[dougieazar]

I have a k-x, k-r, k-5 and k-3 and I like all of them. The k-x and k-r I use for more of knock around situations and my k-3 and k-5 a bit more directed and serious. I do not feel that a k-1, partially due to cost, is really a necessary upgrade at this time. My question is this, I would like to purchase a couple of nice lenses which cover the range I have now. I have the kit lens 18 - 55 but do not like the widest aperture size. I also use an old Takumar 28 - 80 and like the range and its usability and the quality is pretty decent but I want better. My other used quite a bit is a Tamron 70mm - 300mm and that is a fun lens and fairly decent in quality. I want to get some better quality lens, or lenses, with these same useages but don't want to break the bank. One lens I have been considering is the 55mm - 300mm. Is this a decent lens. I would also like to get something in the f2.0 range. With all these choices can anyone give me some insights? I enjoy landscape and cityscape photog.

[Unregistered User 8]

Hey Doug, from all accounts the 55-300 performs well. But please be aware that the newer PLM version will not work properly on your K-5, as this version of the lens is KAF4, which is not supported by cameras older than 2013. The older versions of the lens will work well on all your current camera bodies. Good luck.

[mroeder75]

I have a Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC I picked up second hand for a reasonable price that takes really great photographs if you are looking for a faster lens. (Mine is not for sale).

[yucatanPentax]

One of my favorite lenses for landscapes and cityscapes is the Pentax DA 12-24mm f4. Recently good used copies have been going for very reasonable prices. That may be due to the popularity of the DA 15mm f4 Limited which falls in that range.

If a lot of your photos fall toward the wider end of your 18-55, you might be interested in the DA 21mm f3.2 Limited. Granted, it isn't f2, but it's an improvement over the 18-55 for that focal length. For the money, it is hard to beat the "Plastic Fantastic" DA 35mm f2.4, which would be more of a normal lens on your APSC sensor cameras.

If you like to stay with zoom lenses, the 18-135mm f3.5-5.6 offers a step up from the 18-55 in both range and quality. It's one of my favorite walk-around lenses. To gain more on the wider end, the DA 16-85mm f3.5-5.6 is a good lens. Both the 18-135 and the 16-85 give you WR.

As said, the 55-300mm gives you a bit of a step up from your Tamron 70-300.

I'd look at where you normally take most of your photos -- what focal length on your zoom lenses -- and then maybe consider options and alternatives for a step up that covers your most preferred range.

[dougieazar]

Like I said I have both my k-3 and k-5. When I go out I have the 70 - 300 on my k-5 and the 28 - 80 on my k-3 and both hanging around my neck or on the seat in my car so when the shot presents itself I can decide which is appropriate. The mp is not an issue as I can work with either and 8mp difference is no biggie. I am not at the point that a gazillion mp is necessary. Because of this both suggestions are what I would deem good choices and I thank you for responding. Any more suggestions are more than welcome................Doug

[Gary H Perth]

My suggestion if you wish to stay with zooms would be the Sigma 17-50mm constant f2.8, and the 55-300mm f4-5.8 that suits the older bodies. That way you have all focal lengths covered and auto-everything for when time is tight. Both are quite well priced in the second-hand market.

But I suggest also get at least one prime for size/convenience. If you can find and afford, then either a 35mm Limited or a DFA 50mm macro. If price is more crucial, get the plastic fantastic 35mm or 50mm, or a used FA50mm f1.8.

[K(s)evin]

My suggestion if you wish to stay with zooms would be the Sigma 17-50mm constant f2.8, and the 55-300mm f4-5.8 that suits the older bodies. That way you have all focal lengths covered and auto-everything for when time is tight. Both are quite well priced in the second-hand market.

But I suggest also get at least one prime for size/convenience. If you can find and afford, then either a 35mm Limited or a DFA 50mm macro. If price is more crucial, get the plastic fantastic 35mm or 50mm, or a used FA50mm f1.8.

The Tamron 17-50 f2.8 is also a high quality wide, fast zoom. The DA HD 55-300 WR would be a perfect, weather resistant companion.

[PJ1]

Hi Doug. As @pjv said, all of the 55-300 lenses are pretty good. The PLM version is the best and would work on your K-3 but not earlier bodies. I have an older DAL 55-300 and it is fine for my purposes. With any of these lenses, they are good unless you shoot wide open and pixel-peep. But from f8, even those concerns will disappear. Remember that once you get to 300mm

something in the f2.0 range

is out of the question in a zoom lens. There are 300/f2.8 lenses, but they will cost an arm and a leg.

[aslyfox]

this is always a good reference for me:

Pentax K-mount Lens Compatibility Chart
Copyright 2006-2020 Mosphotos.com. All rights reserved.

The Pentax K-mount Camera Lens Compatibility Chart

_____________________

. . . I would also like to get something in the f2.0 range. . . .

108 results Pentax options up to 2.8:

<= F2.8 Lenses | PentaxForums.com

44 third party options up to 2.8:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/lenssearch/?maxap=2.8&inproduction=0&thirdparty=1

[jgnfld]

Hi Doug. As @pjv said, all of the 55-300 lenses are pretty good. The PLM version is the best and would work on your K-3 but not earlier bodies. I have an older DAL 55-300 and it is fine for my purposes. With any of these lenses, they are good unless you shoot wide open and pixel-peep. But from f8, even those concerns will disappear. Remember that once you get to 300mm is out of the question in a zoom lens. There are 300/f2.8 lenses, but they will cost an arm and a leg.

Given my typical usage, a 55-300 is mounted (KP/K70 formerly K50) about 40% of the time. I have used 3 models starting from the older screw drive DAL model then the WR model and finally the PLM. Twice replacements have been for various falls/accidents on trails/docks, but twice to upgrade.

The main reason I upgraded over the years was that fish-hunting birds (ospreys/gannets in particular) are almost impossible to catch in dives with the older screw drive models without luck and prefocusing. And they are an important target here for me. WR is important for me as well as much/most of my summer shooting is done from an open cockpit in a 27' saiboat making WR in particular very important. For most all other purposes, they were/are pretty much interchangeable optically and quite good quality. I've even made what I consider to be nice panos with this series using stitching. Love the extra detail stitching gives over cropping wide angle shots.

Do note the PLM while a beautiful focuser and nicely compact is a tad slower. If you live in a dark clime with an older camera this might be an issue. With the release of the KP I've quit having to futz around with ISO tradeoffs etc. on dark days in the woods in particular. (Aside: low sun/very thick weather is everyday weather in Newfoundland--I rarely contribute to the "bad weather good pics" thread as most pics on that thread look like pretty darn nice shooting days to me!) But then my environment can be a teensy bit extreme. Don't know where in the USA you hail from or what you want to shoot, but a comparable environment in the US would be hiking/sailing in the Bering Sea area or related.

Given your environment and intended purposes, your needs may be met differently from mine. But this is my experience with this lens series.

[Sandy Hancock]

The HD DA 55-300/4.5-6.3 PLM is a brilliant lens. It will rock on your K-3

If you really like the 28-80 range on crop, the DFA 24-70/2.8 might interest you if you need the speed, or the much cheaper DFA 28-105/3.5-5.6 (which I really like on crop) if you don't.

When you say you would like something on the f/2.0 range, what do you mean? Normal lens? Short telephoto for portraits?

[Lowell Goudge]

Having read the OPs post, I think the first need is to replace the kit lens.

Maybe the 16-85 would be a good start. As a general walk around lens. That paired with the 55-300 would make a respectable 2 lens zoom kit, if he wants to improve upon his long range, although he considers his current lens pretty decent

[Sandy Hancock]

Maybe the 16-85 would be a good start. As a general walk around lens. That paired with the 55-300 would make a respectable 2 lens zoom kit

^THIS.

I take back everything I suggested earlier.

[jgnfld]

Having read the OPs post, I think the first need is to replace the kit lens.

Maybe the 16-85 would be a good start. As a general walk around lens. That paired with the 55-300 would make a respectable 2 lens zoom kit, if he wants to improve upon his long range, although he considers his current lens pretty decent

On in-and-out hikes and up-the-coast and back sails, I tend to use the one going one way and the other returning. Truly wonderful combo of lenses and my personal 80% of the time duo.

The single trouble with the 16-85 here is that it is most definitely starting to get a bit expensive even used. Otherwise it is great and probably my personal most used lens.

I do see several have noted the 2 plastic fantastics: 35mm and 50mm. Even new these are very reasonable. Used they can be a steaI. I have used both and like them except that they really don't cover my particular environment and targets well. As well in this range, I once scored a manual focus SMC Pentax-A 50mm f1.7 that I use for b&w sometimes. I really like the way it renders grays. And it can be gotten for close to a song used. (Reviewers mention it is great rendering saturated colors as well, but I have other lenses for that.)

[pres589]

I think I'd go looking for the older 55-300 on the used market so that the long lens could be used with all of the cameras mentioned. This lens seems like a given.

Fast glass is kind of a different story. The Sigma 24 EX DG or 28 EX DG are both f1.8's and available on the used market or sometimes available as factory refurbs through Adorama. They usually run around $300 USD. They're not small or light but they're nice lenses. For something tighter and good for portraits, and a lot less money, an F or FA 50 f1.7 or the DA 50 1.8 are half that or less on the used market and are great lenses for the money.

The 16-85 sounds like a great lens for general walk-around. The 18-135 is also nice; I have one of these and I won't be parting with it. Either of these seem like great options.