Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-14-2015, 11:34 AM   #1
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,381
Thoughts on a wet-weather system.

Because I only have the D-FA100WR Macro and I need a bit more flexibility in a place that is increasingly wet and dreary.

All prices per Amazon.ca at day and time of posting, so exclusive of local sales tax, rounded to nearest dollar or so (negligible compared to the actual prices).

System #1: 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6
Advantages: One lens covers everything from wide to short telephoto, no need to change lenses in wet weather for most casual shooting.
Disadvantages: Price ($480), see below. DC AF not compatible with older Pentax AF bodies, and I have no problems with screw drive.
(There is a cheaper one but packaging is described as damaged; not sure what this implies for the state of the lens - dropped?? - or what recourse I have if things go badly. Fulfilment is by Amazon via Amazon Warehouse Sales, for what that's worth.)

System #2: 18-55 f3.5-5.6 ($170) and 50-200mm f4-5.6 ($220)
Advantages: Extended FL coverage for $390, much cheaper than system #1
Disadvantages: Two lenses, so possible need to change in the rain. How well can you cover your camera while this is happening?

System #3: Substitute 55-300mm f4-5.8 HD WR for the 50-200 ($470 vs $220 individual price; total system cost $640)
Advantages: Greatest focal length coverage.
Disadvantages: The long zoom on its own is as expensive as the 18-135 and, while offering the longest reach, lacks at the short end compared to that lens. Are the HD coatings and the extra 100 millimetres really worth the extra $270? The same issue of changing lenses in inclement weather if you find you are too long/too short is an issue.

They are all WR; they all have quickshift.

The occasion which spurred all this was a parade which went ahead despite it not being the best weather. I shot it with the 100 macro and found that was plenty long enough, but found I could have done with a wider frame at some points. This tells me that System #3 is overkill and can probably be discounted. Potential System #4 is of course the 16-85 DC WR, but that loses out because of cost; at ~$715 it's more expensive than any of the other combinations for less FL span (even if it's widest at the short end), and if I'm going to be doomed to f/5.6 or so at the long end I'd rather have that happen at 135mm or 300mm than 85.

Overriding all this, there's a little voice in my head that tells me to wait until the full-frame is out (or at least until it's officially announced and we know how it will handle crop lenses) and we see what happens to DA lens prices.

For the sort of casual shooting I do, IQ differences between the various lenses probably make no difference, so can we please not re-fight that war here.

09-14-2015, 11:55 AM   #2
Senior Member
Professor Batty's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 118
(There is a cheaper one but packaging is described as damaged; not sure what this implies for the state of the lens - dropped?? - or what recourse I have if things go badly. Fulfilment is by Amazon via Amazon Warehouse Sales, for what that's worth.)

I bought my Q-S1 from Fulfillment by Amazon with the packaging described as damaged, it was only a small wrinkle on the corner of the box, no big deal. I think you have the regular Amazon return options.
09-14-2015, 11:56 AM   #3
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Washington Cascades
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,991
I would go with the 18-135, if the weather is bad I'm not sure you need a telephoto longer than that anyway and it covers a lot of focal range so you don't have to change lenses in the wet. If you want longer then add the 55-300 WR, or the cheaper non-WR model, again in the rain do you need anything longer than 135mm?

I've seen the 18-135 under $300 several times here on the marketplace or other places. I've not followed the 55-300 so no idea what those are going for.

But, I would also wait (unless you have an immediate need) until October 6th (the rumored announce date) to see what the FF brings.
09-14-2015, 11:58 AM   #4
Veteran Member
mcgregni's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Surrey, England
Posts: 2,603
The 18-135 seems to be the obvious best choice. The DC motor has proved to be reliable and quick I believe. Why are you worrying about older cameras ... ? I'd cough up and get that lens!

09-14-2015, 11:58 AM   #5
Pentaxian
ChatMechant's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Matsuyama
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,284
For casual shooting I find the 18-135 a great do-all lens, hard to beat the bang for your buck. 135 is plenty long and 18 is wide enough. IQ is great for a superzoom, it is small and light and not having to change lenses is priceless in some situations not to mention not having to carry a camera bag with your other lenses. With the 18-135 you just grab your camera and go.
09-14-2015, 12:35 PM   #6
Veteran Member
wstruth's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: at my kitchen table
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,294
You can get a used 18-135 for 250 to 320 US dollars. I would go that route if I were you and not wait around for a probably $2,000 Full frame Body and full frame WR Zoom lenses that will be near that price (B&H lists the new 70-200 at $2,297 and its not even released yet). I read your post again and realized your were thinking of using DA lenses on the pending full frame.

Last edited by wstruth; 09-14-2015 at 01:35 PM.
09-14-2015, 01:07 PM   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
TER-OR's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dundee, IL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,699
As a general walk-around lens, the 18-135 has a lot going for it. The price on the used market is right, too.

The 55-300 in my experience is pretty weak at 55mm, and a little soft at 300 (as you'd expect). For the task you describe, the 18-135 is what I'd get. Skip the 18-55 unless you really need the budget for another lens like the 55-300.

I will add I've been caught in the rain a few times with the 18-135 and gone out deliberately a couple of times. It hasn't caused a problem, but one time the camera did get quite wet and the trigger didn't always work correctly. This problem lasted about a month. I was pretty worried, but left the camera out and hoped any moisture problems would evaporate.

So...still be careful.


Last edited by TER-OR; 09-14-2015 at 01:13 PM.
09-14-2015, 01:39 PM   #8
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
THoog's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,685
I personally would get the 18-135mm. Mine lives on my K-5 as my all-weather "grab and go" kit. 135mm is generally long enough - or long enough that the aggravation of swapping lenses to get 55-135mm coverage offsets the additional coverage from 135 to 200mm or 300mm. Especially if it is raining or snowing.

I recently upgraded my 55-300 to the WR version and added a 20-40 Ltd, so I do have a two-lens WR kit as well as my 18-135, but for something like a parade with bad weather, I'd still go with the 18-135mm.
09-14-2015, 02:13 PM   #9
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: New York
Posts: 4,833
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
LOTS OF SNIPPING ... The occasion which spurred all this was a parade which went ahead despite it not being the best weather. ... For the sort of casual shooting I do, IQ differences between the various lenses probably make no difference, so can we please not re-fight that war here.
The 18-135. It's a very versatile lens.

The main reason for going longer is if you plan to photograph wildlife. Since you didn't mention it I'll assume it's not an immediate need. Save your money and add the HD 55-300 (a better lens than the 50-200) if you find a need for something longer than the 18-135 at a later date.
09-14-2015, 02:57 PM   #10
Veteran Member
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,354
Focal length preference, of course, is very personal.
But 16mm is much more important to me than the 86-135mm which is why I went with the 16-85mm.
In fact, the 15mm has been gathering dust since I got it and am contemplating selling it.
09-14-2015, 03:15 PM   #11
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Wingincamera's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Pine Haven, Wyoming
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,176
Another vote for the 18-135mm, especially since IQ is not top priority. I wouldn't want to be changing lens in wet weather unless I had a secure place to do it. We do most of our distance traveling via motorcycle/sidecar rig and one trip through Yellowstone was so wet & windy that the 18-135 never left the camera.
09-14-2015, 03:55 PM   #12
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,161
Used 18-135.
09-14-2015, 08:57 PM   #13
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
K-Three's Avatar

Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pugetopolis, WA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 935
Another vote for the 18-135,
It's a significantly better, sharper, smoother, quicker lens than the 18-55, and the 50-200 (at least my copies)
Mine usually only comes off when I putting on the 55-300 (HR WR)
09-15-2015, 04:03 AM   #14
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,381
Original Poster
Thanks, all - this looks pretty definitive, and it's confirmed the conclusion I've (slowly) been coming to myself.

QuoteOriginally posted by wstruth Quote
I read your post again and realized your were thinking of using DA lenses on the pending full frame.
Actually I was thinking in terms of what the release of the full-frame, and knowledge of how it works with crop lenses, will do to DA lens prices. So it's worth holding off at least to the Black Friday sales or until the FF is released/specs are fully known, or both.

Regards the full-frame itself, I'm almost certainly going to be a late adopter; my K-5 is kicking along nicely right now, and I see no urgent need to replace it or supplement it unless that state of affairs changes (*knocks on wood*).

---------- Post added 15-09-15 at 09:07 ----------

While I'm thinking about it, how do these DC lenses perform on manual-focus bodies? I know that interface of my DA40 Ltd and DA50/1.8 with my P3 and P30T is strictly program-mode-only, but they WILL mount and fire and AFAIK they will do so with correct exposure (though I'll only know for sure when the next roll of film comes back!). Does anyone out there have a P3/30 series camera and an 18-135 they can slap on it and find out? (The P50 is a different, more sophisticated beast, and I'm not sure I'd care to extrapolate backwards.)
09-15-2015, 05:04 AM   #15
Pentaxian
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,350
If looking at a 18-55 (the comment extends to the other lenses but in particular to that one) by all means get it used from the marketplace here. It sells for lower than 100$, like new.

My WR kit for a while was the 18-55 and DFA 100. I then added the 60-250, and later sold the 18-55 and Sigma 17-70 to get the 16-85. Never looked back, it was worth it.

The 18-135 will be a better lens, and more versatile, than the 18-55. I'd look at this one.
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!
advantages, coverage, da, disadvantages, full-frame, hd, issue, k-mount, lens, lenses, pentax lens, post, prices, slr lens, system, weather
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Canon EOS Rebel T6s/i (760D/750D) AF system thoughts bwDraco Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 3 02-06-2015 12:50 PM
Buying a Zoom: Thoughts on 17-70 SDM. strangeboy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 11-24-2013 10:44 AM
Some thoughts about a m43 system farhagh Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 72 05-13-2012 02:49 AM
Wet weather, mushrooms, & things that slime spyglass Post Your Photos! 8 11-11-2008 10:44 PM
dark,wet gloomy melbourne.. ( is this xmas weather?? ) distorted_vision Post Your Photos! 17 12-22-2007 05:39 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:31 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