[Kozlok]

1. DA 35/2.4 “Plastic Fantastic”
2. DA 50/1.8
3. DA 18-135 WR
4. DA 50-200
5. DA 55-300 WR
6. FA 50/1.4
7. DA* 16-50/2.8
8. Tamron 17-50/2.8 Di
9. Sigma 80-200/2.8
10. DFA 100/2.8 WR

I'd guess the reasons are different for each of these. Some I'd comment on:
3.The 18-135 is a solidly fine lens, but not exemplary. I suspect many that sell it acquired it as part of a kit and decided not to keep it. Other later acquired the 16-85, which is a markedly better lens, though not as versatile. I moved on from the 18-135 and replaced it with the 16-85 AND the 55-300.
4: I rid myself of the 50-200 when I acquired the 55-300, I'd imagine that is a common reason.
5. I am going to rid myself of the 55-300 WR because I have since acquired the 55-300 PLM. Again, I'd expect this is common.
7. The 16-50 is a high-spec lens; I'd guess most 16-50 owners have moved on to the K-1 and 24-70 (or even on to competitor's full frame systems). I acquired a well-used copy for a low price, and I'm quite satisfied at the price I paid, but would not be satisfied at full price.
8. I'd suspect some of the same reasons as the 16-50, but also many complain it's not well constructed physically, so I suspect some move on to better-made lenses also.

Also, don't discount that there are some who buy used lenses, use them for awhile, and sell them along to fund another lens purchase. Someone with one lens worth of money can then experience many different lenses over time. It's a way to do a free rental program, if you will. It's a system I think is smart. My only problem is I don't seem to be very good at selling them along...but then again, I have more than one lens worth of funds, but if I were even a little bit poorer, I'd do that in a heartbeat.

[MossyRocks]

Of all the ones on the list I only own the 35/2.4 and DFA 100/2.8 WR. The 35/2.4 I got because it was the only AF lens available locally and I needed an AF lens in 2 days that was reasonably good, reasonably fast, and basically a normal. I think I paid $50 for it. I've never fallen in love with the lens but use it enough to keep it. The 100 macro is one I use a lot and like getting up close with it which may be why a lot of people sell theirs as they don't really get into macro much. Right now my 2 most used lenses are my 12mm and 400mm (at night) or my 300mm during the day. My 135, 77, and 50 all see about the same use which is fairly frequent and more than the 35. My 28 and 200 don't see much use but do come out and play now an then. The only times I use my zooms is when I need the jack of all trades master of non that I don't care if it gets damaged (tamron 28-300 at scout events) or I am traveling and can't haul all the good glass around (tokina 28-70mm and SMC A 70-210). When I got my 12mm I haven't used my S-M-C 17mm fisheye takumar but that is one where I will want to keep it as I know there will be times when I want the high distortion and it isn't like it takes up much space.

[bdery]

The lenses that I've sold that are memorable (and not MF lenses that I replaced with AF options) are:

18-55 WR and Sigma 17-70 : replaced by 16-85, to have a single, WR walkaround zoom

16-85, replaced by 28-105 when I moved to FF

21, replaced (to some extent) by FA20-35 when I went FF

[jeallen01]

I try to buy lenses "very carefully", and thus have sold very few, notably:
- a few old FF lenses like the Vivitar 19-35 (which was good on film, but "too large" and not useful on an APS-C body), and, well before that, a very old "Carl Zeis Jena 75-300" - but probably actually from Sigma! - which was pretty poor, even on film!) - and there were a few other film-era lenses which also went "elsewhere".
- an original-version Pentax 18-55 (not useful - not wide- or long-enough!)
- used DA F2.4 - tried once on holiday and it was very good, but I'm not a "Prime lens person" nowadays and so I sold it.
- a Pentax 18-135 which was quite good, but "went elsewhere" soon after I got the very old "version 1" Sigma 17-70
- an original-version Pentax 55-300 which soon "went elsewhere" after I got the PLM version which I found much more useful, and somewhat sharper, on the "hacked" K-30 (and now on the K-70!).

---

Last edited by jeallen01; 10-05-2020 at 01:39 PM.

[steamloco76]

1. Sold it when I bought the 35mm f2.8 limited
2. Never owned but would like
3. I love mine and would only sell if I went FF
4. When you calibrate this lens it is brilliant! I just finished the sic. with mine. Its light, wr and so cheap it isn't worth selling, so I am keeping it forever!
5. If I can get the PLM I will trade my HD in, but that's the only reason it will go! Yeah its slow and noisy but you can make it sing with a little work

Not had any of the others

My HD 55-300 WR was fine, however I scored a used PLM version so the HD went to a new owner.

[BigMackCam]

1. DA 35/2.4 “Plastic Fantastic”
2. DA 50/1.8
3. DA 18-135 WR
4. DA 50-200
5. DA 55-300 WR
6. FA 50/1.4
7. DA* 16-50/2.8
8. Tamron 17-50/2.8 Di
9. Sigma 80-200/2.8
10. DFA 100/2.8 WR

Of those, over time I've bought 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 10.

Unlike many folks, I didn't warm to the DA18-135... I just wasn't that happy with it at longer focal lengths. Still, I see so much good photography taken with it that I wonder if I should have persevered.

I sold my DA50-200 WR along with the DA18-55 WR. Though I have far better lenses, I've regretted letting both go as I've had occasions where I could have used them.

The DA*16-50 I bought had to be returned as it wouldn't reach AF accuracy within the +/-10 fine tuning range of my K-3. Otherwise, I thought it was a lovely lens.

The rest, I've hung on to. I'm fond of them all, and I've no desire to sell any. Aside from the D FA100/2.8 WR, though, I'm not sure any of them is "special" in the way some lenses are - so maybe that's why folks tend to flip them... but they're good workhorses. I'm especially fond of the DA35/2.4 and screw-drive HD DA55-300...

[tvdtvdtvd]

Some of the frequent fliers are:
1. DA 35/2.4 “Plastic Fantastic”
2. DA 50/1.8
3. DA 18-135 WR
4. DA 50-200
5. DA 55-300 WR
6. FA 50/1.4
7. DA* 16-50/2.8
8. Tamron 17-50/2.8 Di
9. Sigma 80-200/2.8
10. DFA 100/2.8 WR

I consider myself part of 'everyone' yet I've actually never owned any of these lenses; not one of them.

#1 - I own the DA35 Limited plus own a few MF 35mm and thus have no need for the plastic fantastic, no matter how cheap the cost.
#2 - Same as above, even more so, with the sole difference being I don't own a single AF 50mm prime. You'd think the DA501.8 would be tempting but I'd rather have...;
#6 - Should a FA501.4 make it into my collection I'd probably happily accept it. It just hasn't happened yet. With so many excellent, MF fast 50's to choose from,
the FA50 will need to be cheap, cheap, cheap....
#10 - I have a soft spot for macros and already have examples at 35mm, 40mm, 50mm, 70mm, 90mm and 100mm. The DFA100 in any variant would not only be
redundant but nor can I see the need for AF.
All the rest - I've commented many times in the past that I don't like zooms. To offer worthwhile performance they have to be BIG, and that puts me off like nothing else.
The 20-40 Limited is the only Pentax zoom that piques my interest and I still remain on the fence about it, (ie, I still haven't purchased it).

So much for absolutes.

[ramseybuckeye]

I’ve been a member here for a few years and frequently buy and sell on the Marketplace. A number of lenses with good reviews seem to be purchased by a majority of us only to be listed for sale at a later date. Some of the frequent fliers are:
1. DA 35/2.4 “Plastic Fantastic”
2. DA 50/1.8
3. DA 18-135 WR
4. DA 50-200
5. DA 55-300 WR
6. FA 50/1.4
7. DA* 16-50/2.8
8. Tamron 17-50/2.8 Di
9. Sigma 80-200/2.8
10. DFA 100/2.8 WR

I have sold a DA 50-200, DA 55-300 WR , DA*16-50/2.8, and Tamron 17-50/2.8. I have the DA 35/2.4 and DFA 100/2.8, those aren’t going anywhere. Not sure why so many buy and then sell these two. Then there is the DA 18-135WR. I’ve listed mine three times. Every time I do, at least three others pop up for sale and none of them move. Check the listings, normally three are several of this overrated lens up for sale. I also, unfortunately, own the FA 50/1.4 which I purchased new. These only sell for around $200
in like new condition, well under half what it cost new. Everybody says “It’s a great lens”, and yet it isn’t.

Let’s see what other “bought it, tried it, sold it” class members others have noticed moving around frequently.

There are already a lot of good responses here and reason given, but I'll chime in too as this is an interesting thread.
1. DA 35/2.4 “Plastic Fantastic” - I bought it new, don't use it much, but for certain things it is very, very good.
2. DA 50/1.8 - never had it, the F50/1.7 serves me well. I don't need it, but I would buy it if really cheap
3. DA 18-135 WR - I have it have used it a lot, but not nearly as much since getting the DA 20-40 and 55-300 PLM.
4. DA 50-200 - Never had it, don't need it.
5. DA 55-300 WR - Never had it, but had the non WR and gave it to my son when I got a DA* 300. I also have the PLM version now
6. FA 50/1.4- - never had it, the F50/1.7 serves me well. I don't need it, but I would buy it if really cheap
7. DA* 16-50/2.8 - Never had it
8. Tamron 17-50/2.8 Di - Never had it, had the Sigma, sold it after getting the DA 20-40.
9. Sigma 80-200/2.8 - Do you mean the 70-200?, I had the Tamron which was good but under utilized by me. I bought the Tamron because I won a photo contest from a B&M camera store that did not carry Pentax, but could get Pentax mount in Tamron as a special order.
10. DFA 100/2.8 WR - I had it, great lens, but I really wasn't using it and it was an expensive lens, I sold it to buy the DA* 300.

Many of these lenses are low cost lenses, and people sell them when they can afford an upgrade. And as stated before, some of these were sold as kits, can you actually buy the DA 50-200? I imagine that many people sold their 18-135 and bought the 16-85, or the 28-105 if going to FF. In fact a lot of these fit the going to FF scenario. The DA55-300WR is a simple explanation, they are buying the DA55-300 PLM, exchanging Pentax's slowest focusing telephoto lens for the fastest. I don't see he DFA 100/2.8 WR for sale any more than the Tamron 90 macro, which I see constantly, and I purchased one for a very good price last year.
I bought the DFA 100 macro WR as my first WR lens, but soon realized it was a mistake at the time, I didn't really need a macro lens as much as a telephoto, and that was a little short, but I did not sell it because it was not a good lens, I just never should have bought it. Now several years later I actually have three macro lenses (two are the same lens though) and I use them. As you go along you may find different things that you want to do in photography and your interests may change in what you are shooting and how you are shooting. Pentax Forums is the great infector of LBA (and I mean that in a good way). We come on here and read threads, look at photos, participate in challenges and games, and get ideas. Ideas like I want to shoot that, what will it take to shoot that, I like this lens, but with that lens I can also do this. You also have to take into account that some with LBA are constantly buying and selling, look at the number of listing on the marketplace that are not the original owner.

[mikesbike]

I’ve been a member here for a few years and frequently buy and sell on the Marketplace. A number of lenses with good reviews seem to be purchased by a majority of us only to be listed for sale at a later date. Some of the frequent fliers are:
1. DA 35/2.4 “Plastic Fantastic”
2. DA 50/1.8
3. DA 18-135 WR
4. DA 50-200
5. DA 55-300 WR
6. FA 50/1.4
7. DA* 16-50/2.8
8. Tamron 17-50/2.8 Di
9. Sigma 80-200/2.8
10. DFA 100/2.8 WR

I have sold a DA 50-200, DA 55-300 WR , DA*16-50/2.8, and Tamron 17-50/2.8. I have the DA 35/2.4 and DFA 100/2.8, those aren’t going anywhere. Not sure why so many buy and then sell these two. Then there is the DA 18-135WR. I’ve listed mine three times. Every time I do, at least three others pop up for sale and none of them move. Check the listings, normally three are several of this overrated lens up for sale. I also, unfortunately, own the FA 50/1.4 which I purchased new. These only sell for around $200
in like new condition, well under half what it cost new. Everybody says “It’s a great lens”, and yet it isn’t.

Let’s see what other “bought it, tried it, sold it” class members others have noticed moving around frequently.

I have observed the fact that many become less than happy with what they have selected, and wind up buying and selling quite often. The good thing that comes of this are threefold- eventually they find out what or how to better use that which finally satisfied them (hopefully), the industry is well-served for sales, and the used market bulges with some fine and very useful lenses for those less financially able.

I have accumulated a few lesser lenses and now have replacements better suited for my needs, so I do need to clean house.

I wonder, since you have got rid of some pretty good lenses, including two all-around fast zoom lenses good for low light use, and are now trying to get rid of an all-around zoom lens which is a fine performer with a very useful zoom range, what have you, or do you intend, as their replacements? I know of some people who wind up shooting with high-quality prime lenses as their only interest.

I agree regarding the old FA 50 f/1.4 to point, as it sits because I will preferably by a long shot turn to my FA 77mm or DA 70mm Limiteds, or my "F" 50mm f/1.7. However, I got mine way back shortly after the first Pentax DSLR came out, for less than $200 new! I could not resist, even though having my oldest "M" 50mm f/1.4 for many years. I hang onto it because it remains my only AF lens capable of f/1.4 at all, and I have found it really is capable of very fine rendering and with fine bokeh.

Although having and often using both the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM and the Pentax DA 20-40mm f/2.8-4 Limited, depending on my needs, I still sometimes turn to my still highly-valued DA 18-135mm for its quality imaging combined with its instantly-available zoom range, reducing the need for lens-changing, and I can even grab a very good-quality closeup with yet surprisingly good bokeh!

[stevebrot]

And as stated before, some of these were sold as kits, can you actually buy the DA 50-200?

Yes, you can; it is $196.95 USD at B&H LINK. You can also buy the DA 18-55 LINK and DA 18-50 LINK at similar price points.

That said, I dropped back in to make the same observation regarding the Tamron SP 90mm Macro in the full glory of its various generations. One can always find one for sale (choose your version). It is hard to find a person that finds any damning fault with any of them, yet they are always for sale. Go figure!


Steve

(...I am not planning on selling my 72B any time soon...)

[FozzFoster]

I'd say the most common ones I see for sale:
A 50mm f/2
M 50mm f/2
M 28mm f/2.8
S-M-C Tak 135mm f/3.5
Tak 55mm f/1.8 or f/2
Tak 135mm f/2.5 Bayonet
F 70-210
Sigma 70-300
Maybe I'll throw the F 35-80 in there...

[pepperberry farm]

I’ve been a member here for a few years and frequently buy and sell on the Marketplace. A number of lenses with good reviews seem to be purchased by a majority of us only to be listed for sale at a later date. Some of the frequent fliers are:
1. DA 35/2.4 “Plastic Fantastic”
2. DA 50/1.8
3. DA 18-135 WR
4. DA 50-200
5. DA 55-300 WR
6. FA 50/1.4
7. DA* 16-50/2.8
8. Tamron 17-50/2.8 Di
9. Sigma 80-200/2.8
10. DFA 100/2.8 WR

1. Bought it, sold it, happier with the 35 Limited...
2. Bought it, sold it, happier with a whole slew of 55's and 58's...
3. Bought it - love it - have considered replacing, never found anything that produces as well...
4. Bought it, sold it - never happy with the build quality...
5. Bought it, never use it, should probably sell it....
6. Never had one
7. Never had one
8. Never had one
9. Never had one
10. traded an FA 43 Limited for my copy and love it...

[FozzFoster]

3. Bought it - love it - have considered replacing, never found anything that produces as well...

My major complaint for the 18-135 lens is the zoom creep, very annoying imo
When that 16-50 f/2.8 PLM hits...

[UncleVanya]

My major complaint for the 18-135 lens is the zoom creep, very annoying imo
When that 16-50 f/2.8 PLM hits...

Zoom creep on that lens? Never seen it once. Wild how different things are across the same brand.

[hypermodern]

This rings true...

1. Took my baby photos with it, never parting with it. But the hexagonal bokeh irritates me at times.
2. Gave it to a friend after I got the 55mm f1.4
3. Still have, never use.
4. Sold
5. I had a Sigma 70-300 instead, sold
6. I got the A series instead for some reason, after a couple of years I have an ME Super on its way to go with it.
7. Got the Sigma 18-35mm as my normal zoom instead.
8. See above.
9. 50-135mm FTW
10. Love this. Small, sharp, CA goes away when you stop down a bit. But I use it as a manual focus lens so I could have an older macro instead.