Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

**csa** · 12-16-2015, 05:22 PM

I'm currently considering very strongly the following:

18-135WR to replace my 18-55WR
HD 55-300WR to replace my DA 55-300.

I also want a wide angle zoom perhaps a 10-17, etc.

Open to suggestions within the price range of these two lenses.

pathdoc · 12-16-2015, 05:34 PM

Wait to see if you can win the 55-300 giveaway lottery competition here on the forum before you consider buying. Otherwise it sounds like a good plan, although I would hold off on the 18-135 if I were in your shoes and get the 55-300 first. You are, after all, covered for WR at the wide end; it's the long end you need it at.

Remember too that the 10-17 is a fisheye, especially at its wide end; you may want to think about the 12-24 or a similar rectilinear lens.

**Lowell Goudge** · 12-16-2015, 05:35 PM

Except for WR what do you really get replacing the 55-300. I would take the 16-85 over the 18-135 since you have the focal length coved and the extra 2 mm at the low end are much more important than the length

**csa** · 12-16-2015, 05:49 PM

Originally posted by pathdoc

Remember too that the 10-17 is a fisheye, especially at its wide end; you may want to think about the 12-24 or a similar rectilinear lens.

Good point!

**csa** · 12-16-2015, 05:51 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

Except for WR what do you really get replacing the 55-300. I would take the 16-85 over the 18-135 since you have the focal length coved and the extra 2 mm at the low end are much more important than the length

That's exactly it; WR. I've considered the 16-85.

hcc · 12-16-2015, 06:02 PM

So far you have two zoom lenses and both are 'kit' lenses. You should consider getting lenses with better IQ in my opinion.

The DA16-85mm is one option albeit expensive.

A different approach is to consider prime lenses. A prime lens can give you a major boost in IQ, for a much smaller cost than a comparable zoom lens. The plastic fantastic DA50mm f1.8 and DA35mm are both worth to consider and within your budget.

Lastly let us remember that a lens is worth its penny: that is, you get what you pay for.

Hope that the comment may help.

calsan · 12-16-2015, 06:15 PM

Definitely the HD 55-300wr does perform better than the smc in high contrast or strong light conditions. Well at least my copy does. Build is a LOT nicer also. So I don't think that's a stupid idea.

18-135 is a lot better at 18mm than the 18-55 which was very borderline and a bit mushy. I found 18-55 is really good between 21-35mm, whereas 18-135 is solid between 18-100, and 135 can be used in a pinch for centrally positioned subjects. Nice quick silent focus and only slightly larger than the 18-55, so it's not too cumbersome. Also doesn't block the built in flash, which is important for fill flash or traveling light. Only 'weakness' is the relatively slow aperture, but you knew that coming in.

**csa** · 12-16-2015, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by hcc

A different approach is to consider prime lenses.

I prefer zooms over primes, for my convenience.

"So far you have two zoom lenses and both are 'kit' lenses."

I've been more than pleased with my "kit" lenses; some may think they are not worthy, but that's not the case with my experience with them. I just wish to expand a little more.

bertwert · 12-16-2015, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by csa

I prefer zooms over primes, for my convenience.

You could still get the DA 35 to go with your DA 50, no other reason...

**csa** · 12-16-2015, 06:24 PM

Cal, thanks for your comment on the HD 55-300; this cements my choice there even more.

**csa** · 12-16-2015, 06:25 PM

Originally posted by bertwert

You could still get the DA 35 to go with your DA 50, no other reason...

Why would you suggest that, when I just said I prefer zooms? I'll probably rarely use the DA 50!

**clackers** · 12-16-2015, 06:28 PM

The Sigma 10-24 is something you should consider, too, CSA!

bertwert · 12-16-2015, 06:30 PM

Originally posted by csa

Why would you suggest that, when I just said I prefer zooms? I'll probably rarely use the DA 50!

Just to match it, so they can sit together on the shelf unused...

Okay seriously I think the 55-300 would be a good choice. And the 18-135 is a great lens (for it's price) I hear, but if you had that little extra money go for the 16-85. Then wide end a Sigma 8-16 or 10-20. I know you said you like zooms but for WA the 15 Lmtd is a good choice I hear. Also for tele there is also the Bigma to consider.

**csa** · 12-16-2015, 06:52 PM

Originally posted by clackers

The Sigma 10-24 is something you should consider, too, CSA!

Thank you, I'll definitely look into that one.

**pepperberry farm** · 12-16-2015, 08:36 PM - **1 Like**

Carol - I'm using the DA 18-135 as my Single lens this month:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/pepperberryfarm/albums/72157661141055566

it is a great choice to replace your kit lens..... easy to use, great color rendition.... it does not like low-light situations and the focus ring's placement is a little odd...

I also used the DA 10-17mm last month as my Single:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/pepperberryfarm/albums/72157659032799212

I highly recommend the DA 10-17; yes, it is a fish-eye lens, especially from 10 to about 14mm, but it is surprisingly easy to control the distortion with practice.... additionally, it is a sweetheart to handle and it is so full of pixie dust....

12-16-2015, 05:22 PM	#1
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133	Lens additions I'm currently considering very strongly the following: 18-135WR to replace my 18-55WR HD 55-300WR to replace my DA 55-300. I also want a wide angle zoom perhaps a 10-17, etc. Open to suggestions within the price range of these two lenses.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Survey about future additions / improvements	sterretje	Pentax DSLR Discussion	5	02-24-2015 10:42 AM
Latest additions to my P67 and P645 lens lineup	bensonga	Pentax Medium Format	10	12-11-2012 04:36 PM
Additions to the kit: New lens or a tripod	harish	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	33	04-10-2012 04:17 PM
Additions/corrections to 6x7 lens database	Paul Ewins	Pentax Medium Format	21	11-24-2010 11:47 PM
For Sale - Sold: [SOLD]Next lot from the 300+ lens sale. New additions.	benjamin59	Sold Items	63	02-17-2009 01:31 AM

12-16-2015, 05:34 PM	#2
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	Wait to see if you can win the 55-300 giveaway lottery competition here on the forum before you consider buying. Otherwise it sounds like a good plan, although I would hold off on the 18-135 if I were in your shoes and get the 55-300 first. You are, after all, covered for WR at the wide end; it's the long end you need it at. Remember too that the 10-17 is a fisheye, especially at its wide end; you may want to think about the 12-24 or a similar rectilinear lens.

12-16-2015, 05:35 PM	#3
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,892	Except for WR what do you really get replacing the 55-300. I would take the 16-85 over the 18-135 since you have the focal length coved and the extra 2 mm at the low end are much more important than the length

12-16-2015, 05:49 PM	#4
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133 Original Poster	Originally posted by pathdoc Remember too that the 10-17 is a fisheye, especially at its wide end; you may want to think about the 12-24 or a similar rectilinear lens. Good point!

12-16-2015, 05:51 PM	#5
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133 Original Poster	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge Except for WR what do you really get replacing the 55-300. I would take the 16-85 over the 18-135 since you have the focal length coved and the extra 2 mm at the low end are much more important than the length That's exactly it; WR. I've considered the 16-85.

12-16-2015, 06:02 PM	#6
hcc Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,005	So far you have two zoom lenses and both are 'kit' lenses. You should consider getting lenses with better IQ in my opinion. The DA16-85mm is one option albeit expensive. A different approach is to consider prime lenses. A prime lens can give you a major boost in IQ, for a much smaller cost than a comparable zoom lens. The plastic fantastic DA50mm f1.8 and DA35mm are both worth to consider and within your budget. Lastly let us remember that a lens is worth its penny: that is, you get what you pay for. Hope that the comment may help.

12-16-2015, 06:15 PM	#7
calsan Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Perth, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,549	Definitely the HD 55-300wr does perform better than the smc in high contrast or strong light conditions. Well at least my copy does. Build is a LOT nicer also. So I don't think that's a stupid idea. 18-135 is a lot better at 18mm than the 18-55 which was very borderline and a bit mushy. I found 18-55 is really good between 21-35mm, whereas 18-135 is solid between 18-100, and 135 can be used in a pinch for centrally positioned subjects. Nice quick silent focus and only slightly larger than the 18-55, so it's not too cumbersome. Also doesn't block the built in flash, which is important for fill flash or traveling light. Only 'weakness' is the relatively slow aperture, but you knew that coming in.

12-16-2015, 06:19 PM	#8
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133 Original Poster	Originally posted by hcc A different approach is to consider prime lenses. I prefer zooms over primes, for my convenience. "So far you have two zoom lenses and both are 'kit' lenses." I've been more than pleased with my "kit" lenses; some may think they are not worthy, but that's not the case with my experience with them. I just wish to expand a little more.

12-16-2015, 06:21 PM	#9
bertwert Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Golden, BC Posts: 15,172	Originally posted by csa I prefer zooms over primes, for my convenience. You could still get the DA 35 to go with your DA 50, no other reason...

12-16-2015, 06:24 PM	#10
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133 Original Poster	Cal, thanks for your comment on the HD 55-300; this cements my choice there even more.

12-16-2015, 06:25 PM	#11
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133 Original Poster	Originally posted by bertwert You could still get the DA 35 to go with your DA 50, no other reason... Why would you suggest that, when I just said I prefer zooms? I'll probably rarely use the DA 50!

12-16-2015, 06:28 PM	#12
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	The Sigma 10-24 is something you should consider, too, CSA!

12-16-2015, 06:30 PM	#13
bertwert Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2015 Location: Golden, BC Posts: 15,172	Originally posted by csa Why would you suggest that, when I just said I prefer zooms? I'll probably rarely use the DA 50! Just to match it, so they can sit together on the shelf unused... Okay seriously I think the 55-300 would be a good choice. And the 18-135 is a great lens (for it's price) I hear, but if you had that little extra money go for the 16-85. Then wide end a Sigma 8-16 or 10-20. I know you said you like zooms but for WA the 15 Lmtd is a good choice I hear. Also for tele there is also the Bigma to consider.

12-16-2015, 06:52 PM	#14
csa Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2014 Location: Montana mountains Posts: 10,133 Original Poster	Originally posted by clackers The Sigma 10-24 is something you should consider, too, CSA! Thank you, I'll definitely look into that one.

12-16-2015, 08:36 PM - 1 Like	#15
pepperberry farm amateur dirt farmer Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: probably out in a field somewhere... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 41,781	Carol - I'm using the DA 18-135 as my Single lens this month: https://www.flickr.com/photos/pepperberryfarm/albums/72157661141055566 it is a great choice to replace your kit lens..... easy to use, great color rendition.... it does not like low-light situations and the focus ring's placement is a little odd... I also used the DA 10-17mm last month as my Single: https://www.flickr.com/photos/pepperberryfarm/albums/72157659032799212 I highly recommend the DA 10-17; yes, it is a fish-eye lens, especially from 10 to about 14mm, but it is surprisingly easy to control the distortion with practice.... additionally, it is a sweetheart to handle and it is so full of pixie dust....

Lens additions

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!