[mcgregni]

The Tamron 90mm is a 1:1 Macro, and is highly regarded, on all available camera mounts. Unless its a poor copy or old looking, then surely the Tamron is the one to keep over the Pentax FA 100 3.5, certainly for Macro and even for portraits.

[madison_wi_gal]

The Tamron 90mm is a 1:1 Macro, and is highly regarded, on all available camera mounts. Unless its a poor copy or old looking, then surely the Tamron is the one to keep over the Pentax FA 100 3.5, certainly for Macro and even for portraits.

Nope, it looks great, came boxed and is the 272e (printed on side) even though EXIF says it is not. But Pentax treats non-Pentax lenses in an often bizarre way in EXIF so I'm not worried.

Yeah, maybe I should be less brand-conscious and go with what works.

[stevebrot]

This one? Pentax 100mm smc-FA f/3.5

Not plasticy and I do like the 1:1 diopter (which I struggled to find, and got from a nice member here)

I would keep the Tamron 272e macro over the Cosina-made 1:2 FA 100/3.5. I have the manual focus version of the Tamron (72B) and it rocks.


Steve

[Scorpio71GR]

I have that Tamron 90mm macro. I only use the DFA 100 Macro for the WR. That Tamron is an amazing lens. If I took a photo with each I doubt I could tell one from the other. I still have mine because it has an apeture ring and u can use it with extension tubes.

[madison_wi_gal]

I would keep the Tamron 272e macro over the Cosina-made 1:2 FA 100/3.5. I have the manual focus version of the Tamron (72B) and it rocks.


Steve

OK, you sold me.

The Pentax 100 (plus diopter) on the chopping block.

[Des]

I'm impressed with the cool rationality.

As fine as many of the lenses on the "sell" list are, none of them is irreplaceable or unobtainable. So if your needs change or you feel remorse, you could re-buy.

Just a couple of observations:
- Like others, I'd look hard at keeping the Tamron 90 over the FA 100. Unless the long-term plan is to get the DFA 100 WR (which it should be!)
- Most owners seem to love the 10-17 fisheye, and it seems to de-fish well, but there's a strong case for keeping the 15 as well. It's a completely different lens. Much more of an option for general landscapes. UWA shooting is something that requires practice to get the most from, IMO. Trawl the "15 controls my mind" thread for inspiration before selling.
- Keep in mind your future needs. Doesn't seem likely to be full-frame - it's a heavily APS-C kit. But having gone from two K-30s to a K-3 and K-S2, I'd say that my best lenses really shine on the newer cameras. That may be a reason to keep at least one of the DA Limiteds. Especially when you won't have anything even moderately fast wider than 50.

[madison_wi_gal]

I'm impressed with the cool rationality.

As fine as many of the lenses on the "sell" list are, none of them is irreplaceable or unobtainable. So if your needs change or you feel remorse, you could re-buy.

Just a couple of observations:
- Like others, I'd look hard at keeping the Tamron 90 over the FA 100. Unless the long-term plan is to get the DFA 100 WR (which it should be!)
- Most owners seem to love the 10-17 fisheye, and it seems to de-fish well, but there's a strong case for keeping the 15 as well. It's a completely different lens. Much more of an option for general landscapes. UWA shooting is something that requires practice to get the most from, IMO. Trawl the "15 controls my mind" thread for inspiration before selling.
- Keep in mind your future needs. Doesn't seem likely to be full-frame - it's a heavily APS-C kit. But having gone from two K-30s to a K-3 and K-S2, I'd say that my best lenses really shine on the newer cameras. That may be a reason to keep at least one of the DA Limiteds. Especially when you won't have anything even moderately fast wider than 50.

Right, I fear that I'll regret dumping the limiteds, so I'll start small with the revised sell list once I take some pictures. Keeping the Tam 90!

[mikesbike]

I have very good, even excellent lenses I do not often use. Some are full-frame, retained mainly for 35mm film, which I rarely shoot. Their FL is not what I look for when shooting APS-C. After years of this situation, now Pentax has entered the FF market with a winner, so I am contemplating regaining the proper perspective of these fine lenses. So now I am glad I didn't get rid of them.

I do have some minor but decent lenses I should get rid of, and will.

The excellent lenses I don't often use, some only good for APS-C, include expensive ones, even Limited primes. However, my attitude regarding my equipment is similar to my attitude towards a tool chest, which harbors fine, expensive tools not often used. When the need does arise, the tool there. For instance, I don't shoot macro or near-macro very often. But when I do decide to get into it, or the subject matter at hand draws me into it, I really enjoy what I can get from my DFA 100mm f/2.8 WR lens. The WR allows me to shoot under drippy conditions, which sometimes presents the most charming closeup shots.

Couple of other examples are my top-notch tele primes- DA* 200mm f/2.8 and FA 300mm f/4.5 gems. I got the DA* 200mm back when Pentax was running some special deals, along with the DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 lens. My thinking was I would thus avoid needing a very large, heavy 70-200mm f/2.8. I was correct, since most of my fast tele needs are covered by this zoom lens, and only occasionally do I also need the extra reach. And I only use these when I want extra-high quality and/or its speed for the extra aperture and shutter capability. Otherwise,my very versatile DA 18-135mm does a very good job. And my DA HD 55-300mm f/4-5.8 does a creditable job in good lighting. But when I need the extra-fine tools, I am glad I have them.

Not long ago, I shot friend's college graduation, taking place in a huge pro-sports indoor palace. The family and I were situated in a VIP suite looking down from quite a distance. I hauled out my big guns, taken in their cases and packed into a camera bag. I wound up using all three as the ceremony entailed the need. Afterwards, for family group shots, I had my DA 18-135mm along, which was perfect. The family was amazed at the quality of the shots I gave them. There are other examples as well.

I had a K-r bought new until recently when I gave it to friends, who were celebrating the arrival of their first child. Last year, I had replaced it with the K-S2 at a great price. I have numerous satisfying, and very special images taken with the K-r. But I've found the K-S2 to be a better tool in every way. And, it is still small and lightweight- in some respects smaller even than the K-r, yet with better controls and features, even better IQ, and having WR. So it is now my compact snap-shooter. I got the little kit-lens package for next to nothing extra. I continue to value this little tool because it is so little! Works perfectly with the small camera-so I gave away my old kit lens with the K-r.

My experience says this about your situation. I am rather in parallel with LensBeginner. If you are only interested in snap-shooting friends and family, not needing or ever looking for the extra-high quality the best equipment can deliver, I can see your point. But looking down the road is important. I can tell you, when quality is an issue, I found out for myself that though I was getting quality with my K-5, knowing that being better than what I got with my nice little K-r (which you may have also noticed with your K-30), that when I decided to also get the K-5 IIs (both got at about 1/2 price as outgoing models), I did notice an additional refinement of detail from not having the AA filter! AF was also better. This improvement in fine detail was more noticeable when using very high-quality lenses!

Now I also have the KP. No AA filter (switchable), very high resolution,very good color balance, very good dynamic range, etc. Very good handling for a relatively compact body, and having essentially pro-oriented controls and metal-body. If you had a KP and were shooting with your DA 20-40mm Limited, and looking for quality from scenics, etc. this experience would be very convincing for you, I believe. The more on-body, fully pro-oriented controls of my K-5 IIs still rule, but this is the tradeoff of the KP for being more compact.

I could see selling your 21mm, and 40mm Limiteds. Since you have the 20-40mm Limited, they would mainly be for times when small-as-possible is an issue. And you have the fast 50mm f/1.4 when you need more aperture and added reach. The DA 10-17mm is a fisheye fun lens, a specialty item, but not a linear true WA lens. It is very special as such. So for linear use, the DA 15mm f/4 Limited is very appealing, very tiny, with very good IQ and has low distortion for such a FL- the opposite of the fisheye zoom. Both lenses are very potentially useful for different purposes.

The 18-55mm kit lens is dispensable, as is the 70-300mm tele zoom. I only hang on to mine for film and perhaps being useful on an upcoming FF DSLR. I don't know why you wish to keep the FA 100mm f/3.5 instead of the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 true macro lens, which has more capability. I would sell them both to get my DFA 100mm f/2.8 WR macro!

The price of the KP has been drifting down. You might consider getting one if you are interested in quality, and in taking full advantage of the quality lenses you have! Since getting it, I find myself using my DA 20-40mm LTD, 15mm LTD, and DA* 50-135mm more often!

[madison_wi_gal]

I have very good, even excellent lenses I do not often use. Some are full-frame, retained mainly for 35mm film, which I rarely shoot. Their FL is not what I look for when shooting APS-C. After years of this situation, now Pentax has entered the FF market with a winner, so I am contemplating regaining the proper perspective of these fine lenses. So now I am glad I didn't get rid of them.

I do have some minor but decent lenses I should get rid of, and will.

The excellent lenses I don't often use, some only good for APS-C, include expensive ones, even Limited primes. However, my attitude regarding my equipment is similar to my attitude towards a tool chest, which harbors fine, expensive tools not often used. When the need does arise, the tool there. For instance, I don't shoot macro or near-macro very often. But when I do decide to get into it, or the subject matter at hand draws me into it, I really enjoy what I can get from my DFA 100mm f/2.8 WR lens. The WR allows me to shoot under drippy conditions, which sometimes presents the most charming closeup shots.

Couple of other examples are my top-notch tele primes- DA* 200mm f/2.8 and FA 300mm f/4.5 gems. I got the DA* 200mm back when Pentax was running some special deals, along with the DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 lens. My thinking was I would thus avoid needing a very large, heavy 70-200mm f/2.8. I was correct, since most of my fast tele needs are covered by this zoom lens, and only occasionally do I also need the extra reach. And I only use these when I want extra-high quality and/or its speed for the extra aperture and shutter capability. Otherwise,my very versatile DA 18-135mm does a very good job. And my DA HD 55-300mm f/4-5.8 does a creditable job in good lighting. But when I need the extra-fine tools, I am glad I have them.

Not long ago, I shot friend's college graduation, taking place in a huge pro-sports indoor palace. The family and I were situated in a VIP suite looking down from quite a distance. I hauled out my big guns, taken in their cases and packed into a camera bag. I wound up using all three as the ceremony entailed the need. Afterwards, for family group shots, I had my DA 18-135mm along, which was perfect. The family was amazed at the quality of the shots I gave them. There are other examples as well.

I had a K-r bought new until recently when I gave it to friends, who were celebrating the arrival of their first child. Last year, I had replaced it with the K-S2 at a great price. I have numerous satisfying, and very special images taken with the K-r. But I've found the K-S2 to be a better tool in every way. And, it is still small and lightweight- in some respects smaller even than the K-r, yet with better controls and features, even better IQ, and having WR. So it is now my compact snap-shooter. I got the little kit-lens package for next to nothing extra. I continue to value this little tool because it is so little! Works perfectly with the small camera-so I gave away my old kit lens with the K-r.

My experience says this about your situation. I am rather in parallel with LensBeginner. If you are only interested in snap-shooting friends and family, not needing or ever looking for the extra-high quality the best equipment can deliver, I can see your point. But looking down the road is important. I can tell you, when quality is an issue, I found out for myself that though I was getting quality with my K-5, knowing that being better than what I got with my nice little K-r (which you may have also noticed with your K-30), that when I decided to also get the K-5 IIs (both got at about 1/2 price as outgoing models), I did notice an additional refinement of detail from not having the AA filter! AF was also better. This improvement in fine detail was more noticeable when using very high-quality lenses!

Now I also have the KP. No AA filter (switchable), very high resolution,very good color balance, very good dynamic range, etc. Very good handling for a relatively compact body, and having essentially pro-oriented controls and metal-body. If you had a KP and were shooting with your DA 20-40mm Limited, and looking for quality from scenics, etc. this experience would be very convincing for you, I believe. The more on-body, fully pro-oriented controls of my K-5 IIs still rule, but this is the tradeoff of the KP for being more compact.

I could see selling your 21mm, and 40mm Limiteds. Since you have the 20-40mm Limited, they would mainly be for times when small-as-possible is an issue. And you have the fast 50mm f/1.4 when you need more aperture and added reach. The DA 10-17mm is a fisheye fun lens, a specialty item, but not a linear true WA lens. It is very special as such. So for linear use, the DA 15mm f/4 Limited is very appealing, very tiny, with very good IQ and has low distortion for such a FL- the opposite of the fisheye zoom. Both lenses are very potentially useful for different purposes.

The 18-55mm kit lens is dispensable, as is the 70-300mm tele zoom. I only hang on to mine for film and perhaps being useful on an upcoming FF DSLR. I don't know why you wish to keep the FA 100mm f/3.5 instead of the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 true macro lens, which has more capability. I would sell them both to get my DFA 100mm f/2.8 WR macro!

The price of the KP has been drifting down. You might consider getting one if you are interested in quality, and in taking full advantage of the quality lenses you have! Since getting it, I find myself using my DA 20-40mm LTD, 15mm LTD, and DA* 50-135mm more often!

Thanks, all of these comments make a lot of sense and I am now convinced to keep the Tam 90 in place of the Pentax 100. And I liked the fact that the 21 was 3.2 but the 20-40 beats that, I think enough people have questioned my sanity on giving that one up, so that moves into the "keep" list.

---------- Post added 08-27-17 at 21:41 ----------

OK, updated list, but still taking advice.

****************

Marketplace candidates:

Pentax 21mm smc DA f/3.2
Pentax 40mm smc DA XS f/2.8 (I know, but I just have never warmed up to this thing)
Asahi Pentax 50mm smc M f/1.4
Pentax 100mm smc-FA f/3.5 with 1:1 diopter
Tamron 18-250mm LD DiII f/3.5-6.3
Pentax 18-55mm smc DAL f/3.5-5.6
Sigma 70-300mm DG Macro f/4-5.6

Keepers:

Pentax 15mm smc DA ED f/4
Pentax 50mm smc DA f/1.8 (used once a year for student photos at work, but nice 1.8 in case I need the light)
Pentax 10-17mm smc DA ED f/3.5-4.5
Pentax 20-40mm smc DA ED f/2.8-4
Pentax 18-135mm smc DA ED f/3.5-5.6
Pentax 55-300mm smc DA ED f/4-5.8
Tamron 90mm AP AF Di f/2.8

[Des]

Keepers: Pentax 15mm smc DA ED f/4 Pentax 50mm smc DA f/1.8 (used once a year for student photos at work, but nice 1.8 in case I need the light) Pentax 10-17mm smc DA ED f/3.5-4.5 Pentax 20-40mm smc DA ED f/2.8-4 Pentax 18-135mm smc DA ED f/3.5-5.6 Pentax 55-300mm smc DA ED f/4-5.8 Tamron 90mm AP AF Di f/2.8

That will be an excellent kit. Give yourself a good chance to love the 15 and the 20-40 - maybe a "Single in ..." month with each?

[madison_wi_gal]

That will be an excellent kit. Give yourself a good chance to love the 15 and the 20-40 - maybe a "Single in ..." month with each?

Good idea!

[zzeitg]

Before I post a lot of stuff in the marketplace, figured I'd check over on this side first: I have a lot of lenses (well, I think it is a lot, I suppose some members have way more). There is a lot of overlap. And I tested them all out and only use a few. So it's time to do some housecleaning. Not on eBay, I prefer forum sales.

Anyway, I need to cut down to the minimum I will *actually* use. I would sell for no more than what I paid on eBay or in the forum.

Below is what I have that I rarely if ever use.

Pentax 15mm smc DA ED f/4
Pentax 21mm smc DA f/3.2
Pentax 40mm smc DA XS f/2.8
Asahi Pentax 50mm smc M f/1.4
Tamron 90mm AP AF Di f/2.8
Tamron 18-250mm LD DiII f/3.5-6.3
Pentax 18-55mm smc DAL f/3.5-5.6
Pentax 20-40mm smc DA ED f/2.8-4
Sigma 70-300mm DG Macro f/4-5.6

And these are ones I *do* use so these will be my core keepers:

Pentax 50mm smc DA f/1.8
Pentax 100mm smc-FA f/3.5
Pentax 10-17mm smc DA ED f/3.5-4.5
Pentax 18-135mm smc DA ED f/3.5-5.6
Pentax 55-300mm smc DA ED f/4-5.8

Almost all were impulse items (isn't that how LBA works?) due to praise on this forum (tsk tsk). e.g. yes the 20-40 is a fabulous lens. So are the 15 and 21. But I've used them once or twice and then put away. And I keep the M 50 1.4 out of sentiment but the ME Super is gone.

Looking for advice on which of these (the top list) would be appropriate for the marketplace. I am also wiling to be talked out of selling some due to not thinking through my overlap. The 20-40 in particular. It might be just plain dumb to get rid of that one.

Having unloaded my K-01, all I have left for bodies are my beloved red K-r and my new (used) blue K-30.

Thanks!

"Almost all were impulse items (isn't that how LBA works?)"

Not really. Real LBA is when you make a list or table and see all the gaps in the focal length.

Once you start to buy several versions of the same lens, just to compare the tiny differences, then it's really serious :-)

[pres589]

Oh man, I really like my DA15, I really regret not getting that thing years ago. And mine is the SMC version like yours. Tres magnifique!

I'm curious what your DA21 will be priced at. What color is it, black or silver? I'm wondering what it would be like for a discrete street carry setup.

[madison_wi_gal]

Oh man, I really like my DA15, I really regret not getting that thing years ago. And mine is the SMC version like yours. Tres magnifique!

I'm curious what your DA21 will be priced at. What color is it, black or silver? I'm wondering what it would be like for a discrete street carry setup.

Black. Will put all these in marketplace later today.

[mcgregni]

I think you've done a great job revising the list, and full marks for actually taking note and acting on the advice! I a really sure that it you take more time to go out and really work the lenses you are keeping, perhaps one at a time, that the resulting variety and extra interesting images will be the reward and you will appreciate the high quality collection you have there.

Now here's the first challenge ....lets see what you can do with your 20-40 set to the following focal lengths ....24 ... 29 .... 37. Yes, those are very good focal lengths, and you've got them all !