What lens would be the best purchase for me at this time?

mikebb · 04-27-2017, 01:47 PM

I am expecting my new to me K-3 on Monday. At that time I would have a Pentax-M 50mm 1:1.7, and a Pentax 35-70 f3.5-4.5. So I am wondering and want to get ONE more. I am interested in Documentary Photography (urban, buildings, roads) Night, and low light, and maybe some street eventually.

With this in mind should I go Wide or get a zoom? I was considering DA 35mm 1.8, 17-50 F2.8 Sigma or Tamron, or a DA 18-135mm WR. If I go wide I would not have not have anything tighter than 70mm until my next lens purchase. But Maybe I can have a little more room to work with if I get the 18-135mm. I just know that the 17-50 is faster. What do you think.

**newmikey** · 04-27-2017, 01:58 PM

With your focus (pun intended) on "Documentary Photography (urban, buildings, roads) Night, and low light, and maybe some street eventually" I should say your best all-around bet would be one of the 17-50mm's - the Tammy is slightly cheaper and the Sigma is slighly sharper. There's a test on this site pitting them against each other I believe. The DA35mm will not be wide enough for inside buildings/urban and the DA18-135 is not really a low-light performer as well as having some issues with edge sharpness. (It's one hell of a lens, just not perfectly suited to your purpose IMHO).

**jatrax** · 04-27-2017, 02:29 PM

I would suggest the DA 16-85, nice & sharp. Not as fast as the f/2.8 lenses but a broader focal range, weather sealed and not heavy. Modern, fast auto focus.

**Pentax Syntax** · 04-27-2017, 02:38 PM

Another vote for the 16-85 (3.5-5.6). Pairs well with my K-3. Pricey though and not really ideal for low light. Other options are the DA 12-24 f4 and the DA 14 2.8. Unfortunately none of these are cheap. With the Tamron 17-50 2.8 on sale it's not a bad option.

ChristianRock · 04-27-2017, 02:46 PM - **1 Like**

I am surprised to be the first to suggest the DA 21mm. But that would be my suggestion, unless you want a zoom.

mikebb · 04-27-2017, 02:54 PM

Originally posted by newmikey

With your focus (pun intended) on "Documentary Photography (urban, buildings, roads) Night, and low light, and maybe some street eventually" I should say your best all-around bet would be one of the 17-50mm's - the Tammy is slightly cheaper and the Sigma is slighly sharper. There's a test on this site pitting them against each other I believe. The DA35mm will not be wide enough for inside buildings/urban and the DA18-135 is not really a low-light performer as well as having some issues with edge sharpness. (It's one hell of a lens, just not perfectly suited to your purpose IMHO).

Thank you I am leaning this way.

Originally posted by jatrax

I would suggest the DA 16-85, nice & sharp. Not as fast as the f/2.8 lenses but a broader focal range, weather sealed and not heavy. Modern, fast auto focus.

Originally posted by Pentax Syntax

Another vote for the 16-85 (3.5-5.6). Pairs well with my K-3. Pricey though and not really ideal for low light. Other options are the DA 12-24 f4 and the DA 14 2.8. Unfortunately none of these are cheap. With the Tamron 17-50 2.8 on sale it's not a bad option.

THank you both. I would love to have this one but it is a little out of range for me at the moment. I am a photography baby at 39. But I plan to never be with out my camera. So I am planning on lots of clicks. But I will get this one for sure down the road.

Originally posted by cataseven

I used tamron, sigma and 18-135. Sigma and tamron are sharp (sigma little bit sharper but not big difference) however ı would go for tamron because i think it has much better colors. 18-135 was beyond the expectations especially in terms of color rendering. I used it with k-3 and k-01. I recommend it.

If you have enough budget go for both because 18-135 is also WR) if not then get tammy.

So you think I can survive a couple to a few months with out anything longer than 70mm? I will keep my eye peeled here in the market place for longer lenses of course.

And I don't know if I am calling what it is correctly, but these samples from google search are what I mean when I say documentary/urban/city photography. Maybe it is architecture? I just have a thing for trying to preserve the older stuff before it gives way to the new. At this I WANT to TRY to do this...

cataseven · 04-27-2017, 02:56 PM

I used tamron, sigma and 18-135. Sigma and tamron are sharp (sigma little bit sharper but not big difference) however ı would go for tamron because i think it has much better colors.

18-135 was beyond the expectations especially in terms of color rendering. I used it with k-3 and k-01. I recommend it.

I did not use 16-85 but it has good range, good picture quality and also it is WR.

My suggestions

1- if you want carry just one lens go for 16/85
2 - if you are ok with two lenses then you can pair tamron and 18-135 (it is WR) or tamron and one of 55-300 lenses, even DAL 55-300 (cheaper)

**othar** · 04-27-2017, 03:20 PM

I have a K-3 and my 35-70mm is the lens I primarily use, so I don't think it will disapoint you for general purposes. But for architectural/urban photography I also think you will need something wider first. The DA 21mm or the Tamron 17-50mm are some valid solutions, but depending on where you plan to photograph they might still be too narrow (for interiors or small allies you might even wish for a 10-20mm/10-24mm lens). But for the examples you showed I think something in the range around 18mm will do for starters.

Paul the Sunman · 04-27-2017, 03:25 PM

Wider would be my choice.I love the DA15, but for your purposes the DA21 would probably be a better option. If you prefer a zoom it's hard to go past the DA 16-85, though it's not a fast lens. The DA 18-135 is also very nice, though not quite at the 16-85 standard.

If you want zoom and fast, the Sigma 18-35 Art f/1.8 is the obvious option, if you're willing to put up with its idiosyncracies.

**aslyfox** · 04-27-2017, 03:51 PM

I am going to suggest that you go to the top of the page and click on "cameras", "lenses", "accessories" and "articles" and take a look at what you find there.

I would especially look at:

Pentax K-3 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

Pentax K-Mount Lenses Explained: The differences between various Pentax lens series

Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

Pentax K-3 - PentaxForums.com

Gear Guides | PentaxForums.com

one of these days, I'll get smart and do as I advise others to do

good luck and let us know what you decide on.

and post photos, lots of photos.

I also like the 16 - 85 mm but I am no expert

**RobA_Oz** · 04-27-2017, 04:23 PM

I wouldn't be so quick as others to dismiss the DA18-135. To state the obvious, while the DA16-85 is better for framing in tight situations, it's also shorter at the long end, which might be more of a loss to you, depending on what it is that you're shooting. As noted above, having a look at the lens reviews, but probably more importantly having a look at the threads that showcase the lenses you're considering, will tell you more about their versatility and performance.

Here's a couple of the non-review lens threads, for example, with plenty of images to assist your thinking:

For the DA18-135; and
For the DA16-85

If you use the search feature, you'll find plenty more.

The advantage of the Pentax lenses is that many of them are weather-sealed, whereas the Tamron and Sigma ones are not, which may or may not be a consideration for you.

**jatrax** · 04-27-2017, 05:30 PM

Originally posted by RobA_Oz

I wouldn't be so quick as others to dismiss the DA18-135. To state the obvious, while the DA16-85 is better for framing in tight situations,

I would agree with this. For a couple years (before K-1

) I shot with 16-85 and my wife shot with 18-135. Sometimes my shot was better, sometimes hers was. Stopped down there is not as much difference in the real world as some would try to make you believe. That said, the 16-85 is wider and if wide is a priority that gives it an edge. The 16-85 is also built (IMHO) a bit better, not quite '*' level but a bit of an upgrade over the 18-135. But either will work well.

**boriscleto** · 04-27-2017, 05:34 PM

You could count the number of times I've said "This photo is soft in the corners" on your hands...if you were a double amputee.

C_Jones · 04-27-2017, 05:49 PM

I have the 16-85, and would recommend it. A tripod paired with it for low light subjects would cover most any subject if you were not concerned with catching fast moving objects. On the other hand, if that is too pricey for you and you definitely need the F2.8, the Sigma 17-50 may be a good match for your type(s) of photography you mentioned you were interested in.

**beachgardener** · 04-27-2017, 06:32 PM

my two bob, the da 14 and 21, or maybe just the Tamron 17-50

the 14 and 21 are definite purchases for me in the future.

04-27-2017, 01:47 PM	#1
mikebb New Member Join Date: May 2016 Posts: 15	What lens would be the best purchase for me at this time? I am expecting my new to me K-3 on Monday. At that time I would have a Pentax-M 50mm 1:1.7, and a Pentax 35-70 f3.5-4.5. So I am wondering and want to get ONE more. I am interested in Documentary Photography (urban, buildings, roads) Night, and low light, and maybe some street eventually. With this in mind should I go Wide or get a zoom? I was considering DA 35mm 1.8, 17-50 F2.8 Sigma or Tamron, or a DA 18-135mm WR. If I go wide I would not have not have anything tighter than 70mm until my next lens purchase. But Maybe I can have a little more room to work with if I get the 18-135mm. I just know that the 17-50 is faster. What do you think.

04-27-2017, 04:23 PM	#11
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,197	I wouldn't be so quick as others to dismiss the DA18-135. To state the obvious, while the DA16-85 is better for framing in tight situations, it's also shorter at the long end, which might be more of a loss to you, depending on what it is that you're shooting. As noted above, having a look at the lens reviews, but probably more importantly having a look at the threads that showcase the lenses you're considering, will tell you more about their versatility and performance. Here's a couple of the non-review lens threads, for example, with plenty of images to assist your thinking: For the DA18-135; and For the DA16-85 If you use the search feature, you'll find plenty more. The advantage of the Pentax lenses is that many of them are weather-sealed, whereas the Tamron and Sigma ones are not, which may or may not be a consideration for you.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
645D ...645Z purchase or not to purchase ???	VSTAR	Pentax Medium Format	20	03-09-2017 12:37 AM
Which zoom would work best for me	cdd29	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	01-29-2017 03:40 PM
Lens purchase? Best one	Michael Hensley	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	7	09-19-2015 11:22 AM
What would you suggest as the first non-kit lens purchase and why?	OldNoob	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	38	11-30-2013 05:13 PM
What would be the best lens for me`?	karq	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	07-25-2008 02:26 PM

04-27-2017, 01:58 PM	#2
newmikey Site Supporter Join Date: May 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,287	With your focus (pun intended) on "Documentary Photography (urban, buildings, roads) Night, and low light, and maybe some street eventually" I should say your best all-around bet would be one of the 17-50mm's - the Tammy is slightly cheaper and the Sigma is slighly sharper. There's a test on this site pitting them against each other I believe. The DA35mm will not be wide enough for inside buildings/urban and the DA18-135 is not really a low-light performer as well as having some issues with edge sharpness. (It's one hell of a lens, just not perfectly suited to your purpose IMHO).

04-27-2017, 02:29 PM	#3
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	I would suggest the DA 16-85, nice & sharp. Not as fast as the f/2.8 lenses but a broader focal range, weather sealed and not heavy. Modern, fast auto focus.

04-27-2017, 02:38 PM	#4
Pentax Syntax Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Maryland Posts: 595	Another vote for the 16-85 (3.5-5.6). Pairs well with my K-3. Pricey though and not really ideal for low light. Other options are the DA 12-24 f4 and the DA 14 2.8. Unfortunately none of these are cheap. With the Tamron 17-50 2.8 on sale it's not a bad option.

04-27-2017, 02:46 PM - 1 Like	#5
ChristianRock Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: People's Republic of America Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,910	I am surprised to be the first to suggest the DA 21mm. But that would be my suggestion, unless you want a zoom.

04-27-2017, 02:54 PM	#6
mikebb New Member Join Date: May 2016 Posts: 15 Original Poster	Originally posted by newmikey With your focus (pun intended) on "Documentary Photography (urban, buildings, roads) Night, and low light, and maybe some street eventually" I should say your best all-around bet would be one of the 17-50mm's - the Tammy is slightly cheaper and the Sigma is slighly sharper. There's a test on this site pitting them against each other I believe. The DA35mm will not be wide enough for inside buildings/urban and the DA18-135 is not really a low-light performer as well as having some issues with edge sharpness. (It's one hell of a lens, just not perfectly suited to your purpose IMHO). Thank you I am leaning this way. Originally posted by jatrax I would suggest the DA 16-85, nice & sharp. Not as fast as the f/2.8 lenses but a broader focal range, weather sealed and not heavy. Modern, fast auto focus. Originally posted by Pentax Syntax Another vote for the 16-85 (3.5-5.6). Pairs well with my K-3. Pricey though and not really ideal for low light. Other options are the DA 12-24 f4 and the DA 14 2.8. Unfortunately none of these are cheap. With the Tamron 17-50 2.8 on sale it's not a bad option. THank you both. I would love to have this one but it is a little out of range for me at the moment. I am a photography baby at 39. But I plan to never be with out my camera. So I am planning on lots of clicks. But I will get this one for sure down the road. Originally posted by cataseven I used tamron, sigma and 18-135. Sigma and tamron are sharp (sigma little bit sharper but not big difference) however ı would go for tamron because i think it has much better colors. 18-135 was beyond the expectations especially in terms of color rendering. I used it with k-3 and k-01. I recommend it. If you have enough budget go for both because 18-135 is also WR) if not then get tammy. So you think I can survive a couple to a few months with out anything longer than 70mm? I will keep my eye peeled here in the market place for longer lenses of course. And I don't know if I am calling what it is correctly, but these samples from google search are what I mean when I say documentary/urban/city photography. Maybe it is architecture? I just have a thing for trying to preserve the older stuff before it gives way to the new. At this I WANT to TRY to do this...

04-27-2017, 02:56 PM	#7
cataseven New Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: Istanbul Posts: 24	I used tamron, sigma and 18-135. Sigma and tamron are sharp (sigma little bit sharper but not big difference) however ı would go for tamron because i think it has much better colors. 18-135 was beyond the expectations especially in terms of color rendering. I used it with k-3 and k-01. I recommend it. I did not use 16-85 but it has good range, good picture quality and also it is WR. My suggestions 1- if you want carry just one lens go for 16/85 2 - if you are ok with two lenses then you can pair tamron and 18-135 (it is WR) or tamron and one of 55-300 lenses, even DAL 55-300 (cheaper)

04-27-2017, 03:20 PM	#8
othar Site Supporter Join Date: May 2014 Location: Linz Photos: Albums Posts: 3,098	I have a K-3 and my 35-70mm is the lens I primarily use, so I don't think it will disapoint you for general purposes. But for architectural/urban photography I also think you will need something wider first. The DA 21mm or the Tamron 17-50mm are some valid solutions, but depending on where you plan to photograph they might still be too narrow (for interiors or small allies you might even wish for a 10-20mm/10-24mm lens). But for the examples you showed I think something in the range around 18mm will do for starters.

04-27-2017, 03:25 PM	#9
Paul the Sunman Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,843	Wider would be my choice.I love the DA15, but for your purposes the DA21 would probably be a better option. If you prefer a zoom it's hard to go past the DA 16-85, though it's not a fast lens. The DA 18-135 is also very nice, though not quite at the 16-85 standard. If you want zoom and fast, the Sigma 18-35 Art f/1.8 is the obvious option, if you're willing to put up with its idiosyncracies.

04-27-2017, 03:51 PM	#10
aslyfox Seeker of Knowledge Join Date: Aug 2016 Location: Topeka, Kansas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 24,581	I am going to suggest that you go to the top of the page and click on "cameras", "lenses", "accessories" and "articles" and take a look at what you find there. I would especially look at: Pentax K-3 Review - Introduction \| PentaxForums.com Reviews Pentax K-Mount Lenses Explained: The differences between various Pentax lens series Pentax Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database Pentax K-3 - PentaxForums.com Gear Guides \| PentaxForums.com one of these days, I'll get smart and do as I advise others to do good luck and let us know what you decide on. and post photos, lots of photos. I also like the 16 - 85 mm but I am no expert

04-27-2017, 05:30 PM	#12
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by RobA_Oz I wouldn't be so quick as others to dismiss the DA18-135. To state the obvious, while the DA16-85 is better for framing in tight situations, I would agree with this. For a couple years (before K-1 ) I shot with 16-85 and my wife shot with 18-135. Sometimes my shot was better, sometimes hers was. Stopped down there is not as much difference in the real world as some would try to make you believe. That said, the 16-85 is wider and if wide is a priority that gives it an edge. The 16-85 is also built (IMHO) a bit better, not quite '*' level but a bit of an upgrade over the 18-135. But either will work well.

04-27-2017, 05:34 PM	#13
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	You could count the number of times I've said "This photo is soft in the corners" on your hands...if you were a double amputee.

04-27-2017, 05:49 PM	#14
C_Jones Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,084	I have the 16-85, and would recommend it. A tripod paired with it for low light subjects would cover most any subject if you were not concerned with catching fast moving objects. On the other hand, if that is too pricey for you and you definitely need the F2.8, the Sigma 17-50 may be a good match for your type(s) of photography you mentioned you were interested in.

04-27-2017, 06:32 PM	#15
beachgardener Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,842	my two bob, the da 14 and 21, or maybe just the Tamron 17-50 the 14 and 21 are definite purchases for me in the future.