Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-18-2018, 06:05 PM   #16
amateur dirt farmer...
Loyal Site Supporter
pepperberry farm's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: probably out in a field somewhere...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,240
DA 14mm f2.8 - fast enough for most situation and definitely wide...

04-18-2018, 06:25 PM - 1 Like   #17
Pentaxian
Kozlok's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,298
The DA*16-50 is probably your best bet indoors with a fast aperture. Used they are cheap now. Convert to screwdrive if SDM fails. Also, money leftover to try the DA 15 or 21.
04-18-2018, 06:33 PM   #18
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
pres589's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Lawrence, KS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,229
I'd buy a new Tamron 17-50 before a used DA 16-50 any day of the week. Have not used the DA but don't really care, I like the Tamron. Sigma 17-50 also has fans.
04-18-2018, 07:34 PM - 1 Like   #19
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,492
QuoteOriginally posted by pres589 Quote
I'd buy a new Tamron 17-50 before a used DA 16-50 any day of the week. Have not used the DA but don't really care, I like the Tamron. Sigma 17-50 also has fans.
That's a strange statement to make if you haven't used the DA*16-50. It's a fantastic lens for environmental portraits, with particularly nice bokeh.



Not much bokeh in this one, but the IQ impressed me.



I have owned the Sigma 17-50/2.8, and sold it soon after getting the Pentax; in direct comparisons the improvement in colour reproduction and overall rendering was dramatic. The SDM failed, but I don't really care

04-18-2018, 08:21 PM   #20
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
pres589's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Lawrence, KS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,229
Thought the Tamron 17-50 outscored the 16-50 when PF compared the three. I've seen some excellent portraits out of the Tamron and have used it on a Canon body and liked it quite a bit.

The 16-50 isn't a bad lens; far from it. It's just doesn't seem worth the price they go for new; used with failed SDM might make more sense, but when the Tamron is $300 new in the US...
04-18-2018, 09:33 PM   #21
Journeyman Cat Wrangler
Loyal Site Supporter
SSGGeezer's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Maine, U.S.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,638
QuoteOriginally posted by pres589 Quote
Thought the Tamron 17-50 outscored the 16-50 when PF compared the three. I've seen some excellent portraits out of the Tamron and have used it on a Canon body and liked it quite a bit.

The 16-50 isn't a bad lens; far from it. It's just doesn't seem worth the price they go for new; used with failed SDM might make more sense, but when the Tamron is $300 new in the US...
Just get a da 50 1.8 for about $100 bucks (or less used) and buy the DA 21 and maybe another Limited like the FA77 and then a DA 40, and still have a little left over. Why go with one when there are Limiteds out there waiting for you?
04-18-2018, 10:18 PM   #22
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,492
Remember the OP is specifically after something wide on a crop camera.
04-19-2018, 04:33 AM   #23
Pentaxian
Kozlok's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,298
The other advantage of the *16-50 is WR. You can go outside on wet days and get some photos you would otherwise miss. I think when the Pentax is $800 itís a tough sell, but at $350 used, itís a no brainer.

04-19-2018, 06:11 AM   #24
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
pres589's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Lawrence, KS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,229
QuoteOriginally posted by SSGGeezer Quote
Just get a da 50 1.8 for about $100 bucks (or less used) and buy the DA 21 and maybe another Limited like the FA77 and then a DA 40, and still have a little left over. Why go with one when there are Limiteds out there waiting for you?
I've mentioned a few different lenses that would work. There's so many ways to skin this cat. He mentioned $900 USD right now so how about I list what I would do with that money, where used prices are estimates;

DA 15 SMC (specifically the SMC), - used, ex. cond., $350
DA 50 1.8, new - $120

If there's already some kind of general purpose zoom in his collection, then get;
DA 70 SMC - used, ex. cond, $300

If there isn't a decent zoom in his collection, then get
Tamron 17-50 f2.8, new - $300
OR
Pentax DA 18-135, new - $400 (not the greatest portrait zoom, but it's a great all-around zoom with WR)

My preference would be the DA 15, DA 18-135, and DA 50. That's exactly what's on my shelf today and probably what I would consider my "core lenses" for my crop DSLR. Landscape, do-all-everywhere, and portraits.
04-19-2018, 06:47 AM   #25
Pentaxian
ChatMechant's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Santa Cruz Mountains
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 960
With a $900 budget, maybe start thinking about saving a little more for a used K-1 to go with that 31. Otherwise, seems like an FA*24 would fit the requirements.
04-19-2018, 07:08 AM   #26
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,467
Is it just me or does anyone else find this thread a little ironic that new photographers are looking to match the field of view of their phones to a camera lens? I have stated many times that the manufacturers advertising that their cameras/lenses are equivalent to a certain 35mm size is totally useless because the vast majority of people have never looked through the viewfinder of a FF camera.

Anyhow, for what it's worth, the iPhone is a pretty wide angle view so as has been mentioned, a wide angle lens like the DA 21 would match it pretty good. I believe Apple specs their lens as 28mm equivalent on 35 mmm (FF). SInce the OP wants it for a walk around, I'd suggest a good fast zoom like the DA 16-50 or Sigma 17-50/ 2.8. The Sigma will fall well under the budget of $900. Or just go with the DA 21 Ltd. if you want a prime.
04-19-2018, 07:23 AM   #27
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,937
Kinda surprised the sigma 18-35 1.8 hasn't been mentioned. Its fast and good for close up portraits. Its also wide. I haven't complained about the bokeh, actually love its starburts never though of bokeh. Its worth mentioning.
04-19-2018, 01:13 PM   #28
Veteran Member
AndrewG NY's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Chappaqua, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 686
For wider angle, soft out-of-focus areas are typically hard to come by without relatively close focus distance and/or good distance separation to the background. The difference between f2.8 and f/4 is not that huge in this regard. There are a few outliers like Sigma 24/1.4 but I think DA 21/3.2 Limited is hard to beat if you like the useful mild-wide angle of view that mobile phone cameras usually provide. What is out of focus with this lens is pleasant enough.
04-19-2018, 01:52 PM   #29
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 31,578
QuoteOriginally posted by AndrewG NY Quote
For wider angle, soft out-of-focus areas are typically hard to come by without relatively close focus distance and/or good distance separation to the background
The shorter the FL, the wider the DoF. It can be hard to even get the background out of focus, forget about nice looking out of focus. Checking my 21 images going back 4 years, I have one image with an out of focus area, shot at ƒ5.6. When I want an out of focus background I don't reach for the 21. Maybe someone else has something.
04-19-2018, 02:26 PM   #30
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2013
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posts: 372
QuoteOriginally posted by Engineworks Quote
Seeking advice on one new lense for portrait as well as broad landscape shots. Ideally something with the field of view of my iPhone 7, but with a nice bokeh for close up portraits, and fast as possible for low light. Would be my new walk-around lense.
As some others have suggested, the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 would be worth considering. It is a good lens and it's compact, fairly light weight, and cheap (only $300 new), yet it has a six year warranty. It could be a walk-around lens for several months, then analyse which focal length(s) are most used, and go for another wide aperture prime at that focal length (or perhaps even longer or shorter), to complement the FA 31.

Last edited by MrB1; 04-19-2018 at 02:32 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
bokeh, da, f/2.8, field, k-mount, landscape, lens, lense, limited, pentax, pentax lens, portrait, slr lens, view
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Introduction and seeking advice: fast lens or upgrade K200D for low light? shalerosen Welcomes and Introductions 6 12-13-2015 10:15 PM
Universal lense wide lense: Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8, DA 16-45mm F4, DA 17-70mm ? Vejas Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 02-11-2014 12:04 PM
Seeking Fast & Simple Answer: Budget Calibrating DavidSKAF3 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 10 12-18-2013 04:49 AM
fast 50s, other fast lenses, nice bokeh? cream Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 37 10-11-2013 11:55 AM
Misc 100mm f/2.8 Macro WR Bokeh Bokeh Bokeh! iocchelli Post Your Photos! 3 03-20-2011 02:22 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:05 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top