[alexorange]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Hi guys, I am the proud owner of a K-50. Aside from the standard kit lens I also have a 50 mm Prime lens. I bought the camera in April for my Peru trip and have become increasingly enthusiastic towards photography ever since.

I am now looking to buy a new zoom lens. I am constantly reading about photography terminology etc, however I really don't know that much. I do understand the trade off in quality betwen prime and zoom. However, having taken this into account I still think I would get more use out of a good quality zoom lens. As this would be the one I use on a daily basis.

My main areas I like to photograph are Landscape, nature etc.

So I'm thinking I should buy a good zoom lens to replace the kit one, what I really think I need is a longer zoom range than the 18-55mm.

Can anyone help me? I want to spent around £200 -£300.

Thanks

Alex

[Adam]

I'd recommend looking at the Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 "C", the Pentax 18-135mm, and the Pentax 16-85mm.

See our in-depth reviews here:
Lens Reviews | PentaxForums.com Reviews

And user reviews below:
Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
Pentax Lenses by Sigma, Tamron, Zeiss, and more - Reviews and Specification Database - Pentax Lens Review Database

[robthebloke]

A few reputable places to buy second hand lenses....

Pentax/Others Range - Ffordes Photographic
Batteries and Battery Grips, Sigma Lenses and Converters items in SRS Camera and Image Solutions store on eBay!
Pentax - Other Used Lenses - Used Lenses - Wex Photographic

Wex has the 18-135 in your budget range, and the 16-50 for slightly above your budget. Ffordes has the 17-70 and 21mm limited within your range (I know you said zoom, but the 21mm + 50mm would make a superb kit, and would be the option I'd personally take). All 3 of those zooms are improvements over the 18-55, but I'll let others discuss the pros/cons of each

[chmance]

Hi guys, I am the proud owner of a K-50. Aside from the standard kit lens I also have a 50 mm Prime lens. I bought the camera in April for my Peru trip and have become increasingly enthusiastic towards photography ever since.

I am now looking to buy a new zoom lens. I am constantly reading about photography terminology etc, however I really don't know that much. I do understand the trade off in quality betwen prime and zoom. However, having taken this into account I still think I would get more use out of a good quality zoom lens. As this would be the one I use on a daily basis.

My main areas I like to photograph are Landscape, nature etc.

So I'm thinking I should buy a good zoom lens to replace the kit one, what I really think I need is a longer zoom range than the 18-55mm.

Can anyone help me? I want to spent around £200 -£300.

Thanks

Alex

Hi Alex,

A couple of years ago, I was in a situation like you looking for a zoom fit for landscape and nature shots. I know that the recommendation below is not within the zoom range you have in mind. Let me share this nevertheless.

The most useful lens for landscape and nature among those I have is the SMCP 12-24mm f/4. Please check my gallery as many of the photos there were taken with this zoom. Without exaggeration, this is the best landscape/nature lens I have. It is contrasty rendering the blue sky adeptly without a polarizing filter. Moreover, it is sharp ... and take that from a pixel peeper like me. A used copy should be within your budget. And did I say that although it is ultra-wide, it is miraculously rectilinear?

Cheers!

Charlie

---

Last edited by chmance; 06-27-2015 at 04:21 PM.

[alexorange]

I'd recommend looking at the Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 "C", the Pentax 18-135mm, and the Pentax 16-85mm.

See our in-depth reviews here:
Lens Reviews | PentaxForums.com Reviews

And user reviews below:
Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
Pentax Lenses by Sigma, Tamron, Zeiss, and more - Reviews and Specification Database - Pentax Lens Review Database

Hi, thanks for the reply, the 16-85 looks good. I'm just reading over them now, I was also attracted to the Sigma, but after doing a bit of reading there seems to be a few problems with it.

[alexorange]

Thanks for all your posts guys. I'm going to look over the lenses now. Charlie I'm going to look at your gallery now.

[Mothballs]

Truth be told, you can often get better landscape shots with a telephoto. Ever seen a sunset shot where the sun seemed to be almost touching the mountain? telephoto compression.

I think you are going to need a two lens kit, zoom or not. It seems you have a good idea what your tastes are, but I think it's worth pointing that out.

[alexorange]

To be honest, landscape is really what I'd be taking the most of in an ideal world. However as I live in the city it's hard to get away to locations frequently. So the lens I invest in must really be a good all rounder. I suppose what I really need is a standard zoom with a larger focul length and sharper quality ghan the kit lens. I can afford to spend a little more than my budget price if needs be.

[robthebloke]

Sounds like you want the 21mm. Best all round lens there is

[DSims]

I think you'll still eventually want at least two lenses, but in the mean time the 16-85 looks pretty good to me (and I'm not always a fan of the newest HD lenses). The 18-135 is good too, and it's longer, of course (as well as less expensive). But then every mm counts when it comes to wide angle, so 16mm is nice. I suspect you'll be happy with either.

Eventually you'll probably want the DA*50-135 (used prices are much better) plus DA*16-50 or similar lens (maybe even the 16-85 still). Ideally you get a second body (used K-50 is fine) with one lens on each. And you probably won't know how useful a F/FA/DA*300 is until you get one.


So if I can spend all your money for you you're getting the 16-85, followed by the DA*50-135, and then an (affordable) Cosina 100/3.5 macro. Finally you add an extra body and a *300 (pick your favorite version).


[If the DA*50-135 is bigger and heavier than you want to carry around (although it's not really, compared to competing lenses) you can get the DA55-300 (any version) or F70-210/4-5.6 instead. They're certainly more affordable. But they'll never deliver quite the "WOW" image quality the * lenses I mentioned will.]

[alexorange]

Thanks for that DSims, and everyone else. I'm more confused than ever, lol. I shall do some research and report back. By the way, what do you mean when you say you can add an extra body?

Cheers

Alex

[timb64]

18-135 WR and you're sorted!

[alexorange]

18-135 WR and you're sorted!

Thanks, as I understand, with a zoom lens you sacrifice some of the image quality, would I not sacrifice even more with a range of 18-135, as opposed to 16-85?

Cheers

---------- Post added 06-28-15 at 04:11 PM ----------

How about this one?Pentax DA 17-70mm f/4 AL SDM

[Bagga_Txips]

OP's budget is fairly signicant here. The stated usage is very similar to how me and my wife use our cameras most of the time, and as a result we have far too many lenses covering the same focal lengths!


The 18-55 WR kit lens is merely OK for quality, but the WR means that it goes on our K5 for rainy days and wading into waterfall pools.

The Pentax 18-135 is very good value, ideal for rainy days and walkaround use, and it is very quiet and focusses very quickly. This of course means that when the WR is needed the lens stays firmly attached to my wife's K30 and I don't get any chance to use it! Highly recommended because it is also very nice for closeups of flowers etc - not macro, but still very useful.


We don't have a 16-85, because I am scared to suggest it, but that extra 2mm at the wide end would be very useful for landscapes. We would miss the extra 50mm at the telephoto end though, I think.


However, when it is not a WR-day, the lens we both squabble over most is the Sigma 17-50 f2.8. It's just about wide enough at 17mm, and stitching two shots together with ICE is very useful - and its image quality is the best zoom we have at the wide end. The f2.8 constant aperture is also very useful to have. It focusses very quietly, as does the 18-135, which is very useful for wildlife. Even when photographing a very large animal at a fair distance, some of our noisiest lenses can trigger a stampede! The Sigma is damned heavy though.


So in the end, my wife gets to use the best choice of zoom, and I either use the second best WR zoom, or I use my small but growing collection of primes! In the situation outlined by the OP, I would either buy the DA21 prime first or get the Sigma 17-50. (The Tamron 17-50 is also worth considering, but I compared it to the Sigma the only parameter the Tamron won in was price - the build was not as good, and boy it was noisy focusing!)

[alexorange]

Thanks, how much better is the actual photo quality on the 16-85 and the 17-70. As opposed to the standard kit lens?
Cheers