[PaysonAZTim]

I would like to get a wide angle lens (<18mm) for real estate pictures and also a wider range lens to use the rest of the time. (18-250, 18-270, or 18-300)

I have a Pentax K-70 and I use the DA L 18-55mm WR f3.5-5.6 and the DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR lens as my primary lenses. (I have a couple of old manual focus prime lenses too.)

I live in the mountains and drive gravel/dirt roads for at least 30 minutes during a typical day. I am a real estate sales agent and I use the 18-55mm to take home and land pictures. I usually have the 50-200mm on the camera when I am driving so that I can get pictures of elk, deer, or other animals from my Jeep when I see them. Often those will be in the early morning or evening hours. I hike a lot, both on rocky trails and off trails through thicket. Those hikes are usually with an Australian Shepherd. Without a doubt I have missed some pictures by only having the 18-55 mm on the camera and I don’t like having to switch lenses all of the time because of the hassle and because I think that invites dust. On hikes, the camera is staying around my neck and tucked as best I can have it, into a camera bag that I also wear around my neck.

Compared to the kit lenses that I use right now, what could I expect out of the 18-250, 18-270, or 18-300 mm lenses available? I’d prefer to spend less than $500 and I lean towards used lenses. However, the Sigma 18-300mm new at $400 is tempting, so I might be willing to expand my budget for that. I have ruled out 18-135mm lens – I need more range than that for animal pictures.

Thoughts are much appreciated and if you would like for me to share any pictures as samples of the kind of stuff I take, I am happy to share.

Thanks,
Tim

[ramseybuckeye]

I would like to get a wide angle lens (<18mm) for real estate pictures and also a wider range lens to use the rest of the time. (18-250, 18-270, or 18-300)

I have a Pentax K-70 and I use the DA L 18-55mm WR f3.5-5.6 and the DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED WR lens as my primary lenses. (I have a couple of old manual focus prime lenses too.)

I live in the mountains and drive gravel/dirt roads for at least 30 minutes during a typical day. I am a real estate sales agent and I use the 18-55mm to take home and land pictures. I usually have the 50-200mm on the camera when I am driving so that I can get pictures of elk, deer, or other animals from my Jeep when I see them. Often those will be in the early morning or evening hours. I hike a lot, both on rocky trails and off trails through thicket. Those hikes are usually with an Australian Shepherd. Without a doubt I have missed some pictures by only having the 18-55 mm on the camera and I don’t like having to switch lenses all of the time because of the hassle and because I think that invites dust. On hikes, the camera is staying around my neck and tucked as best I can have it, into a camera bag that I also wear around my neck.

Compared to the kit lenses that I use right now, what could I expect out of the 18-250, 18-270, or 18-300 mm lenses available? I’d prefer to spend less than $500 and I lean towards used lenses. However, the Sigma 18-300mm new at $400 is tempting, so I might be willing to expand my budget for that. I have ruled out 18-135mm lens – I need more range than that for animal pictures.

Thoughts are much appreciated and if you would like for me to share any pictures as samples of the kind of stuff I take, I am happy to share.

Thanks,
Tim

The only lens decent enough for wildlife in your price range would be the DA 55-300 PLM, it is also has blazing fast autofocus, it will be a nice step up in IQ and performance over your 50-200. For the wide angle interior shots the DA 15 Ltd or the Pentax -DA 12-24mm, the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5, or the Tamron 10-24mm F3.5-4.5. Those three lenses you mention would really compromise IQ, because of such a long zoom range.

Good luck in whatever you decide.

[Docrwm]

I'd suggest that you get the DA12-24 for interior shots for real estate and the DA55-300 for those nature shots and longer distance animal shots. If you shop carefully you might be able to get both used for around $500. I have an 18-250 and its barely used because it has so many compromises. If I travel and can take only one lens it gets chosen sometimes, but not always.


I realize that many here are enamored of the 55-300 PLM version but it costs a LOT more than the HD WR version and the gains are.....minimal based on side-by-side comparisons I've reviewed.


Good luck.

[UncleVanya]

The only lens decent enough for wildlife in your price range would be the DA 55-300 PLM, it is also has blazing fast autofocus, it will be a nice step up in IQ and performance over your 50-200. For the wide angle interior shots the DA 15 Ltd or the Pentax -DA 12-24mm, the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5, or the Tamron 10-24mm F3.5-4.5. Those three lenses you mention would really compromise IQ, because of such a long zoom range.

Good luck in whatever you decide.

Good info. I agree. I have used the 18-300 on a Nikon owned by my step dad. Its ok but the 55-300 is vastly better.

[mikesbike]

I'd suggest that you get the DA12-24 for interior shots for real estate and the DA55-300 for those nature shots and longer distance animal shots. If you shop carefully you might be able to get both used for around $500. I have an 18-250 and its barely used because it has so many compromises. If I travel and can take only one lens it gets chosen sometimes, but not always.


I realize that many here are enamored of the 55-300 PLM version but it costs a LOT more than the HD WR version and the gains are.....minimal based on side-by-side comparisons I've reviewed.


Good luck.

+1 for this suggestion. The DA 12-24mm at say 15mm has exceptionally good figures for low distortion, very suitable for architectural subject matter. It also provides exceptional edge-to-edge performance. What you have to watch for with any ultra WA lens is perspective distortion, which is not the same as the lens's own linear distortion. This is a matter of positioning in relationship to the hight of what you are dealing with.

While having a single lens capable of a WA to super tele zoom range is convenient, performance issues, especially in the tele half of its range, make it unattractive for your needs. A 3-lens kit of DA 12-24mm f/4, DA 18-135mm DC WR, and the DA 55-300mm f/4.5-6.3 DC WR PLM with your K-70 would be more ideal. And you'd have a WR weather-resistant equipment kit from 18-300mm with your K-70 body. If it starts to rain a bit during your shoot, so what? Do you know, with Nikon or Canon, to get a camera body having WR you'd be looking at least in the $1,000 range, and again another $1.000 range for a WR lens! The DA 18-135mm DC WR is definitely a much better-performing lens than your DA-L 18-55mm kit lens, and has exceptionally fast, quiet, and accurate AF. Actually, I have the former HD DA 55-300mm f/4-5.8 WR version, which operates with the camera's screw-driven AF, and have found it to be a very good performer with a little wider aperture than the newer one. Its AF is ok with me, and actually quite fast if all your subjects are at distance, not going rapidly up close and far away again. It is still available, usually at a lower price than the newer one.

[UncleVanya]

I
I realize that many here are enamored of the 55-300 PLM version but it costs a LOT more than the HD WR version and the gains are.....minimal based on side-by-side comparisons I've reviewed.


Good luck.

I don't have the PLM, but I trust those who own both. They is is very similar maybeva tough stronger on the HD DA WR at 300mm but the focus speed is not even close. The PLM is fast.

[Des]

Those hikes are usually with an Australian Shepherd.

Presumably this is a dog rather than sheep-minding bloke from Oz. Never heard of the breed. The most notable Australian breeds are Blue Heelers and Kelpies, but I don't suppose it's either of those.

Compared to the kit lenses that I use right now, what could I expect out of the 18-250, 18-270, or 18-300 mm lenses available?

The Sigma 18-300 seems to be the most highly rated of these superzooms. I used to have the 18-250 in its original Tamron form. It was a step up from 18-55, but optically well behind my current go-everywhere combination, the DA 18-135 and DA 55-300. The superzooms are very convenient, but I'd agree with Tom (@Ramseybuckeye) that one of the 55-300 lenses is a better option for your telephoto needs.

I've got both one of the three screw-driven AF versions of the 55-300 and the PLM version (which has a different optical formula). The HD DA 55-300mm f4.5-6.3 PLM WR is the one to get if your budget will run to it - not only is the AF much much better but the rendering is nicer too. It's slower (narrower maximum aperture) than the screw-driven ones, but better wide open. But if that's outside the budget, the HD DA 55-300 f4-5.8 WR is still a very good option (this is optically the same as the two other DA 55-300mm f4-5.8 lenses, except that it has HD lens coatings) and should be significantly cheaper than the PLM. Resolution is quite comparable to the PLM. Here are samples taken with the two different versions that I have:
Pentax DA-L 55-300mm f4-5.8 sample images - Des(Australia) - Flickr
Pentax HD DA 55-300mm f4.5-6.3 PLM sample images - Des(Australia) - Flickr

Sounds to me like you could use the weather resistance too. None of the superzooms is WR.

As for the wide angle options, I think for real estate shots you really need the capacity to shoot 12mm or wider plus the flexibility of a zoom. Here are some shots I took (just handheld shots for our own records, not for publication) when we were selling our house some years back, taken with the Pentax DA 12-24 f4 at 12mm.

(Note that the decor was supplied by the agent for the sale. We thought the hide and skull were hideous.)

The DA 12-24 is a very good lens. But in the PF five-way comparison between the two Sigma 10-20 models, the Sigma 12-24, the Tamron 10-24 and the Pentax.DA 12-24 there was a case to be made for each of them:
https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-12-24mm-lens-comparison/introduction.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/sigma-10-20-comparative-review/introduction.html
The Sigmas and Tamron may be cheaper on the secondhand market than the Pentax.

---

Last edited by Des; 01-19-2019 at 09:43 PM.

[aslyfox]

as was said, once you get below 15 mm I think you may have to deal with more distortion than you would want

I would recommend that you go up to " Lenses " above and check out the " in depth " and " user " reviews to help learn more about the lenses you want to investigate


if cost is an issue, check out the DA and DA L 55-300mm " family ".

the PLM version is as good as you might wish in that " family " but optically you may find earlier versions acceptable.

The other thing to look at is the possibility of getting " experienced " equipment, either through the forum's market place - " buy/sell " above or elsewhere. I have had very good luck in using the market place to find like new equipment at reasonable prices available from other forum members

if you are willing to spend $, consider doing your own trials by renting before deciding what to buy

Information on Businesses that offer cameras and lenses for rent - PentaxForums.com

[clackers]

Presumably this is a dog rather than sheep-minding bloke from Oz. Never heard of the breed.

It's a sort of border collie, as I understand it, no idea where the name came from.

[Des]

It's a sort of border collie, as I understand it, no idea where the name came from.

Aha, no connection with Australia and the origin of the name is a mystery! Australian Shepherd - Wikipedia

Does this mean we from the Wide Brown Land have a reputation for being smart, loyal and hard-working? We'd better not tell people the truth Clackers. ;-)

[clackers]

Aha, no connection with Australia and the origin of the name is a mystery! Australian Shepherd - Wikipedia

Does this mean we from the Wide Brown Land have a reputation for being smart, loyal and hard-working? We'd better not tell people the truth Clackers. ;-)

Well, our dogs like kelpies and blueys are, the humans might be a different matter, Des!