Originally posted by weaponx525 I am torn between this lens and the 28-105 D FA. The 28-105 is nice for the possibility of going full frame in the future without worrying about vignetting because of a Da lens on full frame body. When I use the 55-200 I don't normally go beyond 105 mm anyway. Im also currently using the original kit lens and want an improvement. What are the opinions: the 16-85 or 28-105mm. Feedback is much appreciated!
I've got a 28-70 2.8 full frame lens from my film days but I also use it on digital at events. Unless I know I'll not be using anything wide, I rarely use it.
I really never liked the whole future proofing thing. Buy the best lens for the camera system you have. Not the camera system you might or might not get.
The 16-85 gives you a nice 24-135ish equivalent lens on an APS-C camera. The 28-105 is a normal tele zoom, completely different animals.
---------- Post added 12-08-2016 at 03:41 AM ----------
Originally posted by weaponx525 Would the equivalent field of view be 32-160 if I use the 28-105 on my K5 I and the 16-85 would "become" 24-127?
42-160