My DA* was not sharp as I expected on K-5IIs. Then I bought DA. DA looks much sharper than DA*. Finally, I sold DA*.

hoopsontoast · 03-16-2016, 05:43 AM

Well, I've come full circle now

I went with the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 and after a while found I needed the Silent Focusing Motor and swapped it out for a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 HSM.

I have used this on and off for a bit but I do now miss the wide end as I sold my DA14 last year.

Now the K-1 is all released, and the cute D-FA 28-105mm looking great, I am looking to move on my Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 HSM in favor of a DA*16-50mm or DA16-85mm for the short term.

One question, has anyone with a DA16-85 used 77mm filters on it via a step down ring, with and without the hood?

I ask as mentioned earlier, I already have a 77mm CPL and 10-Stop filter which I would like to use on either of these lenses, the DA* already being 77mm is a bonus, but the DA16-85 being 72mm.

I have an upcoming trip to the UK Lake District, and would like to have a WR lens to take with me as a more lightweight kit over the Sigma 24-70mm HSM, 85mm HSM etc.

hoopsontoast · 04-01-2016, 05:05 AM

Well, I found a decent used copy of the DA*16-50 at a UK dealer (1yr warranty) and surprised that it feels smaller and lighter than I was expecting, maybe just coming to it from the Sigma 24-70mm HSM.

I look forward to trying it out at the weekend!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
HD DA 16-85mm vs DA* 16-50mm?	Cyril_K5	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	11-02-2019 06:39 AM
pentax da 16-45 vs 16-50 da* for K5?	gf1	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	11-16-2013 10:14 AM
Shootout #2 - DA 15 Ltd / Tamron 17-50 @17 / DA* 16-50 @16 / Sigma 10-20 @16	EarlVonTapia	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	06-23-2013 10:17 PM
Wide-to-medium Tele zoom (DA 16-45mm, DA* 16-50 or DA 17-70mm?)	tlwyse	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	07-08-2009 06:36 AM

05-27-2015, 04:27 PM	#16
Driline Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,705	Originally posted by hoopsontoast I do like to shoot portraits (admitadly with a FA43, K85 and now FA135) Which one is your favorite portrait lens?

05-27-2015, 11:48 PM	#17
hoopsontoast Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 861 Original Poster	Originally posted by Driline Which one is your favorite portrait lens? Probably, on APS-C a tie up between the FA43 and K55, I find the K85 and FA135 are a bit too long for the crop, I bought both with Film/FF in mind.

05-28-2015, 11:49 PM	#18
hoopsontoast Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 861 Original Poster	Thanks for all the replies, actually thinking of the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 instead now, it gives up the wide angle but gives me some extra reach. Yesterday I was doing some bits for my work (portrait/group shots) and found that it was all with my FA43 and FA135, the K85 was fine but MF was a PITA with a group of people. I could easily have a WA Zoom or Prime later but I don't use the wide angle much, I did have a DA14 as my default, now if that was WR I could have forgiven its weakness (ultimate sharpness). The Tamron 28-75 looks great value as well, I looked into the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 HSM but ALL the reviews state its not great wide open and genrally, apart from the built and HSM the Tamron is overall the better lens. Of course we are out of the WR Lenses now, it seems a trade off of having WR and compromising with the DA*16-50 in sharpness/CA or DA16-85 in speed or going non WR and getting a better all round package with the Sigma 17-70C or Tamron 28-75. Damit, I thought looking for a standard zoom would be easy, I have always generally gone the Prime route and found that much easier to decide!

05-29-2015, 05:01 AM	#19
Samoht Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Härjedalen, Sweden Posts: 72	I'm in kind of the same situation. I got a Tamron 17-50 f2,8 today which is a great lens especially when looking at the price but it doesn't have any weather resistance or seal so I'm looking for a replacement. And there isn't that much to replace it with if I want WR and f2,8. We have the DA 20-40 f2,8-4 WR but replace 17-50 with 20-40, nah. Then we have the DA 16-85 f3,5-5,6 where 3,5-5,6 grants for a nah as well. I have a DA 18-55 3,5-5,6 and really miss 2,8 the few times I've used it. And the DA 17-70 lacks WR so basically the only lens left for me is the DA* 16-50 but not as new, will look for a used example preferable not to old as rumors says a change was made to SDM in 2011-2012 or similar.

05-29-2015, 06:25 PM	#20
GlennG Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 824	Originally posted by GaryH I just ordered the 16-85 today and plan to use it for travel. Hoping that it will be wide enough so that I can leave the 12-24mm home. I found that sometimes the 18-135 is not wide enough and can get kind of ugly at the edges. Especially when your main subject is not centered. Time will tell whether or not the 16-85 will be enough. I could also carry the 55-300 with it for a pretty light two lens kit. I would be interested to hear, after you've experienced enough to say, how that two-lens kit works for travel. Seems that it could be near ideal, but that is on paper, assuming that you don't need real fast, that is. I've the DA 17-70 and 55-300 - really not bad as a travel combo.

05-30-2015, 04:12 PM	#21
IchabodCrane Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,728	Originally posted by Samoht I'm in kind of the same situation. I got a Tamron 17-50 f2,8 today which is a great lens especially when looking at the price but it doesn't have any weather resistance or seal so I'm looking for a replacement. And there isn't that much to replace it with if I want WR and f2,8. We have the DA 20-40 f2,8-4 WR but replace 17-50 with 20-40, nah. Then we have the DA 16-85 f3,5-5,6 where 3,5-5,6 grants for a nah as well. I have a DA 18-55 3,5-5,6 and really miss 2,8 the few times I've used it. And the DA 17-70 lacks WR so basically the only lens left for me is the DA* 16-50 but not as new, will look for a used example preferable not to old as rumors says a change was made to SDM in 2011-2012 or similar. The DA 17-70 does have a mount seal so there's a modest amount of weather resistance it provides (for the body).

05-31-2015, 08:23 AM	#22
6BQ5 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,348	If you are looking to go FF one day then don't discount the older film era lenses. Some are very, very good! Be ready for a different set of compromises though. These lenses are built differently and render differently.

05-31-2015, 12:03 PM	#23
hoopsontoast Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 861 Original Poster	Decided to go with a UWA (not 100% sure which yet) and the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. I have read lots of reviews that generally praise this over the other 28-70 models, and of course is FF/35mm compatable. Having thought about it I am not sure the WR will be of use for 99% of the photos I shoot.

05-31-2015, 12:06 PM	#24
6BQ5 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,348	Originally posted by hoopsontoast Decided to go with a UWA (not 100% sure which yet) and the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. I have read lots of reviews that generally praise this over the other 28-70 models, and of course is FF/35mm compatable. Having thought about it I am not sure the WR will be of use for 99% of the photos I shoot. I thought about a Tamron 28-75mm with the idea that I can use it on an upcoming FF body. Be sure to check out reviews of this lens in other mounts, like Canon and Nikon, and see how this lens performs on a FF sensor. You may be surprised - I was! The data was not very positive. APS is just fine though.

05-31-2015, 11:32 PM	#25
hoopsontoast Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 861 Original Poster	Originally posted by 6BQ5 I thought about a Tamron 28-75mm with the idea that I can use it on an upcoming FF body. Be sure to check out reviews of this lens in other mounts, like Canon and Nikon, and see how this lens performs on a FF sensor. You may be surprised - I was! The data was not very positive. APS is just fine though. Yeah I had seen the APS-C vs FF reviews on the 28-75. It should suit my APS-C needs and I can use initially on the FF as/when I get it, it should be fine on the MZ-S I think the upcoming D-FA 24-70 f2.8 would be ideal!

06-27-2015, 04:53 AM	#26
forestskier New Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Tochigi Posts: 12	My DA* was not sharp as I expected on K-5IIs. Then I bought DA. DA looks much sharper than DA. Finally, I sold DA.

03-16-2016, 05:43 AM	#27
hoopsontoast Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 861 Original Poster	Well, I've come full circle now I went with the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 and after a while found I needed the Silent Focusing Motor and swapped it out for a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 HSM. I have used this on and off for a bit but I do now miss the wide end as I sold my DA14 last year. Now the K-1 is all released, and the cute D-FA 28-105mm looking great, I am looking to move on my Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 HSM in favor of a DA16-50mm or DA16-85mm for the short term. One question, has anyone with a DA16-85 used 77mm filters on it via a step down ring, with and without the hood? I ask as mentioned earlier, I already have a 77mm CPL and 10-Stop filter which I would like to use on either of these lenses, the DA already being 77mm is a bonus, but the DA16-85 being 72mm. I have an upcoming trip to the UK Lake District, and would like to have a WR lens to take with me as a more lightweight kit over the Sigma 24-70mm HSM, 85mm HSM etc.

04-01-2016, 05:05 AM	#28
hoopsontoast Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Oxfordshire Posts: 861 Original Poster	Well, I found a decent used copy of the DA*16-50 at a UK dealer (1yr warranty) and surprised that it feels smaller and lighter than I was expecting, maybe just coming to it from the Sigma 24-70mm HSM. I look forward to trying it out at the weekend!

DA* 16-50 or DA 16-85mm

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!