[bassek]

complete rubbish, the screw drive lenses sound loud to us because our ears are so close to the mechanism - people further away barely notice it.

Agree here regarding my FA43, (fake) shutter sounds are far more annoying.

Must have lenses are the (FA) limiteds, or for old skool shooting the K, M or A series ones. The M or F series are the best bang for $.

Seb

[BigMackCam]

complete rubbish, the screw drive lenses sound loud to us because our ears are so close to the mechanism - people further away barely notice it.

I have photographed musical performances, and the audience and performers weren't even aware I was taking photographs of them.

You've confirmed what I've suspected for some time, though I'd guess macro lenses such as the DA35 f/2.8 or DA100 f/2.8, racking back and forth (same with the DA55-300 which is infamous for this), have more potential to be intrusive if you're in an extremely quiet environment. Otherwise, screw-drive focus lenses are so quick that the little bit of noise they do make should be fairly inconsequential. Pre-setting the distance on the lens before using AF would reduce the already-quick focus time further still...

[Digitalis]

TL/DR version for the visually oriented:

[Sandy Hancock]

the ltds are too noisy for wedding work and the 50-135 is too slow focusing.

Nonsense. The 31 and 43 take so little time to focus the noise is irrelevant, and the IQ of the 77 makes any noise worth it.
If you can't get the DA*50-135 to focus quickly enough for weddings you're doing something wrong.

[Runegutt123]

This is what I must have:

DA15,21,35 macro, and 70

Supplied with the FA 43, my favorite.

Then its the DFA 100wr macro
the DA*300 with the 1,4 conveter for birds.

and the Sigma 10mm fisheye f/2,8 for Aurora


If you are on a budget, the A 50/1,7 is a very sharp lens,

[BigMackCam]

This is what I must have:

DA15,21,35 macro, and 70

Supplied with the FA 43, my favorite.

Then its the DFA 100wr macro
the DA*300 with the 1,4 conveter for birds.

and the Sigma 10mm fisheye f/2,8 for Aurora


If you are on a budget, the A 50/1,7 is a very sharp lens,

That's quite a list for portrait & wedding photography (the OP's main interest)...

[Runegutt123]

That's quite a list for portrait & wedding photography (the OP's main interest)...

Yes, but they are nice lenses

[drypenn]

True, I've been shooting with the FA77 in several stage plays of my daughter. I once asked my wife, sitting beside me if she noticed the whining screw drive. She couldn't hear it.

Now if it's the F70-210's torquey screw drive, I believe that I would be ushered out of the theatre .

Back to OP, I think that the MUST haves: 16-50/2.8, 50-135/2.8, and perhaps the DA*55, and for some macro shots: the DFA100/2.8.

Everything else are not "Must" haves, but more likely "Should-get-too".

[pres589]

Not to knock the choices of others... but it seemed like PF's own in-house comparison of the Sigma and Tamron 17-50's along with the DA* 16-50 made the DA* seem like a not so hot choice. Why not save the money and get the Tamron or Sigma; I thought the Tamron had the edge in images but the Sigma had the edge in build quality / resistance to getting dusty and such internally.

Digitalis, you mind sharing with the class the names of the three lenses in your picture? I see a 31 ltd and then I sort of lose the plot.

[BigMackCam]

I thought the Tamron had the edge in images but the Sigma had the edge in build quality / resistance to getting dusty and such internally.

It depends which reviews you read as to whether the Tamron or Sigma is better optically. There's not much in it either way, it would seem. One possible feature in the Sigma's favour - if AF noise is a factor - is that it uses their "Hypersonic Motor" (equivalent to Pentax's SDM, but without the latter's frequently-reported reliability issues), and is extremely quiet when focusing.

[ChristianRock]

complete rubbish, the screw drive lenses sound loud to us because our ears are so close to the mechanism - people further away barely notice it.

I have photographed musical performances, and the audience and performers weren't even aware I was taking photographs of them.

Digitalis, I'm thankful for this comment. I really am.

I've done several small events as a favor to friends (mostly kids birthday parties), and in these situations I always felt the screw drive wasn't an issue (loud kids!). But I haven't done events where I thought I needed a silent motor, which I don't have... it's been on my list to get the Sigma 17-50 for that reason, even if I don't particularly like the look of that lens... but now I think I'll just be a bit more brave and will start getting myself out there more

[Digitalis]

Digitalis, you mind sharing with the class the names of the three lenses in your picture? I see a 31 ltd and then I sort of lose the plot.

The other two lenses are: center: SMCP-K 50mm f/1.2 ( interchangeable with the SMCP-FA43 f/1.9 Limited*) and to the right: the SMCP-FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited.


* I have a preference for the SMCP-K 50mm f/1.2 because it is a stop faster than the f/1.8 limited lenses and it has rendering that is consistent with the other two Limited lenses, I hate to say it but the FA43 is a bit of an oddball even among the FA31 and FA77.

[drypenn]

The other two lenses are: center: SMCP-K 50mm f/1.2

But why the K over the A? I'm sure that it'll be easy for you to find an A if you want to. Is it just a matter of personal preference?

[Digitalis]

But why the K over the A? I'm sure that it'll be easy for you to find an A if you want to.

(I'll try to answer that with a straight face)
That particular lens was made in 1984: the year I was born. So it is a sentimental favorite.

[sarge]

I am thinking of going with the Sigma 17-50 2.8 due to price and reliability issues of the Pentax 16-50. (That and the price jumped yesterday to over $1000.00 at B&H) I have also looked at the Tamron 70-200 2.8 as an option. Going to get the 77 for sure though.