[PenPusher]

Gloomy with threatening rain so I came up with this bit of nonsense.

Considering only prime lenses made for the 35mm format, over the years Pentax has made, in Screw Mount, lenses with the following focal lengths:

15, 17, 18, 20, 24, 28, 35, 50, 55, 58, 83, 85, 100, 105, 120, 135, 150, 200, 300, 400, 500 and 1000mm, many available with different apertures and some also came in various body incarnations.

moving on now to those for the K mount we have:

15, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 24, 28, 30, 31, 35, 40, 43, 50, 55, 70, 77, 85, 100, 120, 135, 150, 200, 300, 400, 560, 600, 1200 and 2000mm, again many come with an assortment of apertures, and in various incarnations.

I suppose somewhere out there in the vastness of the internet there might be a collector who has one of every lens Pentax has ever made, so which one does he/she put in their gadget bag for their afternoon walk and do they combine it with the appropriate camera for which it was made.

Perhaps we could narrow down the choice for APS-C with the DA21, 35 or 40 and 70mm which would make a nice lightweight set though there would have to be one or two extras for the specialist photographer.

For years most of us got by with the single 50/55mm lens that came with their camera, you could probably still do it if you really put your mind to it.

---

Last edited by PenPusher; 01-15-2022 at 09:27 AM. Reason: defeating the spell checker

[pepperberry farm]

tl:dr - no such thing.....


(:

[3by2]

tl:dr - no such thing.....


(:

All other answers are now superflous!

[gump]

YouTube vlogger James Popsys talk about something similar. He suggested inventorying your best photos to determine a pattern of using particular focal lengths. Who knows, it might work and save money, time, and space

[house]

I'm a prime shooter and I don't like having to many lenses with me. It makes the process messy and indecisive. My ideal is three. Wide, standard and tele.
On apsc DA15 and DA21 competed in a way that was difficult to resolve. Same with the DA2.4/35, and DA1.8/50. the DA70 had the tele position sorted.
In the end the DA21 was hard to bring as it wasn't wide enough for many scenes but I very much liked the fov always increasing the risk it came along for an outing.

My goal for FF is three plus a shift lens and a 50. Unfortunately I have more lenses than that now and the wide is still unresolved

I just love the idea of a line up with so many focal lengths and personalities as in the vintage ones.

[normhead]

I am often tempted to just put my DA*55 1.4 on the camera and using that , either the K-1 or K-3 as a walk around.

I will rarely use screw mount lenses. Usually only for comparative tests.
My most used non-AF K mount lens was my A-400 , and it was a super lens. That being said, I don't think I have any other A lenses. I've many times look at telephotos, but this lenses really hold thier value.

I'm not sure there's a lens made I'd carry other than a D FA 28-105 or DA 18-135 on the camera. Sometimes if expecting wildlife I'll carry the DA 55-300 PLM.

That answers the question, what do I carry. But I don't have enough lenses to do this right. I only have 22.

[house]

YouTube vlogger James Popsys talk about something similar. He suggested inventorying your best photos to determine a pattern of using particular focal lengths. Who knows, it might work and save money, time, and space

I think this is very much the wrong approach. Sounds similar to the suggestion I see that you check you stats for focal lengths before buying a prime. A lens should imho *make* you see. You should pick a fov because you want to add an arrow to your quiver not to feed your old habits.

[ffking]

I still quite enjoy going out with only one prime lens on the K-1 - usually one ot the old Ltds as they are small and light and high quality. it makes you think a bit harder, and though there are some shot's you can't get, there are others you would have missed if you were faffing around zooming or changing lenses

[pschlute]

I suppose somewhere out there in the vastness of the internet there might be a collector who has one of every lens Pentax has ever made

I am trying, but a long way to go yet........

[photoptimist]

This is a classic Goldilocks problem. For any given photographic composition and subject matter, some lenses are too long and some are too short. If someone is a photographer with diverse interests -- expansive landscapes, architecture, street, portrait, animals, birds, deep-space objects, etc., then it takes a big bag full of "just right" lenses.

In theory, if you want to avoid more than a 20% crop of the image (a 44% loss of pixel count), then you need a bag with 19 lenses to span 15mm to 1000 mm.

Add to that is the issue of special lenses with special characteristics (macro lenses, pixie-dust limited lenses, big-bokeh fast lenses, etc.) and the bag gets even heavier.

Thus, every single one of all those lenses has a purpose and does belong in someone's bag.

LBA is not an addiction, it's a justifiable need!

[JohnMc]

In theory, ... you need a bag with 19 lenses to span 15mm to 1000 mm.

What is 19 divided by two feet? )

[normhead]

Now why would you carry a bunch of primes, when for some of those lenses available zooms would be better?

[gump]

I think this is very much the wrong approach. Sounds similar to the suggestion I see that you check you stats for focal lengths before buying a prime. A lens should imho *make* you see. You should pick a fov because you want to add an arrow to your quiver not to feed your old habits.

You make a valid point. I am probably overthinking this but it may be those who are comfortable with redoing or perfecting what came before and those that are still trying to "find" their way. I have a friend who still plays the music/songs we did 50 years ago. He is technically outstanding but has added very little to his play list.

[texandrews]

I think that there's no such thing as too many lenses in a collection unless you've got a retail therapy problem, and definitely not for a collector, but possibly there is for a manufacturer. I have a couple of expensive lenses I rarely use. This seems to argue that they are superfluous, but in fact they are "save your bacon" lenses. You rarely truly need them, but when you do, you really do. I'd say this is going to mean different FL's for different users.

[Lowell Goudge]

I did a spreadsheet chart to show what I had,

Here is an example from years ago

No one told me about LBA... - Page 3 - PentaxForums.com