Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-12-2019, 06:35 AM   #1
Senior Member
Bunch's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 257
Do I want a 20-40 HD or a 16-85

My only zoom is the 10-17 fisheye. I have an upcoming trip on a small-ish fishing boat, taking photos for a friend to help his guide service, and I would like a WR lens that will be useful at the close ranges on a boat, or even from a paddle board along side the boat. Camera is a K-3. Clearly the range of the 16-85 is more versatile but honestly good bokeh and rendering and that unquantifiable artistic flare is more important to me. My primes include a 15 HD, 35 2.4, various manual 50s and the fantastic plastic 50, 55 1.8 K, 77, 100 WR macro, and then a jump to the 300*.

04-12-2019, 07:13 AM   #2
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
pres589's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Lawrence, KS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,409
This is one of those times where the 15-30 sounds about right combined with something like the DA 50. More money than either lens you're considering though and not one that you asked about.

DA 15, DA 18-135, and DA 50 1.8 would also be a nice combo. Don't own the 16-85 but that is probably where I would go over the 20-40 which I also don't own due to the zoom range and nearly same max aperture range.
04-12-2019, 07:20 AM - 1 Like   #3
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Woodstock, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,686
You need WR, so taking your 100mm macro and a DA 16-85 should make for a great combination. But the DA 20-40m Limited would work as well. You have to decide what is more important to you - versatility (with good quality, nothing wrong with the 16-85) or the Limited rendering (a step above by most accounts).
04-12-2019, 07:26 AM   #4
Senior Member
Bunch's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 257
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by pres589 Quote
This is one of those times where the 15-30 sounds about right combined with something like the DA 50. More money than either lens you're considering though and not one that you asked about.

DA 15, DA 18-135, and DA 50 1.8 would also be a nice combo. Don't own the 16-85 but that is probably where I would go over the 20-40 which I also don't own due to the zoom range and nearly same max aperture range.
I previously had an 18-135 I sold because of how ho-hum and not sharp it was. Maybe I had a not great copy.

Unfortunately I think the 15-30 is out of my price range, certainly by the time I need this lens in June.

04-12-2019, 07:28 AM - 1 Like   #5
Pentaxian
timb64's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Here, there and everywhere.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,166
QuoteOriginally posted by Bunch Quote
I previously had an 18-135 I sold because of how ho-hum and not sharp it was. Maybe I had a not great copy
If sharpness is important to you the 16-85 won’t disappoint.
04-12-2019, 07:33 AM - 1 Like   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
pres589's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Lawrence, KS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,409
I find my 18-135 to be quite sharp. The 16-85 seems to have better sharpness over more of its zoom range; the 18-135 isn't so hot from about 18 to 23ish and then that starts again around 75 on out to 135. Stopping down can help of course but sometimes that isn't so easily available.

I find the concept of the 15-30 with a crop camera to be quite interesting although it's large, heavy, and costly. An APS-C specific 14-30 f4 would really be something...
04-12-2019, 07:42 AM - 1 Like   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Perfessor5646's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Louisville, KY
Photos: Albums
Posts: 250
I have a 16-85 I use with a K-3II and battery grip for events and have complete confidence in it to deliver. It’s usually carried in conjunction with a K70 mounting a 55-300 PLM or Sigma 8-16 with the other in reserve.

It’s a big chunky combo that usually only comes out when I’m shooting for someone else.

So I have been tempted by the price reduction of the 20-40 but even by my low acquisition standards can’t justify it. Just barely so since I suffer from LBA.

PS: I also have the 18-135 And 15mm Ltd, 21mm Ltd, 35 DAL, 35mm Ltd and 40mm XS. I have the 20-40 focal range covered six ways from Sunday.

Last edited by Perfessor5646; 04-12-2019 at 07:49 AM.
04-12-2019, 07:43 AM   #8
Senior Member
Bunch's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 257
Original Poster
The 16-85 seems to be a winner of a lens, but that 20-40 has been pulling me for years. Not sure why. I love my 35 2.4 plastic so the idea of that focal length in a compact WR zoom is appealing.

04-12-2019, 07:51 AM - 2 Likes   #9
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Washington Cascades
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,831
You WANT the Limited. They build them that way.

But the 16-85 is by far the better the choice for your stated purpose. My 16-85 lives on my K-3II and it has been a solid, consistent performer since day one. Is it as COOL as the 20-40? No. Is it an object you would put on display to admire the craftsmanship? No. Is it going to produce images that have artistic flare and timeless style and rendering (whatever that is)? No. Will it take solid, excellent images over a wide focal range, be WR and never let you down? Yes.
04-12-2019, 08:35 AM   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
pres589's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Lawrence, KS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,409
The OP has an 18-135 that wasn't mentioned in his original post. Ergo, I am now changing my suggestion to "don't buy anything, you have the lenses you already need. DA 15, DA 18-135, DA 50 1.8".

Boom sold end of thread.
04-12-2019, 08:49 AM   #11
Senior Member
Bunch's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 257
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by pres589 Quote
The OP has an 18-135 that wasn't mentioned in his original post. Ergo, I am now changing my suggestion to "don't buy anything, you have the lenses you already need. DA 15, DA 18-135, DA 50 1.8".

Boom sold end of thread.
I said I sold the 18-135. I also said I wanted a WR lens, since I will likely be splashed for this specific situation, and none of which you listed are.

Boom end of thread for you for not reading.
04-12-2019, 08:52 AM   #12
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 1,774
Couple thoughts on this. I spend a lot of time on boats. Typically, it's bright on the water, and you're going to be stopping down. I think this takes the wide open shooting I associate with maximizing bokeh out of the equation. You are also moving around, always, so stopping down to have more depth of field around your intended focus point is advantageous, so another hit against those wide open artistic bokeh shots. I also find I want range and less lens changing. All of this makes me say snag the 16-85.. What I would also do is get a good quality polarizer. They come in very handy when shooting around water. And having just picked up a 20-40, it's a wonderful lens and worth having, but not what I would be grabbing as my boating lens for what you describe.
04-12-2019, 09:02 AM   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
pres589's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Lawrence, KS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,409
Oh no I got people switched around that are posting in this thread. The DA 18-135 is rated as WR by Pentax.

Just the the 16-85 if you really care about WR that much as it will allow you to leave one lens on to cover basically any focal length you probably care about for this assignment. 20 isn't that wide on crop, 40 isn't that long (although it might be long enough).
04-12-2019, 09:03 AM   #14
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Avalon Peninsula, Newfoundland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 564
My 16-85 is fine in the cockpit of my 27' sailboat. Even when getting bounced around a bit (though I roll a jacket around it if it gets too rough).
04-12-2019, 09:09 AM   #15
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,530
I have the da 16-85, 55-300, and the da limited primes, except for the macro. It's niceto have all this versatility in terms of size and weight over a large range of focal lengths. And the overlapping range of the zooms really reduces lens changes for landscape work with a tripod, which matters a lot to me because I use both round and square filters. However, I am not crazy about always retracting the zooms to be able to walk, and especially hike, with them, but that's the nature of the beast.
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!
board, boat, hd, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: DA 16-85, 100 WR Macro, 20-40 WR Limited, Combo special! FREE SHIPPING! Oktyabr Sold Items 23 03-10-2019 09:53 AM
APS-C wide angle comparison (Laowa 15/4 macro, HD 16-85, HD 15/4 limited, K5IIs) stanic Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 02-02-2018 07:53 AM
HD 20-40 or HD 21 & HD 35 macro BarryE Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 33 09-03-2017 06:05 AM
IQ Comparison: 16-85 HD VS 20-40 Limited Blacknight659 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 07-05-2017 08:35 PM
Please create a review! 16-85 WR vs 20-40 WR Blacknight659 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 12-22-2014 06:45 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:14 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