Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-27-2009, 02:24 AM   #1
Veteran Member
Toshi's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 431
$700 poorer

I am now $700 poorer

I just couldn't resist buying this lens!



I won't be able to do a full day's worth of shooting with it until Wednesday though. I can't wait

01-27-2009, 03:25 AM   #2
Veteran Member
dazman's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,950
I'm sure you'll enjoy this wonderful piece of glass. The lens performs above it's price range, so you scored yourself a great deal!!!
Have fun and look forward to seeing some of the first pics
01-27-2009, 04:01 AM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Gnesta, Sweden
Posts: 373
I would say 700$ less richer. Becasue I don't feel sorry for you if you could afford such a nice lens
01-27-2009, 07:30 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,399
Uh, I dunno whether to console you or not. If I was in your place, I wouldn't need any consoling at all. The lens will give me all the consolation I would have needed.

Kudos on the new lens. I'm sure you'll make the most of it.

01-27-2009, 07:58 AM   #5
Veteran Member
Venturi's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,639
WARNING! This lens has a reputation for causing grown men to giggle like 12yo school girls!
01-27-2009, 02:07 PM   #6
Veteran Member
Toshi's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 431
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by dazman Quote
I'm sure you'll enjoy this wonderful piece of glass. The lens performs above it's price range, so you scored yourself a great deal!!!
Have fun and look forward to seeing some of the first pics
Every time I saw photos posted using this lens, I knew I had to get one. The weather is finally clearing up here so hopefully tomorrow will be the same!

QuoteOriginally posted by losecontrol Quote
I would say 700$ less richer. Becasue I don't feel sorry for you if you could afford such a nice lens
Haha, it took me a while to pull the trigger on this lens. You can afford a lot with credit The pain will come when I get my bill

QuoteOriginally posted by vinzer Quote
Uh, I dunno whether to console you or not. If I was in your place, I wouldn't need any consoling at all. The lens will give me all the consolation I would have needed.

Kudos on the new lens. I'm sure you'll make the most of it.
I'm sure once I get out there and shoot with the lens, I'll feel better about spending all that money

QuoteOriginally posted by Venturi Quote
WARNING! This lens has a reputation for causing grown men to giggle like 12yo school girls!
With the DA*300, I was happy. And now with the 50-135 I know I'll be extremely happy. The bad thing is it's going to tempt me to get the 16-50 and 200 as well
01-27-2009, 02:48 PM   #7
Veteran Member
Lloydy's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Shropshire, UK
Posts: 1,114
There's a first, that lens is cheaper in the UK ! ( Time for me to open my wallet )
01-27-2009, 03:11 PM   #8
Veteran Member
heliphoto's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Region 5
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,540
QuoteOriginally posted by Toshi Quote
...
The bad thing is it's going to tempt me to get the 16-50 and 200 as well
Yes... yes it will.

01-27-2009, 03:13 PM   #9
Veteran Member
Venturi's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,639
QuoteOriginally posted by Toshi Quote
The bad thing is it's going to tempt me to get the 16-50 and 200 as well
I have the Tamron 17-50/2.8 and love it; don't think I would want the added size/weight of the DA*16-50 for that range. But, I hear you on the DA*200. There's really only one lens (shocking) on my 2009 Really Wanna Have It list and that's the one. The 300 tempts me but I just can't justify the cost:use ratio to satisfy mere gear lust. Other than the 200, the only lenses I'm looking for are some FA's to flesh out my PZ-1/FF kit.

Congrats again on the new baby, and get used to grinning.
01-27-2009, 03:42 PM   #10
Veteran Member
Toshi's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 431
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Venturi Quote
I have the Tamron 17-50/2.8 and love it; don't think I would want the added size/weight of the DA*16-50 for that range. But, I hear you on the DA*200. There's really only one lens (shocking) on my 2009 Really Wanna Have It list and that's the one. The 300 tempts me but I just can't justify the cost:use ratio to satisfy mere gear lust. Other than the 200, the only lenses I'm looking for are some FA's to flesh out my PZ-1/FF kit.

Congrats again on the new baby, and get used to grinning.
I have the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 MACRO and it's a great lens. I know I don't need to get the 16-50, but you know how it is The little extra wide range and weatherseal suits my shooting style as well. My friend wants the Sigma so when it comes down to it, it shouldn't hurt the wallet too much.

As for the DA*300, I like shooting motorsports so it was a must for me
01-27-2009, 05:12 PM   #11
Forum Member
Presto's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Jacksonville, AL
Posts: 85
Congratulations on the purchase. I know I was giggling out loud when mine came in the mail! That 16-50 called my name loud enough the other day as well! I got a call this afternoon from UPS that a package requiring my signature will be here tomorrow! I wonder what that could be? I almost can't contain myself. Those golden badges look nice on the camera, and look even nicer through the viewfinder. I hope you enjoy yours!
01-27-2009, 09:03 PM   #12
New Member




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Murray, Utah
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10
So, I am a week away from buying a new lens and I'm debating the Pentax 50-135 vs Sigma 70-200. Why did you go with the pentax over the Sigma?
01-27-2009, 10:30 PM   #13
Damn Brit
Guest




Cost of having one = $700
Pleasure at having one = Priceless
01-28-2009, 01:56 AM   #14
Veteran Member
Toshi's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 431
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Presto Quote
Congratulations on the purchase. I know I was giggling out loud when mine came in the mail! That 16-50 called my name loud enough the other day as well! I got a call this afternoon from UPS that a package requiring my signature will be here tomorrow! I wonder what that could be? I almost can't contain myself. Those golden badges look nice on the camera, and look even nicer through the viewfinder. I hope you enjoy yours!
Thanks! Whenever I order a new lens, I feel like a kid again, waiting to open presents on Christmas Enjoy your 16-50 ... that's next on my list

QuoteOriginally posted by Damn Brit Quote
Cost of having one = $700
Pleasure at having one = Priceless
Definitely!
01-28-2009, 02:16 AM   #15
Veteran Member
Toshi's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 431
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by tomsparks Quote
So, I am a week away from buying a new lens and I'm debating the Pentax 50-135 vs Sigma 70-200. Why did you go with the pentax over the Sigma?
I was looking at a 70-200mm as well (the Tamron though). Couple things made me go for the Pentax. Weatherseal was a feature I liked; although the DS I use isn't, when I eventually upgrade to a K20D (or higher model in the future), I'd like the complete package since I tend to shoot in dusty and other less than ideal camera conditions.

Motorsports was the reason for me wanting a high quality telephoto zoom ... and although the 70-200 focal length is suited well for that, I decided for the 50-135 because I was able to pick up a brand new Tamron 1.4 TC. Combined with the 50-135, it would give me a similar focal length to the 70-200. The loss of 1 stop isn't too much of concern for me and I know IQ is still very good from several samples I've seen on the forum.

And, shooting with the DA*300 the past few weeks, I guess I got spoiled by the quality of photos the DA*'s can produce. Seeing various samples from other owners of the 50-135 only made me want the lens that much more.

I guess it comes down to whether the focal range suits your style. If you really need that extra reach, go for the Sigma. Whichever lens you decide on, both are great lenses from what I've seen. Good luck with your decision!
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, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
TM 700 vs Ptr Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 0 05-01-2010 01:44 PM
Samsung NX10 Prices Announced: $700/600/700 Miserere Pentax DSLR Discussion 10 03-04-2010 10:27 PM
Minolta X-700 deadwolfbones General Talk 7 05-19-2009 02:52 PM
POST 700: thanks to everyone rparmar General Talk 1 06-10-2008 01:24 AM
LBA and $700 ..... daacon Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 04-16-2007 04:43 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:09 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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