Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Which of the setups would you consider the most practical for general shooting?
Ultrawide Zoom + Midrange Zoom + long Telephoto Zoom
(like 12-24 ; 24-70 ; 70-300)
3413.13%
Standard Zoom + short Tele Zoom + long Tele Zoom
(Like 16-50 + 50-135 + 70-300 or longer)
3714.29%
Superzoom + some Primes
(Like 18-250 + 50/1.4 + 100 Macro)
238.88%
Kit Zooms + some Primes
(Like 18-55 + 55-300 + 50 + 100 Macro)
2610.04%
Shorter Primes + long Telephoto Zoom
(like 21 + 35 + 50 + 100 + 70-300)
3613.90%
Shorter Primes + Short Telephoto Zoom + TC
(like 21 + 35 + 50-135 + 1.4x TC)
166.18%
Standard Zoom + Telephoto Primes
(Like 17-70 + 100 + 300)
135.02%
Both Zooms and primes all over the focal range 4517.37%
What is a zoom ...? 2911.20%
Voters: 259. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-29-2009, 11:23 AM   #46
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
My choice is also not in your poll and has not been mentioned AFAIK. Which only goes to show that there are many different choices possible, depending on one's priorities.

I would choose a fast prime always since that gives me low-light usage and DOF handling a zoom cannot match. Plus they are lighter and smaller which matters to me 99% of the time. My first choice is the FA77 for IQ and excellent handling. I have two f/1.2 lenses but think the extra stop is rather gimmicky. f/2 is essential to me, especially in a lens that renders well at that aperture.

Then I carry a screw-on macro adapter saving me from carrying my Vivi Series 1 105mm (which I use only on dedicated macro shoots).

As an exception to the rule, my second lens is the DA12-24 since no primes can cover that range. There is no 12mm prime, the 15mm has no better IQ and is no faster, plus the combined weight of several primes would be worse than carrying a single efficient zoom. Then again, I use it at 24mm most of the time. My opinion is that ultra-wide angle is over-rated and too often gimmicky, not to mention generally inappropriate for landscapes. However, for urban streets and interiors nothing can substitute for the width.

If I am not carrying a dedicated camera bag I instead pocket a manual focus Vivitar 24/2. It is faster, smaller and nicer to focus.

My third lens is often the FA43, which gives me even better rendering than the FA77, plus the ability to capture environmental portraits or group shots.

The 24 / 43 / 77 combo is the ultimate in portability and excellent workmanship.

The 12-24 / 43 / 77 combo provides more versatility but is not quite as much fun. And it is bulkier.

Always buy the best lenses. Don't waste time on half-way measures.

11-29-2009, 07:51 PM   #47
Pentaxian
Moderator Emeritus




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,648
I voted the 2nd choice as it's closest to what I find important.

DA*16-50mm (most used) If I need the shot wider, I'll take a few and stitch it later.
FA50mm f1.4
Sigma 70-200mm
FA*300mm f4.5 (optional)
11-29-2009, 09:04 PM   #48
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,696
I hardly remember responding to this poll when it started, but certainly my preferences haven't changed, although I've come to appreciate primes more now...

Despite the preference for zooms for fast-action stuff and gigs, I have my primes out for specific projects, which I never considered until a couple of years ago.
11-30-2009, 12:10 PM   #49
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Quebec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 210
My personal choice

If I had no lens, this is the way I would go:

Wide angle: DA 12-24
Normal and macro: DA 35 Ltd Macro
Portrait: DA* 50-135
Indoor sports: DA* 200
Wildlife: DA* 300 + 1.7X Adapter

Have fun!

12-20-2009, 12:08 AM   #50
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,629
16-50 + 50-135 + [here, I beg to differ] long zoom

The 16-50 is a superb piece of optics. I just finished replying to a poll thread on which lens I used the most. The 16-50 topped it all at 44% of my shooting. The 12-24 and 50-135 came in at around 23% each. The 12-24 is a great lens as well, but until one has decided that 16mm (24mm on film) is not wide enough, it can be very hard to use. I really have to pay attention so that the pictures look real.

Where I beg to differ is with your choice of a long zoom. I would recommend a prime lens in the 300mm range rather than the zoom. In my particular case, you will see that I have nothing between the 50-135 and my 400. I gave my A 70-210 to my daughter. It was only used 1.6% of the time. It's an excellent lens, but the field of view range on film is the same as the 50-135 on sensor, and the 50-135 is a stop faster. The prime telephoto will have better contrast, will be sharper, and will weigh less. If it doesn't weigh less, it will be much faster right where you need the extra shutter speed and focusing ability.

[Edit] PS: the 400 came in at 6.1%
12-20-2009, 07:31 AM   #51
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: central Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 409
If I had to choose ...

QuoteOriginally posted by Noisychip Quote
Imagine you wouldn't own one single lens. Nothing, but a Pentax DSLR body.

Which of the setups would you consider the most practical for general shooting (vacation wtc.) from the experiences you have made, considering:

- Weight/Space
- Lens change frequency
- Photographic creativity and possibilities
- Only include lenses that get really used
I have opted for short primes and a longer telephoto zoom simply because you can't easily shift your position with respect to a distant subject. If I were to buy one lens and one lens only it would be the Sigma 17-70 or maybe the Pentax FA 24-90. But moving on a stage, after a lot of faffing around my preference now is for the DA limited primes together with the 55-300.
But I will still pack the Sigma in my suitcase. Or even the kit 18-55 which does more than most people give it credit for.
Forget all the exotic zooms - not only too expensive but too heavy.
12-20-2009, 09:45 AM   #52
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Minneapolis
Photos: Albums
Posts: 588
I'm at a crossroads as I have

Sigma 10-20
Kit 18-55
FA 50 1.4
Tamron 90mm 2.8 Macro

And even if I leave the kit lens at home, I can cover a lot of bases, other than telephoto.

The sigma and tamron are BIG. Think I may pick up the 55-300 now and worry about a better walkaround lens later, at which point a 24-70 would be interesting as I have 10-20 covered elsewhere.
12-20-2009, 10:16 AM   #53
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
wtlwdwgn's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Billings, MT
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,335
I would choose the DA*16-50 f/2.8 and DA*50-135 f/2.8 which is exactly what I chose when I bought my K10D in 2007.

When traveling by car I most often take the whole kit and kaboodle. But my "light weight" travel pack has the 16-50 and 50-135 and a K20D with a battery grip. These cover 99% of my travel needs. When I went to Monument Valley last year the 16-50 was all I needed.

I have some primes in this range which are lighter but don't have the versatility of the two DA*'s. Sometimes I add the Sigma 100-300 f/4 if I think there'll be wildlife on the trip. Otherwise I'll add a 2nd K20D so I don't have to change lenses.

12-20-2009, 12:42 PM   #54
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,629
QuoteOriginally posted by wtlwdwgn Quote
I would choose the DA*16-50 f/2.8 and DA*50-135 f/2.8 which is exactly what I chose when I bought my K10D in 2007.

When traveling by car I most often take the whole kit and kaboodle. But my "light weight" travel pack has the 16-50 and 50-135 and a K20D with a battery grip. These cover 99% of my travel needs. When I went to Monument Valley last year the 16-50 was all I needed.

I have some primes in this range which are lighter but don't have the versatility of the two DA*'s. Sometimes I add the Sigma 100-300 f/4 if I think there'll be wildlife on the trip. Otherwise I'll add a 2nd K20D so I don't have to change lenses.
I think we think very closely the same. I bought the k10 as a kit with the 12-24, then immediately ordered 16-50 and 50-135. The 16-50 gets 44% of the keeper shots in my Lightroom Library. The 12-24 and 50-135 pick up another 23% each, with the 12-24 slightly ahead of the 50-135. The 400 runs a distant fourth at 6%. Most of the rest are the 100 macro at 2.4%.
12-23-2009, 11:42 AM   #55
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Gloucester UK
Posts: 441
As zooms cover around 90% of my shooting, therefore I use a D-Xenon 12-24 + DA 17-70 + DA*60-250, I do find the overlap useful. I've only recently added the 12-24, so I'm getting to know it and how to best use the wider FOV.

I only find prime macros useful as they combine the best IQ and close focussing ability, therefore I have the FA 50/2.8 & D-Xenon 100/2.8. They cover pretty much all of my portrait, flower and bug shots! I sold off all my other primes as I got fed up with continual lens swapping and I never found shallow DOF useful. I did have decent primes, an FA*24, FA 35 and FA*300 f4.5, the FA*300 was probably my most used prime. I also spent 3 months working with the 21, 40 and 70 pancakes and I've never regretted my decision.

I still have a strange hankering for the 10-17 FE though!
02-16-2010, 04:57 PM   #56
Veteran Member
Abbazz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Aotearoa
Posts: 540
I change my carry-along kit every now and then. The last version of my kit is composed of DA 15/4, DA 40/2.8 and Cosina/Voigtländer 90/3.5. Small, great optical quality and no need for a bag: the camera is in my hands and the two spare lenses in my pockets. If I carry a bag, then I can add the Cosina/Voigtländer 180/4 to the setting.

Who needs a zoom?

Cheers!

Abbazz
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!
k-mount, lens, lens setup, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A new kind of single lens reflex camera falconeye Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 22 01-16-2011 08:17 AM
My lens setup (Let me know what you think) A.M.92 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 07-01-2010 04:27 AM
For Sale - Sold: Leica M3 Rangefinder (single stroke), 50mm/f2 Summicron lens chemxaj Sold Items 13 11-10-2008 12:56 PM
What single lens can do it all? is it possible? bolek Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 10-26-2007 07:33 AM
Single body & lens combo switters Pentax DSLR Discussion 9 07-31-2007 10:42 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:03 PM. | 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