Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-30-2020, 06:32 AM - 1 Like   #16
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ramseybuckeye's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hampstead, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 17,277
You have some good lenses, then you have those two Tamrons which I can’t imagine that you use. I would ditch those two and the 18-50 and get the DA 20-40, it has the silent focus, weatherized, and great IQ, it would be a big upgrade to your stable. It’s much better than the Sigma17-50, I have owned both. I don’t do Astro so I don’t have any recommendations on that, and don’t want to recommend anything else without knowing what you shoot. The DA 20-40 is just a high quality versatile lens. Go for quality, not quantity.

11-30-2020, 06:37 AM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 2,009
Original Poster
Thank you everyone for your replies. It's right, I should go into details.

The lenses I use the most :
- Sigma 10-20 F3.5 (for landscape and astro, but I have to admit a 2x zoom often seems limitating)
- Pentax DA 35 F2.4 (for general use)
- Pentax HD DA 55-300 PLM (for anything with a longer focal length)

The lenses with few use :
- Pentax SMC DA 10-17 Fisheye (I really like this lens but I lack time currently to play with it)
- Pentax DA 50 F1.8 (no many occasions to do portraits currently, and the focal length is a bit large when it comes to general use)
- Pentax DFA 50 Macro F2.8 (not enough skilled to get good macro shot yet, and working distance is so small that I have to use external lights to avoid overshadowing the subject, which is awkward to use)

The lenses I almost never use :
- Tamron AF 18-250 (but it's good to have around to catch on event when I have no idea of the focal length I may need)
- Pentax DA-L 18-50 F4-5.6 (I don't like this lens much, but it's good to have it around if I ever need WR or silent focusing)
- Tamron AF 70-300 (it is a fun lens, but PLM made this one obsolete and is the only lens I would not mind getting rid of)

If I really had to sell a lens, the 70-300 would be a no-brainer. But I won't get much of it, so I wonder if it is really worth the time and effort?

When I look at my lenses, I see that when it comes to WR, I only have two suitable, the 18-50 and the PLM. But I have to admit that I don't need WR often.

All of my lenses are auto-focusing, most are screw-drive and very noisy (the Tamron 18-250 could be mistaken for a screw-driver). Only three of them are silent focusing : the Sigma 10-20, the 18-50 and the PLM.

When it comes to astro, I have no real "need", since I don't do deep sky, because of lack of equatorial mount and lack of GPS to make use of the KS-2 astrotracer. Looking at lenstip, Sigma 10-20 correct coma rather well at 20mm. I thought the Sigma 17-50 could help with that thanks to its F2.8 maximum aperture, but coma with that lens is rather horrible, according to lenstip. But thinking about it, buying a lens just for that rare use case would be a waste of money.

If I had to describe a need (putting LBA aside), I would say that I need a quality lens that could stay on my KS-2 most of the time, with great IQ, versatility, a fast lens to allow indoor-shooting without a flash, and silent-focusing. WR would be nice, but is not strictly needed. Silent-focusing and fast lens requirement are because I will soon have a newborn that will be a perfect subject for shots in low-light with no screw-drive noise allowed.

That's why I thought of the Sigma 17-50 F2.8, which seems to fit the bill, except for WR, and is only a 3x zoom. But since I don't do post-processing (because of lack of time mostly), I admit I am attracted by Pentax zoom because of those colors rendering, but they are all slow.

When it comes to Limited lenses, well, I don't really understand the fuss about them, but it's probably because I never got one! But except the 20-40, all are either slow (DA 15, DA 21), double with my own gear (DA 35 F2.8, DA 40), or with a too large focal length (DA 70), and except the 20-40 Limited, all are noisy and lack WR. The 20-40 Limited looks nice, but the review on Pentaxforums states that 40mm is subpar. It's only a 2x zoom, slow on the long end, and I feel it limiting (same for Sigma 10-20). Oddly enough, a prime is less limiting to my eyes because I know I have to walk to make my composition work!

A new body like the KP would give me one stop of light thanks to high ISO performance, but I would still lack of a lens that could stay on my body most of the time.

Help.

Last edited by Bertrand3000; 11-30-2020 at 06:44 AM.
11-30-2020, 06:56 AM - 1 Like   #18
Pentaxian
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,353
I think indeed a fast normal zoom would be nice, and I notice you don't have any short tele prime such as the FA77 or DA70. I'd look into those, and maybe loose some of the redundant tele zooms.
11-30-2020, 07:12 AM - 2 Likes   #19
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Lancaster
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,821
QuoteOriginally posted by Bertrand3000 Quote
Thank you everyone for your replies. It's right, I should go into details.

The lenses I use the most :
- Sigma 10-20 F3.5 (for landscape and astro, but I have to admit a 2x zoom often seems limitating)
- Pentax DA 35 F2.4 (for general use)
- Pentax HD DA 55-300 PLM (for anything with a longer focal length)

The lenses with few use :
- Pentax SMC DA 10-17 Fisheye (I really like this lens but I lack time currently to play with it)
- Pentax DA 50 F1.8 (no many occasions to do portraits currently, and the focal length is a bit large when it comes to general use)
- Pentax DFA 50 Macro F2.8 (not enough skilled to get good macro shot yet, and working distance is so small that I have to use external lights to avoid overshadowing the subject, which is awkward to use)

The lenses I almost never use :
- Tamron AF 18-250 (but it's good to have around to catch on event when I have no idea of the focal length I may need)
- Pentax DA-L 18-50 F4-5.6 (I don't like this lens much, but it's good to have it around if I ever need WR or silent focusing)
- Tamron AF 70-300 (it is a fun lens, but PLM made this one obsolete and is the only lens I would not mind getting rid of)

If I really had to sell a lens, the 70-300 would be a no-brainer. But I won't get much of it, so I wonder if it is really worth the time and effort?

When I look at my lenses, I see that when it comes to WR, I only have two suitable, the 18-50 and the PLM. But I have to admit that I don't need WR often.

All of my lenses are auto-focusing, most are screw-drive and very noisy (the Tamron 18-250 could be mistaken for a screw-driver). Only three of them are silent focusing : the Sigma 10-20, the 18-50 and the PLM.

When it comes to astro, I have no real "need", since I don't do deep sky, because of lack of equatorial mount and lack of GPS to make use of the KS-2 astrotracer. Looking at lenstip, Sigma 10-20 correct coma rather well at 20mm. I thought the Sigma 17-50 could help with that thanks to its F2.8 maximum aperture, but coma with that lens is rather horrible, according to lenstip. But thinking about it, buying a lens just for that rare use case would be a waste of money.

If I had to describe a need (putting LBA aside), I would say that I need a quality lens that could stay on my KS-2 most of the time, with great IQ, versatility, a fast lens to allow indoor-shooting without a flash, and silent-focusing. WR would be nice, but is not strictly needed. Silent-focusing and fast lens requirement are because I will soon have a newborn that will be a perfect subject for shots in low-light with no screw-drive noise allowed.

That's why I thought of the Sigma 17-50 F2.8, which seems to fit the bill, except for WR, and is only a 3x zoom. But since I don't do post-processing (because of lack of time mostly), I admit I am attracted by Pentax zoom because of those colors rendering, but they are all slow.

When it comes to Limited lenses, well, I don't really understand the fuss about them, but it's probably because I never got one! But except the 20-40, all are either slow (DA 15, DA 21), double with my own gear (DA 35 F2.8, DA 40), or with a too large focal length (DA 70), and except the 20-40 Limited, all are noisy and lack WR. The 20-40 Limited looks nice, but the review on Pentaxforums states that 40mm is subpar. It's only a 2x zoom, slow on the long end, and I feel it limiting (same for Sigma 10-20). Oddly enough, a prime is less limiting to my eyes because I know I have to walk to make my composition work!

A new body like the KP would give me one stop of light thanks to high ISO performance, but I would still lack of a lens that could stay on my body most of the time.

Help.
I would strongly, strongly suggest a 21mm limited. It is tiny, very sharp, great to hand hold down to really slow speeds, because it is so sharp you can crop lots, its great for streets, inside churches or landscapes, the small amount of distortion is easily rectified, and, used, it is probably the cheapest limited prime. Limited lenses give you an extra level of sharpness. They are getting up towards the star lenses in terms of quality but are tiny and unobtrusive. By all accounts, the 20-40mm limited is as good at 21 & at 35mm as the two limited primes and it is weather sealed. Its not quite as discreet though. That is the only lens on my "WANT IT NOW!!!" List



These were taken with the 21mm limited





11-30-2020, 07:39 AM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2019
Posts: 2,009
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Cerebum Quote
These were taken with the 21mm limited
Wow! That first shot, this landscape, is jaw-dropping! I suppose you did quite a lot of post processing to get such a sharp, colorful and magic picture?

I am sensitive to your argument because landscape is still my preferred shooting style, and I discovered with the Sigma 10-20 that I have a soft spot for 20mm field of view.
11-30-2020, 08:22 AM - 1 Like   #21
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,186
I own a lot of lenses for my K-3. The normal walk around options I have are:

DA* 16-50 (screw drive converted)
DA L 18-50
DA 18-135
DA Ltd 20-40
FA Ltd 31
FA 35
FA 50 f1.4
F 50 f1.7
DA* 55


The less normal choices:
DA12-24

The DA Ltd 20-40 is surprisingly good. The range is more useful than it sounds as it covers slight telephoto to slight wide angle. You’ll still need to zoom with your feet but the extra bit is helpful.

The DA 12-24 isn’t fast it isn’ and is a bit wide and it overlaps your 10-20, but the extra on the long end makes it more useful as a walking around lens...

Like you I’m not in love with the DA L 18-50. I find the DA 18-135 is better and the only reason I keep it is for size and price.

The new 16-50 will be expensive, when available, but saving for it could be the best choice if you really want a fast normal zoom that’s quiet and has good iq.

Another lens to consider is the Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 there are two versions. It’s supposedly very good, but I don’t have any experience with it.

The DA 70 isn’t too long at all on crop. In It’s quite similar to the old Nikon 105 f2.5 and I like the lens a lot.

Last edited by UncleVanya; 11-30-2020 at 08:31 AM.
11-30-2020, 08:37 AM   #22
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Lancaster
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,821
QuoteOriginally posted by Bertrand3000 Quote
Wow! That first shot, this landscape, is jaw-dropping! I suppose you did quite a lot of post processing to get such a sharp, colorful and magic picture?

I am sensitive to your argument because landscape is still my preferred shooting style, and I discovered with the Sigma 10-20 that I have a soft spot for 20mm field of view.
Thanks I didn't do much really, it was just after dawn and nicely in golden hour

11-30-2020, 09:39 AM   #23
New Member




Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Bhubaneswar, India
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10
I do not know about your field of interest. I have sigma 17-50 f 2.8 which is very good ( Tamron 17-50 which I have sold earlier was no bad also) and smc 55-300 wr and old 50 mm Helios k mount for regular use. Sold 35 mm , 50 mm, Tamron 90 mm etc because these are not that essential for an ordinary hobby photographer. Want to buy an F or FA 50 f 1.7 since sold my FA 50 f 1.7 which was not a mint copy.
11-30-2020, 10:08 AM   #24
Veteran Member
Ronald Oakes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,582
Your poor little DA L 18-50 lens just gets no love at all..and everybody mentions the poor little bugger as the first lens they would ditch!
I happened to dearly love that little lens so send it to me if you get serious about some lens ditching!
I can't really give you any advice on what to buy except look really hard at the HD DA 20-40 Limited.
11-30-2020, 10:16 AM   #25
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,078
The Sigma 17-50 might make sense as has been noted.

A 17-70 might also fill in that space.

What about the 100mm macro. Better working distance and it is a fine lens for head shots.
11-30-2020, 11:42 AM - 1 Like   #26
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
AlwaysAl's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: West GTA, Ontario, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 549
Depending on your application but, as a suggestion, instead of your indicated Sigma 17-50, perhaps the Sigma ART 18-35 1.8. Got this one, replaced a Tamron 17-50 and it became my go to lens on the K-5iis. Beautiful piece of work!
11-30-2020, 11:42 AM   #27
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Coast, CA
Posts: 1,312
Another vote for the 18-135, but the 85mm 1.4 would be tempting.
11-30-2020, 11:43 AM   #28
Seeker of Knowledge
Loyal Site Supporter
aslyfox's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Topeka, Kansas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,563
QuoteOriginally posted by bladerunner6 Quote
. . . What about the 100mm macro. Better working distance and it is a fine lens for head shots.
the D FA 100 f2.8 Macro WR is a very good short telephoto and macro lens

as is its predecessors D FA 100 f2.8 Macro, FA 100 f2.8 Macro and F 100 f2.8 Macro

all share the same optics but not the same aperture blades

____________________

another lens to consider - the first Pentax Limited created:

QuoteQuote:
SMC Pentax-FA 43mm F1.9 Limited Review
Introduction
Pentax took the photographic world by surprise in 1997 with the launch of its first Limited lens, the FA 43mm F1.9. This was 20 years ago, at a time when film camera's were still the norm and digital cameras were a rare novelty (Nikon's D1 DSLR was still two years in the future). It was also an era of plastic zoom lenses, many carrying with them a feeling of cheap quality.

The FA 43mm was a little revolution at the time: a minuscule, full-metal bodied prime lens with an uncommon focal length and superb image quality. Joined a few years later by the 31mm and 77mm to complete the trio of FA Limited (often called the Three Amigos or Three Princesses), the 43mm was created by legendary lens designer Jun Hirakawa. Its rendering and optical qualities are often numbered among the best on the market even today.
Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/smc-pentax-fa-43mm-f19-limited/introduc...#ixzz6fJ0I9MK3

QuoteQuote:
Description:
The Pentax FA 43mm limited is a standard prime lens featuring a metal construction and superior optics.

It was for a while also available as a manual focus lens in the Leica M39 rangefinder mount with a matching optical viewfinder. That version was labeled smc Pentax-L 1:1.9 43mm Special.

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/lensreviews/SMC-Pentax-FA-43mm-F1.9-Limited-Len...#ixzz6fJ0pS1iD

Last edited by aslyfox; 11-30-2020 at 11:51 AM.
11-30-2020, 02:30 PM - 1 Like   #29
Des
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Des's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Victoria Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,410
QuoteOriginally posted by Bertrand3000 Quote
The 20-40 Limited looks nice, but the review on Pentaxforums states that 40mm is subpar
Maybe they had a bad copy. Examples at 40mm







(The last one is wide open at f4.)

I have the FA 43 as well and the 20-40 compares well from f4 up. (It's more predictable and reliable than the 43, which can be wonderful or awful according to its mood.) If you have a fast 50 that would cover the occasions where you need a wider aperture.

I have the DA 35 f2.4 as well and I much prefer the 20-40 despite its slower aperture at its long end. The DA 35 has a little more resolution, but the images from the Limited are much nicer (IMO).

The 20-40 is f2.8 at the wide end (compared with f3.2 for the 21). I really like the bokeh. 23mm f3.2


20mm f2.8


If you need a zoom that is f2.8 across the range for indoor use, OK. But don't pass up the 20-40 because you think its IQ will be inferior.

Last edited by Des; 11-30-2020 at 05:38 PM.
11-30-2020, 02:35 PM   #30
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,183
You might consider a Sigma 8-16, if you can find one (they do pop up second-hand, from time to time). I’ve never tried night skies with mine, but they do make for compositional challenges at the short end.
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!
af, budget, da, da*, f2.8, f4-5.6, k-mount, lens, lenses, pentax, pentax lens, sigma, slr lens, tamron
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Two body upgrades in two weeks? Please tell me I'm full of GAS and need help! Luc More Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 09-20-2018 07:05 AM
Which Two Lenses Should I Take? (Need Advice ASAP) Beetle B. Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 24 06-13-2018 11:59 AM
Nature An English Rose (two days, two different lenses) MSL Post Your Photos! 8 07-12-2016 09:12 PM
Two lenses in two weeks... Rayenna Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 07-25-2009 10:09 PM
Two bodies, two lenses- which for which? NeverSatisfied Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 01-02-2009 10:20 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:59 AM. | 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