Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-14-2009, 07:50 AM   #1
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Finland, Vantaa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 95
Next lens?

Hi!
I allready have 35mm Ltd and Da* 50-135mm and now im looking for next lens.
So, wich one of these lenses would u recommend to me?
(i take pics of landscapes, urban and animals)
U can add uīre favourite to
SMC Pentax-FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited
or
SMC Pentax-DA 70mm F2.4 Limited
or
SMC Pentax-DA* 200mm F2.8 ED [IF] SDM

I have heard a LOT of good reviews of 77 ltd, but 200mm is interesting by itīs range (but is it long enough after 50-135mm??. Or is Da* 300mm better to shoot animals?

Could u please guide me?

(or should i save a lot of more money and buy 77mm 1.8 & 300mm?)

02-14-2009, 07:58 AM   #2
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by pexi85 Quote
Hi!
I allready have 35mm Ltd and Da* 50-135mm and now im looking for next lens.
So, wich one of these lenses would u recommend to me?
(i take pics of landscapes, urban and animals)
U can add uīre favourite to
SMC Pentax-FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited
or
SMC Pentax-DA 70mm F2.4 Limited
or
SMC Pentax-DA* 200mm F2.8 ED [IF] SDM

I have heard a LOT of good reviews of 77 ltd, but 200mm is interesting by itīs range (but is it long enough after 50-135mm??. Or is Da* 300mm better to shoot animals?

Could u please guide me?

(or should i save a lot of more money and buy 77mm 1.8 & 300mm?)


I think what you're really missing is 1) wide-angle, and 2) speed.

I'd consider:

WA: DA 12-24 f4, DA* 16-50 f2.8, DA 16-45 f/4, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, DA 21 f3.2 ltd
Speed: FA 50 1.4, F/FA 50 1.7, FA 43ltd 1.9, FA 77 1.8 ltd

If you really need the length for sports or wildlife, consider the DA* 200, 300, Tamron 70-200 2.8, or one of the long Sigma zooms. If you really don't need that much length, go for wide-angle or speed.

So my choice for you would be: 77ltd + DA 12-24 = around the same $ as the DA* 300.

.
02-14-2009, 08:13 AM   #3
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Finland, Vantaa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 95
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
I think what you're really missing is 1) wide-angle, and 2) speed.

I'd consider:

WA: DA 12-24 f4, DA* 16-50 f2.8, DA 16-45 f/4, Tamron 17-50 f/2.8, DA 21 f3.2 ltd
Speed: FA 50 1.4, F/FA 50 1.7, FA 43ltd 1.9, FA 77 1.8 ltd


So my choice for you would be: 77ltd + DA 12-24 = around the same $ as the DA* 300.

.
That sounds pretty good to me. Damn, i just noticed that u are speaking truth here, i really need a wide lens like 12-24mm. And if i like to get closer, i could buy teleconventer and put it to my 50-135mm, right? Does someone know, how much sdm-conventer is gonna cost?

Only problem of those 2 is, that those have not weather sealing.. But in other hand, when its raining, im the first inside
And again, sorry if my english is bad, i havent spoke it like ages..
02-14-2009, 08:16 AM   #4
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
you say, you do urban and lanscapes. Is the 35mm widest?!? for that aplication I'd think of something like DA12-24. If not, than from the options you posted, I'd go for DA*200 or 300
BR

02-14-2009, 08:24 AM   #5
Veteran Member
Ben_Edict's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SouthWest "Regio"
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,303
QuoteOriginally posted by pexi85 Quote
Hi!
I allready have 35mm Ltd and Da* 50-135mm and now im looking for next lens.
So, wich one of these lenses would u recommend to me?
(i take pics of landscapes, urban and animals)
U can add uīre favourite to
SMC Pentax-FA 77mm f/1.8 Limited
or
SMC Pentax-DA 70mm F2.4 Limited
or
SMC Pentax-DA* 200mm F2.8 ED [IF] SDM

I have heard a LOT of good reviews of 77 ltd, but 200mm is interesting by itīs range (but is it long enough after 50-135mm??. Or is Da* 300mm better to shoot animals?
Your choice is pretty wide. You should start reflecting, what you have missed most so far - a wider view or a tele lens? This should help to narrow your choices. You simply cannot compare the 200/2.8 or the 300/4 to more or less portrait lenses like the 77 or 70.

For landscapes most people would favour to have a much wider lens. besides a real wide angle zoom even the 16-50/2.8 would be a good supplement to your 35mm lens.
What do you mean with "urban" - people, street life or architecture? Fot the first the 77 or the smaller 70mm lenses would be good, for the latter you agaion would probably prefer a good wide angle zoom or prime.

And for animals (in the wild, in the zoo, big or small?) a 300mm lens could be considered a minimum focal length, though for the zoo it could be too long or for small animals you might go for a macro lens.

The question is not, whether you need this or that lens, but what exactly do you miss most often now - and this focal length shoud take priority. Nobody can give you a valid recommendation here.

Ben
02-14-2009, 09:36 PM   #6
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,613
You already have the 70 and 77 focal lengths covered by the 50-135. I also would recommend the 12-24 for a wide angle lens, or a 300mm telephoto if you want to shoot anaimals.
02-14-2009, 10:43 PM   #7
Veteran Member
octavmandru's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: somewhere around
Posts: 615
QuoteOriginally posted by Ben_Edict Quote
Your choice is pretty wide. You should start reflecting, what you have missed most so far - a wider view or a tele lens? This should help to narrow your choices. You simply cannot compare the 200/2.8 or the 300/4 to more or less portrait lenses like the 77 or 70.


Ben
Yeah, sounds familiar...
Since my first SLR I realized what a big mistake I've done choosing a long lens instead of a short/wide one.
This kind of choice should be wisely made. Or you will end with a lens you will not really use.
Why don't you try the 10-17? And then we'll see which side you are...
Try this:
Pentax 10-17 Fisheye or Sigma 10-20 Wide Angle? [Archive] - Photography & Digital Camera Forums
02-14-2009, 11:21 PM   #8
PFH
Site Supporter
PFH's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 482
I just bought the Sigma 10-20 yesterday and Iīm quite impressed.
Because of the price, the Pentax 12-24 wasnīt really an option.
The price here in Sweden is more than the double on the Pentax compared to the Sigma.
I bought the Sigma used for 3200sek ($375) $560 new, the Pentax is 10250sek ($1200) new.
Hereīs one of my first images with the Sigma.

Attached Images
 
02-14-2009, 11:24 PM   #9
Veteran Member
GLXLR's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sugar Land, TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 686
Why not consider the 16-50mm or 16-45mm?
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!
200mm, 77mm, animals, da*, k-mount, lot, ltd, pentax lens, slr lens, smc
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:20 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