[SSGGeezer]

Haven't we all?

Sometimes not by choice! At least for those of us who have enjoyed being in the warm bosom of our nation's Armed Forces!

---------- Post added 04-05-20 at 15:19 ----------

Since you're in Canada, there's a used 16-50 converted to screwdrive at MacBain for 340 $CDN. You might even be able to barter a bit since I've seen it as low as 250$CDN when there was a clearance sale on used items a few weeks ago.

Edit: They also have an open box DA 17-70 which could be an interesting alternative to a used 16-50 or 18-135 since it should be covered by the 2 years Pentax Canada warranty...

It doesn't meet his criteria of being WR.

[bertwert]

Once I discovered the magnificent performance of the Pentax K1 + DFA 28-105 mm, I never looked back.

Now that's an affordable setup

[normhead]

Once I discovered the magnificent performance of the Pentax K1 + DFA 28-105 mm, I never looked back. Only the 645Z with an array of heavy and expensive lenses can beat this combo.

Regards,
Richard

It is so impressive, it made me leave my APS-c kit home for everything but wildlife. I didn't want to, but that's how it ended up. When I bought it I thought of studio and macro shots close to home. Things didn't work out that way. It is incredible how underrated this lens is. My wife even steals it for use on her K-5, and my 18-135 isn't good enough for her, but the 28-105 is. It's in a class all it's own. The "most expensive lens is the best " club really missed out this time.

High quality professional images at an amateur price.

[bertwert]

Sometimes not by choice! At least for those of us who have enjoyed being in the warm bosom of our nation's Armed Forces!

You mean that military grade stuff isn't high tech and lightweight?


I'll get to experience all that soon enough.

[SSGGeezer]

You mean that military grade stuff isn't high tech and lightweight?


I'll get to experience all that soon enough.

Not so much item weight, but number of items! I have military grade back pain these days!

[CarlJF]

There's quite a few good other options, but for this purpose I've decided WR is a requirement

(Anyways, where are you seeing this, I can't find them on McBain's website...)

The item is on thist listing: McBain Used Equipment filtered for Pentax. It's identfied as Pentax K 16-50mm F2.8 DA* SAL (for Screwdrive Autofocus Lens).

[c.a.m]

I don't canoe trip these days or go on extended back-country hikes. In years gone by, I'd be careful in selecting my kit. Ideally, every item would have at least two purposes, and I'd measure weight to the ounce and mind the volume as well. Minimizing the number of items in the pack is important.

These days, I think I'd consider leaving the DSLR behind and taking a small 'point-and-shoot' instead, something like a Canon Powershot or one with a larger sensor. A small camera fits easily in the pack, it can be ready at hand, and provides images that document the trip, serve well for online presentation, and print well to 8x10 inches or slightly larger. Of course, great images of wildlife might not be possible, but I'd suggest that such images require fairly long focal lengths and their attendant weight and bulk.

- Craig

[CarlJF]

It doesn't meet his criteria of being WR.

Yes, I know. But, depending how much WR is really a must for the OP and not just a nice to have, a 2 years manufacturer warranty covered DA 17-70 for 300 $CDN (about 210 $US) was worth pointing out. Even if this lens does't have the best reputation for reliability, there isn't much to lose at this price... It could also be good to know for other peoples reading the thread...

[tibbitts]

Yes, I know. But, depending how much WR is really a must for the OP and not just a nice to have, a 2 years manufacturer warranty covered DA 17-70 for 300 $CDN (about 210 $US) was worth pointing out. Even if this lens does't have the best reputation for reliability, there isn't much to lose at this price... It could also be good to know for other peoples reading the thread...

For a roughly a similar price you could get a slighly used 17-70 Sigma, which - if you get a good copy - by virtually all accounts would perform better than the Pentax. Still not WR of course. Or a 17-50 Sigma that would - again assuming a good copy - outperform the Pentax equivalent, but also without WR.

[CarlJF]

For a roughly a similar price you could get a slighly used 17-70 Sigma, which - if you get a good copy - by virtually all accounts would perform better than the Pentax. Still not WR of course. Or a 17-50 Sigma that would - again assuming a good copy - outperform the Pentax equivalent, but also without WR.

But this misses the main point: the lens isn’t a used one but new and warranty covered. This is what could make it an interesting deal for some people depending on how much they value the peace of mind of a warranty...

[bertwert]

I don't canoe trip these days or go on extended back-country hikes. In years gone by, I'd be careful in selecting my kit. Ideally, every item would have at least two purposes, and I'd measure weight to the ounce and mind the volume as well. Minimizing the number of items in the pack is important.

These days, I think I'd consider leaving the DSLR behind and taking a small 'point-and-shoot' instead, something like a Canon Powershot or one with a larger sensor. A small camera fits easily in the pack, it can be ready at hand, and provides images that document the trip, serve well for online presentation, and print well to 8x10 inches or slightly larger. Of course, great images of wildlife might not be possible, but I'd suggest that such images require fairly long focal lengths and their attendant weight and bulk.

- Craig

The K-50 does serve two purposes. Taking photos and banging in tent stakes

It's weird, I simply don't enjoy taking photos with a point and shoot, and I end up using it less. It's much more of an incentive to take photos when you're lugging around all this weight to do so...

[bertwert]

Yes, I know. But, depending how much WR is really a must for the OP and not just a nice to have, a 2 years manufacturer warranty covered DA 17-70 for 300 $CDN (about 210 $US) was worth pointing out. Even if this lens does't have the best reputation for reliability, there isn't much to lose at this price... It could also be good to know for other peoples reading the thread...

For a roughly a similar price you could get a slighly used 17-70 Sigma, which - if you get a good copy - by virtually all accounts would perform better than the Pentax. Still not WR of course. Or a 17-50 Sigma that would - again assuming a good copy - outperform the Pentax equivalent, but also without WR.

But this misses the main point: the lens isn’t a used one but new and warranty covered. This is what could make it an interesting deal for some people depending on how much they value the peace of mind of a warranty...

For this lens I'm looking for, WR is a must. And I'm pretty set on the ('boring old') 18-135.

I'm quite happy buying used, especially from a reputable forum member

[tibbitts]

But this misses the main point: the lens isn’t a used one but new and warranty covered. This is what could make it an interesting deal for some people depending on how much they value the peace of mind of a warranty...

Except the main value of having the warranty is Pentax's SDM

[JensE]

For this lens I'm looking for, WR is a must. And I'm pretty set on the ('boring old') 18-135.

I would not worry to buy used.

I found my two 18-125 so far very reliable. Bought the first one new with my K-5. It has a worn-out bayonet for the hood and attached to the K-5 took an involuntary bath with me in Lake Washington in my backpack, but after drying (a little moisture got inside) it's still reliably focusing and taking so good pictures, that its on permanent loan with my daughter now. I 'replenished' with used one, which now together with a KP, a 15mm LTD, a 55-300PLM and 58mm Achromat for the later (works better for me than the Raynox), two extra batteries and a tiny USB charger (connecting to a solar-recharging power bank) form my kayak tripping set. That set just fits into a B&W Type 2000 case, which is the biggest I can stow when we travel in our two seater sea kayak with camping gear. In calm conditions, the box goes on top for ease of access, but has to fit in between my legs otherwise.

The 10-17mm instead of the 15mm may still fit if I stow the charger and one battery elsewhere. The new HD looks extremely tempting to me. I do have the 8-16mm Sigma, 15mm LTD, and 8mm Samyang FE, as well as a similar kit for the K-1. Still for touring and the almost circular FE option on K-1 ...? My point is that I would consider the 10-17mm an excellent companion to the 18-135mm. I have grown into UWA and FE in the past few years only, now I wouldn't want to miss that option for shots like this FE one from a hike or this rectangular one at <=10mm, where I couldn't go back any further. With wind and trees or waves, stitching panos is not always an option.

[TwoUptons]

I'm really fond of my 16-50.
Though I haven't used it a bunch since I got the K1, it usually the lens on the K01 when I use it, and it pairs well with the 70-300 I use as a telephoto most of the time.
I haven't had it screwdrive converted, and I've been generally happy with its autofocus performance.
Certainly on the K01, it is vastly better than some of my other lenses.

I found it an upgrade in both image quality and flexibility over either the 18-55 or 18-50 kit lenses.
For me, the difference between 16 and 18mm is enormous.
When I bought it, I wanted a * lens, I wanted premium, and I've been satisfied from that perspective.
Now, I might choose the 16-85 instead...

I think, despite all the hair-splitting, you can't really go wrong with any of these... and you could sell one on if you didn't like it.

-Eric