[jddwoods]

I am looking forward to the reviews on this lens. The zoom range works well for me on the K-3 since I have wide covered with DA 15 and 21 Limiteds. The benefit is that down the road if I decide to upgrade to K-1 or its successor, I would have a FF compatible lens. I am holding off on some walk around zooms I have been considering to see how this lens pans out. It does not look like this lens will be much bigger than the DA 17-70 or HD DA 16-85 zooms.

[therion]

Does anybody have this lens? I would like to see, how good is this lens in direct sunlight and what about starburst. Thanks

[robjmitchell]

In case someone missed the other thread, https://www.ephotozine.com/article/hd-pentax-d-fa-28-105mm-f-3-5-5-6-ed-dc-wr-lens-review-29352
Performance would appear to be excellent.

[therion]

thanks, I have seen it, but there are no pictures Im looking for

[WPRESTO]

thanks, I have seen it, but there are no pictures Im looking for

In you can get onto the "Trees" thread, I just posted a couple of images taken with the 28~105mm, the second a crop from the first.

[Robbod]

I clicked on the sample image of the hillside town to bring up the high-res image, then clicked to enlarge here and there, for example on one of the cars at the bottom of the image. The IQ seems to be very good to excellent and would survive some pretty deep cropping before the image began to look soft.

I have the Tamron re-badge (FA 28-105 F4-5.6 IF) on my K1 and previously used it as a back up lens for weddings and occasionally as a weekend shooter. It's a capable piece of kit and surprisingly good edge to edge for what it is. Using it on the K1 over the weekend, I achieved some quite good sharpness and detail. No doubt the new D FA will be a step up...

[sibyrnes]

Am I crazy for considering this lens for my K200D? I don't have a high quality zoom in that range and I am planning on moving up to Full Frame eventually.

[Paul the Sunman]

Am I crazy for considering this lens for my K200D? I don't have a high quality zoom in that range and I am planning on moving up to Full Frame eventually.

If you really are going to FF eventually, the 28-105 is a reasonable choice. However, for APS-C I would go with the excellent 16-85 or, if you want more reach, the "all-rounder" 18-135.

[Driline]

If you really are going to FF eventually, the 28-105 is a reasonable choice. However, for APS-C I would go with the excellent 16-85 or, if you want more reach, the "all-rounder" 18-135.

I've read on PF that the 28-105 & 16-85 have much better IQ than the 18-135. I had an 18-135 and sold it. I felt it was'nt much better in IQ than my kit 18-55 lens. I'm looking forward to purchasing the 28-105 myself and use it on my K-50.

[WPRESTO]

I've read on PF that the 28-105 & 16-85 have much better IQ than the 18-135. I had an 18-135 and sold it. I felt it was'nt much better in IQ than my kit 18-55 lens. I'm looking forward to purchasing the 28-105 myself and use it on my K-50.

I will second the recommendation that IF you are going to FF, get the 28-105; BUT IF you are staying with APS-C, the 16-85 is a better choice.

[Driline]

I will second the recommendation that IF you are going to FF, get the 28-105; BUT IF you are staying with APS-C, the 16-85 is a better choice.

I'm all about IQ. If the 28-105 has better IQ than the 16-85 I would gladly purchase it over the 16-85. I tend to take photos at the Long end anyway. But if the 16-85 is = or better than the 28-105 in image quality then I would purchase it. I can live with either lenses focal length. It's all about who has the better IQ.

[WPRESTO]

I'm all about IQ. If the 28-105 has better IQ than the 16-85 I would gladly purchase it over the 16-85. I tend to take photos at the Long end anyway. But if the 16-85 is = or better than the 28-105 in image quality then I would purchase it. I can live with either lenses focal length. It's all about who has the better IQ.

I do not have immediately available an image to demonstrate the IQ of the 16~85, but I will say that I have been regularly, consistently been been surprised and pleased by it's ability to record detail.

[gaweidert]

I have the lens and it is a very good performer. I was sort of forced to get it when I got my K1. I was almost 1,900 miles from home when I purchased my K1. I was pretty certain that I was going to get the K1 when I left home, but didn't pack and FF wide angle lenses with me. So I bit the bullet and got it with the camera. The whole time I was in Yellowstone either that lens or the 150 - 450 was on the camera. I am very happy with it.

Fist shot at 28mm.

This at 105mm

[timcatn]

I just bought the 28-105 as my all-round lens for the K1. I think it is very good. Even sharpness across the frame. Only drawback is the smalle max aperture compared to the 24-70. It so good (and expensive) that i would hesitate to Call it a "kit lens". The measurements done by E-photozine says it all imo.

However if you plan to stay With APS-C then 28mm might not be wide enough as an all-rounder.

[sibyrnes]

However if you plan to stay With APS-C then 28mm might not be wide enough as an all-rounder.

I have a HD DA 15 Limited and a K 24mm f/2.8 for wide angle use as well as a pretty nice collection of manual focus FF lenses. I will almost definitely be moving to FF, as most of us eventually will. I'm just going to hold off for a while and see what "develops". That said, I ordered the 28-105 from B&H and will be trying it out next week.