[madison_wi_gal]

OK, so I watch a lot of You Tube vids when I can't sleep, and I watched Kobie

You Tube

You Tube

who was testing the 18-135 vs the 16-55 PLM (also vs a Sigma that I do not own)

One thing he mentioned (and I think I knew this but it finally hit home once I looked at my spreadsheet) is that the consumer zoom lenses have variable apertures whereas generally the pro ones are fixed (and larger). And it makes a difference (sometimes) for exposure. Plus the sharpness (at wide open) can be a big issue.

Looking at mine, I see that all are variable. No surprise, I am on an LBA budget. # = yes, I know these are pretty sub standard, so let's ignore them, shall we?

Pentax 10-17mm smc DA ED f/3.5-4.5 - bought used - took lovely shots in US Southwest that I think look fine
Pentax 18-135mm smc DA ED f/3.5-5.6 - bought used - my go to most of the time, I am happy with this one OUTSIDE
Pentax 20-40mm smc DA ED f/2.8-4 - bought used - not used too much
Pentax 55-300mm smc DA ED f/4-5.8 - bought used (not the PLM) - my second go to when i need distance OUTSIDE

#Tamron 18-250mm LD DiII f/3.5-6.3
#Pentax 18-55mm smc DAL f/3.5-5.6
#Sigma 70-300mm DG Macro f/4-5.6

OK, but also looking at my other cameras (K-r, K-30 and K-01) it's not like I have high-end ones, so a pricey * lens on my sweet red K-r may do nothing noticeable.

Last: I have a friend who plans to go to Japan in the fall and plans to poke around in the camera stores for used Pentax stuff, my wish list is the KP Limited (Gold/Black with red wooden grip) and the K-1 II Limited in VIRIDIAN. That last one is unlikely but free to ask, right? Dark green camera? Ooooohh.

So if I actually get a K-1 II, I might have to rethink my lenses since all are APS-C. But I am scared of the SDM ones, I see reports of them failing a lot.

Anyway, Sunday morning thoughts. Not even much of a question, mostly some musing.

---

Last edited by madison_wi_gal; 06-05-2022 at 07:56 AM. Reason: subbed # for *

[RICHARD L.]

About 2 months ago, I saw freshly cut hardwood logs waiting to become furniture material and I took similar pictures with 1) my DFA* 70-200 mm f/2.8 @ 85 mm FL and f/8 and 2) my HD DA 16-85 mm f/3.5-5.6 also @ 85 mm FL and f/11. Guess what ... both images were extremely sharp edge-to-edge and practically indistinguishable. I think both of these lenses are ideal on a K3 III body. The HD DA 16-85 mm seems to produce a little warmer (yellowish or reddish) images than the DFA 70-200 mm (which is a little more bluish but true-to-life).

DFA* 70-200 mm f/2.8 @ f/8 and 85 mm FL (snow seems bluer)


HD DA 16-85 mm f/3.5-5.6 @ f/11 and 85 mm FL (snow seems redder)

[madison_wi_gal]

About 2 months ago, I saw freshly cut hardwood logs waiting to become furniture material and I took similar pictures with 1) my DFA* 70-200 mm f/2.8 @ 85 mm FL and f/8 and 2) my HD DA 16-85 mm f/3.5-5.6 also @ 85 mm FL and f/11. Guess what ... both images were extremely sharp edge-to-edge and practically indistinguishable. I think both of these lenses are ideal on a K3 III body. The HD DA 16-85 mm seems to produce a little warmer (yellowish or reddish) images than the DFA 70-200 mm (which is a little more bluish but true-to-life).

DFA* 70-200 mm f/2.8 @ f/8 and 85 mm FL (snow seems bluer)


HD DA 16-85 mm f/3.5-5.6 @ f/11 and 85 mm FL (snow seems redder)

Yes, I saw your southwest USA images in previous post and that is what got me started on this topic of fixed aperture high end zoom vs. consumer.

[Madaboutpix]

Anyway, Sunday morning thoughts. Not even much of a question, mostly some musing.

Since there isn't much of a question indeed, here are just a few observations, mostly to put things into perspective:

• Even within the consumer tier, there can be and are meaningful differences in IQ.
• Some of the better consumer lenses will actually be so close to pro-level performance that, depending on the situation, you may be hard put to spot the difference.

As a case in point, consider the HD DA 16-85. For a number of reasons, notably its more moderate focal range, better coatings, and more sophisticated optical design, it is known to perform better than its older smc DA 18-135 sibling. It seriously rivals the old smc DA* 16-50, besting it even in corner sharpness. What you gain with the new HD DA* 16-50 PLM over the 16-85, is battleaxe build, faster and constant F2.8 aperture, zippier AF, a bit dreamier bokeh - but not so much better sharpness (although there might be some slight improvement there too). However, you will have to lug around more weight, will lose considerable focal range towards the long end, and will have to shell out double the dosh. Which of the two is the "better" lens becomes much less clear then and probably boils down to the question which one is the better one for your specific needs.

---

Last edited by Madaboutpix; 06-05-2022 at 10:02 AM. Reason: Grammar.

[madison_wi_gal]

...probably boils down to the question, which one is the better one for your specific needs.

Exactly. I go through phases of lots of picture taking then my cameras sit while I get sidetracked by life. The K-3 III is the most $ I have ever spent on a camera, and the 20-40 used at $479 was the most I have spent on a lens, but I barely use that one. I suspect I pull it out to try to get my money's worth.

[Madaboutpix]

The K-3 III is the most $ I have ever spent on a camera, and the 20-40 used at $479 was the most I have spent on a lens, but I barely use that one. I suspect I pull it out to try to get my money's worth.

In comparison to the 16-85, the 20-40 may even give you an arguably better rendering as far as colours and microcontrast are concerned, so by all means do. Also, don't forget that what I said about the 16-85 vs. the 18-135 doesn't make the latter a bad lens, particularly for such a super-versatile focal range and its form factor. The more we use and learn our gear, the more we are in a position to appreciate what they have to offer and where the limitations are.

[RICHARD L.]

Yes, I saw your southwest USA images in previous post and that is what got me started on this topic of fixed aperture high end zoom vs. consumer.

I had a health scare last fall (blocked biliary duct, gangrened gall bladder and generalized infection) and nearly died. It took me 5 months to get my head out of the water. When I finally was able to return home, I saw a 500 CDN $ offer for a brand-new "Open Box" copy of the HD DA 16-85 mm zoom in an Ontario store. I ordered it (though I didn't need it at all) as a soothing prop that would take my mind off of my woes. I tried it on my K3, then on my K3 III and it performed brilliantly. Keeping busy with a new "toy" helped my healing process, I guess.

Best Regards

[vector]

Yes it all comes down to specific need. If you are mainly shooting landscapes, still life, etc where the composition and the lighting do the talking in the image, you generally want deeper depth of field to keep as much as possible in focus. In those shots a variable aperture consumer zoom is often good enough, especially if you stop down to f8-f11. If you are shooting in scenarios where you want to take artistic control by using the plane of focus to highlight a subject and pull in the viewers attention the a wide aperture “fast” prime is a great option. Focal length also works to accomplish this as longer focal lengths with short distance to subject also create a narrow depth of field. Fast f2.8 “pro” zooms are the middle ground letting you cover both scenarios decently well so you don’t need to carry a bag of lenses. Of course those pro zooms will be heavier and more expensive than the consumer grade ones and they won’t have as bright of aperture, as narrow of depth of field, or be as sharp as the fast primes can be. So generally you figure out which combination of lenses suits your style, or like a lot of us, just get as many as you can, just in case I might suggest a good and affordable next move for you might be a 50mm prime. There is also the tamron 17-50mm f2.8 you can find decently priced on the used market.

[madison_wi_gal]

In comparison to the 16-85, the 20-40 may even give you an arguably better rendering as far as colours and microcontrast are concerned, so by all means do. Also, don't forget that what I said about the 16-85 vs. the 18-135 doesn't make the latter a bad lens, particularly for such a super-versatile focal range and its form factor. The more we use and learn our gear, the more we are in a position to appreciate what they have to offer and where the limitations are.

Yes, I do like my 18-135 and Kobie said it was fine unless it was critical to get edge to edge sharpness (I am paraphrasing, sorry Kobie if I got that wrong).

Side note: I plugged a few of my lenses into the "sell your gear" thingie at KEH and yes, I know they need to make a profit, but jeepers $136 for the 20-40? I'll stick to the Marketplace if I decide to sell some of my stuff.

---------- Post added 06-05-22 at 11:04 ----------

Yes it all comes down to specific need. If you are mainly shooting landscapes, still life, etc where the composition and the lighting do the talking in the image, you generally want deeper depth of field to keep as much as possible in focus. In those shots a variable aperture consumer zoom is often good enough, especially if you stop down to f8-f11.

Other than annual "class photos" (shot with Tamron 90 with K-30 on a tripod) almost all of my stuff is landscapes, still life, etc. The piles of indoor African Violet pics are an anomaly, and were for quick and dirty tests.

I can see myself going on a trip with 2 bodies (K-3 III and ???) and keeping a lens on each plus a spare in the bag. I took the K-01 plus 40 XS for a ride yesterday but it was raining and it is not a weather sealed camera or lens, so I didn't get much done.

[RICHARD L.]

Yes, I do like my 18-135 and Kobie said it was fine unless it was critical to get edge to edge sharpness

My copy of the DA 18-135 mm f/3.5-5.6 ED zoom, bought from a Japanese store on eBay, has proven to be extremely sharp on my K3 and K3 III (have a look at my Lens Review on this Forum). I always close my diaphragm to f/11 and I will start trying f/8 on the 26 Mpx sensor of my new K3 III.

K3 III


K3

[wadge22]

From your bokeh discussion, I wonder if you wouldn't do well to get some kind of vintage prime lens that's very "characterful" next, rather than a fast zoom. The 70 or 77 Limited would also seem like a nice choice, and the 77 would make sense if you're ever going to go full frame. You also have many zooms that cover a wide range, but fewer special primes.
If you are looking for a pro zoom, the 16-50 PLM would be nice, especially with the focus motor that will take advantage of your K3iii's speedy focusing capabilities. But it will definitely cost you!
Cheaper options from Tamron, Sigma, and even Tokina are also very good lenses, and can be had for quite reasonable prices used. If you think a K1 is in your future, you may consider looking for full frame options like 24-70 or 70-200.

[madison_wi_gal]

My copy of the DA 18-135 mm f/3.5-5.6 ED zoom, bought from a Japanese store on eBay, has proven to be extremely sharp on my K3 and K3 III (have a look at my Lens Review on this Forum). I always close my diaphragm to f/11 and I will start trying f/8 on the 26 Mpx sensor of my new K3 III.

K3 III


K3

Oooooooh! As always, nice shots!

---------- Post added 06-05-22 at 11:30 ----------

From your bokeh discussion, I wonder if you wouldn't do well to get some kind of vintage prime lens that's very "characterful" next, rather than a fast zoom. The 70 or 77 Limited would also seem like a nice choice, and the 77 would make sense if you're ever going to go full frame. You also have many zooms that cover a wide range, but fewer special primes.
If you are looking for a pro zoom, the 16-50 PLM would be nice, especially with the focus motor that will take advantage of your K3iii's speedy focusing capabilities. But it will definitely cost you!
Cheaper options from Tamron, Sigma, and even Tokina are also very good lenses, and can be had for quite reasonable prices used. If you think a K1 is in your future, you may consider looking for full frame options like 24-70 or 70-200.

Yes, I have avoided the 77 in the past since it seemed unnecessary for APS-C crew I have, but let's see if I can get that dark green K-1 II and I'll revisit

[pepperberry farm]

Yes, I have avoided the 77 in the past since it seemed unnecessary for APS-C crew I have, but let's see if I can get that dark green K-1 II and I'll revisit

even though I don't shoot FF, I replaced my DA70 Limited with the FA77 Limited just because of how special the shots are with the 77...

[northcoastgreg]

so a pricey * lens on my sweet red K-r may do nothing noticeable.

Pricey star lenses tend to do better on all cameras. Of course, it's all relative. Some of the variable aperture lenses are quite good and if stopped down will perform nearly as well as the more expensive fixed aperture zooms. The DA 20-40, for example, is a terrific lens, as is the DA 16-85 and the DA 55-300 PLM (at least in the 55 to 150 range).

But I am scared of the SDM ones, I see reports of them failing a lot.

The SDM on the full-frame DFA lenses is newer and a lot better. It's the old SDM (from more than 15 years ago) that has such a reputation, particularly on the DA 17-70, the DA* 50-135, a0nd the old DA* 16-50. The main problem with the DFA FF lenses is that, other than the DFA 28-105, they're bigger, heavier, and more expensive than most of the DA glass.

[AfterPentax Mark II]

Dear Madison-wi-gal, you have at least two terrific lenses, both are not substandard, the 18-135 looks standard but is better than that. Than you have that amazing stack of 21 primes: 20-40mm Ltd. I bought the 18-135 for my Samsung GX-10 and I made some rather good pictures with it on that one, but eventually it landed on my KP, and guess what. The 18-135 was a lens ahead of its time, on the KP it shines! Even on the predecessor of the KP, the K-3 Mark II, it was not as pleasant as it is on the KP. The 20-40mm Ltd. was my first ever Ltd. and I am glad, because it is such a good lens and also a good combination with the KP and probably also with the K-3 Mark III, the camera which I am forbidden to buy, because I lack deep pockets.
To conclude: Whether they are of fixed or variable aperture, whether they wear a * or are assigned Ltd or just DA it does not matter, because it is you that is important, that camera and lens would be nothing if it was not for you who brought it to live!