Upgrade from 16-45mm to 12-24mm or 50-135mm?

AirSupply · 01-22-2010, 09:48 AM

Since I have my K-7 works really well together with the 40mm LMT and 16-45mm, the IQ is over my expectation from several kinds of photography like landscape, portrait ... However, I would like to upgrade my 16-45mm to another higher level for taking wildlife pictures, big event (Boy Scout Jamboree ...) or sometime portrait. I am standing between the 12-24 and 50-135, and I really don't know which one is best for my purposes. The difference in price is not too big between those good lens (~200)
I really need your Pentax professional advise. It would be greatly appreciated

Pentaxor · 01-22-2010, 12:28 PM

hi there, I recommend the Tamron 70-200/2.8. but if you won't mind shooting at slower aperture and want something at 50mm and an extended reach at 300mm, I recommend the DA55-300 variable aperture lens. both lenses are great, it depends on what would fit your need or comes down to aperture speed or focal length.

or get both if you can afford them both.

Damn Brit · 01-22-2010, 12:41 PM

Apart from an 8mm overlap between the 16-45 and 12-24 these are completely different focal lengths you're looking at so I don't see what you mean by upgrade, IQ has nothing to do with it in that sense.
You go on to say you want this lens "for taking wildlife pictures, big event (Boy Scout Jamboree ...) or sometime portrait.", the 12-24 isn't going to be any good to you for any of those situations so 50-135 would be the choice on the basis of that alone.
Don't discount the Sigma or Tamron offerings in similar FL's though. The Tamron already mentioned is an excellent lens by all accounts, it doesn't have SDM which is a concern that should be considered (the less people buy those lenses the sooner Pentax will change their attitude to the customer IMO) and it has a much longer warranty. The Sigma 70-200 also seems to be quite well thought of and again, no HSM and a much longer warranty. I think the 70-200 range will better suit your needs than the 50-135. For FL below 70mm, you should perhaps look at getting a prime in the 50mm area as then next purchase after this one. It would be a good chance to buy a used manual focus 50 for not too much money and give yourself the opportunity to practice manual focusing.

AirSupply · 01-22-2010, 12:47 PM

Thanks Pentaxor and Damn Brit, your guys advices are always valuable to me. The 70-200/2.8 seems interesting to me, but I am a bit afraid of its lacking of weather sealed (in comparison with the 50-135) because I always hiking or exploring with my Boy Scout troop and really need a well built lens for it.

The 55-300 seems ok to me but a bit shorter than my expectation, but still a good deal with a tempting price tag.

AirSupply · 01-22-2010, 12:50 PM

@Damn Brit: can you suggest me some good 50mm models that I should take a look at?

Damn Brit · 01-22-2010, 12:57 PM

From the older Pentax lenses you have a choice of 50 1.4, 50 1.7, and 55 1.8 (note - some may be screwmount in which case you would need an adapter). M designated lenses mean fully Manual A designated lenses mean the camera can control the aperture for you.

You should find a few in the marketplace here. Even if they are sold you can check the reviews in the lens database, at least you will familiarise yourself with them and know what to look for and how much to pay.

I assume you are keeping the 16-45, it's a great lens and I don't think is an issue with it, it just doesn't have a really wider aperture making low light conditions difficult, so I wouldn't worry about the 50 just yet. From what you have said, you need a longer zoom so my advice would be to concentrate on that for now.

Pentaxor · 01-22-2010, 01:08 PM

as Gary pointed out, if ever you'll get the 70-200mm, get a manual focus 50mm, either a 1.4 or 1.7. or both. if you want that extra speed and smooth bokeh, the 1.4 is your lens, if sharpness at wide open is your concern, the 1.7 is your lens.

as far concerns regarding weather-sealing, just use it with extra care and always bring a towel or cloth to wipe the liquid off or cover the lens with plastic.

Pentaxor · 01-22-2010, 01:24 PM

on a side note, the K55/1.8 is quite trickier to find as compared to the 1.4 and 1.7. but anyways, I love that lens the best among the 3. it's the best cheapest manual focus 50mm lens, IMO, next to the most expensive manual focus 50mm lens which is the f1.2 which goes to 11. but that is another story.

p.s. just be careful of not misreading or misunderstanding a 1.2 for a 1:2.
the 1:2 is an f2 lens and completely different and is the ugliest of the 4 manual 50mm sisters. the K55/1.8 and K55/2 are the 2 older adopted twin sisters of the 50mm family.

meet the 50mm family: 50/1.2 , 50/1.4, 50/1.7, 50/1:2, 55/1.8, 55/2

Marc Sabatella · 01-22-2010, 01:49 PM

Originally posted by AirSupply

The 70-200/2.8 seems interesting to me, but I am a bit afraid of its lacking of weather sealed (in comparison with the 50-135) because I always hiking or exploring with my Boy Scout troop and really need a well built lens for it.

The 55-300 seems ok to me but a bit shorter than my expectation, but still a good deal with a tempting price tag.

I don't understand how you can be considering a 50-135 or 70-200 but then turn around and say the 55-300 is a bit shorter than your expectation. I'm also confused as to how you could find any of these - or the 12-24 - to be an "upgrade" to your 1645. That's like me getting a 32" LCD TV as an upgrade to my refrigerator.

AirSupply · 01-22-2010, 02:02 PM

@Marc: sorry for the confusing. I am just an amatuer to the Pentax world and still don't have a good knowledge about the lens etc. Back to the original purpose, I may keep my 16-45 for a while, but I will get a long-range telezoom lens and a 50mm as people suggested above. Thanks for your comment Marc

Damn Brit · 01-22-2010, 02:05 PM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

That's like me getting a 32" LCD TV as an upgrade to my refrigerator.

LOL, haven't you heard Marc? Next years model of refrigerators have a 32" LCD TV built into the door. Admittedly the tv is built in 'portrait' style but I like to lay down and watch tv anyway.

panoguy · 01-22-2010, 02:09 PM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

I'm also confused as to how you could find any of these - or the 12-24 - to be an "upgrade" to your 1645. That's like me getting a 32" LCD TV as an upgrade to my refrigerator.

Hilarious! My humble guess is that the OP finds his 16-45 too limited in focal length on both the wide and tele ends, and is not thinking "upgrade" but rather "in addition to." Otherwise, I agree, it's a 32" LCD refrigerator...

Just keep the 16-45mm and get the 50-135mm. Great for portraits and "close-ups" of events with kids, but not for th bigger picture unless you are some distance from the action.

Oggy · 01-22-2010, 04:02 PM

Originally posted by Marc Sabatella

I don't understand how you can be considering a 50-135 or 70-200 but then turn around and say the 55-300 is a bit shorter than your expectation. I'm also confused as to how you could find any of these - or the 12-24 - to be an "upgrade" to your 1645. That's like me getting a 32" LCD TV as an upgrade to my refrigerator.

Thanks Marc. I was begining to think it was me

AirSupply · 01-22-2010, 08:06 PM

Before I opened this post, I was thinking the DA 50-135 would be my next purchase ... However, finally, after reading a lot about the SDM issues and u guys comments, I convinced myself go for the Tamron 70-200. I love the Pentax built on the 50-135, but they didn't do a serious job on solving the SDM problems. So Tamron is on my list ....

01-22-2010, 09:48 AM	#1
AirSupply Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Minnesota Posts: 153	Upgrade from 16-45mm to 12-24mm or 50-135mm? Since I have my K-7 works really well together with the 40mm LMT and 16-45mm, the IQ is over my expectation from several kinds of photography like landscape, portrait ... However, I would like to upgrade my 16-45mm to another higher level for taking wildlife pictures, big event (Boy Scout Jamboree ...) or sometime portrait. I am standing between the 12-24 and 50-135, and I really don't know which one is best for my purposes. The difference in price is not too big between those good lens (~200) I really need your Pentax professional advise. It would be greatly appreciated

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Would you upgrade from a K-x to a K-7 or keep the K-x and buy a DA* 50-135mm	crossover37	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	09-11-2010 08:12 AM
Upgrade from kit to 16-45mm?	A-z	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	48	05-10-2010 01:00 PM
Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 a worthy upgrade from the DA 16-45mm f4?	Ben Hunt	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	25	04-20-2010 06:26 AM
For Sale - Sold: 16-45mm trade for 24mm\28-70mm\75mm f2.8	amicah22	Sold Items	3	03-16-2009 03:05 AM

01-22-2010, 12:28 PM	#2
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	hi there, I recommend the Tamron 70-200/2.8. but if you won't mind shooting at slower aperture and want something at 50mm and an extended reach at 300mm, I recommend the DA55-300 variable aperture lens. both lenses are great, it depends on what would fit your need or comes down to aperture speed or focal length. or get both if you can afford them both.

01-22-2010, 12:41 PM	#3
Damn Brit Guest	Apart from an 8mm overlap between the 16-45 and 12-24 these are completely different focal lengths you're looking at so I don't see what you mean by upgrade, IQ has nothing to do with it in that sense. You go on to say you want this lens "for taking wildlife pictures, big event (Boy Scout Jamboree ...) or sometime portrait.", the 12-24 isn't going to be any good to you for any of those situations so 50-135 would be the choice on the basis of that alone. Don't discount the Sigma or Tamron offerings in similar FL's though. The Tamron already mentioned is an excellent lens by all accounts, it doesn't have SDM which is a concern that should be considered (the less people buy those lenses the sooner Pentax will change their attitude to the customer IMO) and it has a much longer warranty. The Sigma 70-200 also seems to be quite well thought of and again, no HSM and a much longer warranty. I think the 70-200 range will better suit your needs than the 50-135. For FL below 70mm, you should perhaps look at getting a prime in the 50mm area as then next purchase after this one. It would be a good chance to buy a used manual focus 50 for not too much money and give yourself the opportunity to practice manual focusing.

01-22-2010, 12:47 PM	#4
AirSupply Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Minnesota Posts: 153 Original Poster	Thanks Pentaxor and Damn Brit, your guys advices are always valuable to me. The 70-200/2.8 seems interesting to me, but I am a bit afraid of its lacking of weather sealed (in comparison with the 50-135) because I always hiking or exploring with my Boy Scout troop and really need a well built lens for it. The 55-300 seems ok to me but a bit shorter than my expectation, but still a good deal with a tempting price tag.

01-22-2010, 12:50 PM	#5
AirSupply Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Minnesota Posts: 153 Original Poster	@Damn Brit: can you suggest me some good 50mm models that I should take a look at?

01-22-2010, 12:57 PM	#6
Damn Brit Guest	From the older Pentax lenses you have a choice of 50 1.4, 50 1.7, and 55 1.8 (note - some may be screwmount in which case you would need an adapter). M designated lenses mean fully Manual A designated lenses mean the camera can control the aperture for you. You should find a few in the marketplace here. Even if they are sold you can check the reviews in the lens database, at least you will familiarise yourself with them and know what to look for and how much to pay. I assume you are keeping the 16-45, it's a great lens and I don't think is an issue with it, it just doesn't have a really wider aperture making low light conditions difficult, so I wouldn't worry about the 50 just yet. From what you have said, you need a longer zoom so my advice would be to concentrate on that for now.

01-22-2010, 01:08 PM	#7
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	as Gary pointed out, if ever you'll get the 70-200mm, get a manual focus 50mm, either a 1.4 or 1.7. or both. if you want that extra speed and smooth bokeh, the 1.4 is your lens, if sharpness at wide open is your concern, the 1.7 is your lens. as far concerns regarding weather-sealing, just use it with extra care and always bring a towel or cloth to wipe the liquid off or cover the lens with plastic.

01-22-2010, 01:24 PM	#8
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	on a side note, the K55/1.8 is quite trickier to find as compared to the 1.4 and 1.7. but anyways, I love that lens the best among the 3. it's the best cheapest manual focus 50mm lens, IMO, next to the most expensive manual focus 50mm lens which is the f1.2 which goes to 11. but that is another story. p.s. just be careful of not misreading or misunderstanding a 1.2 for a 1:2. the 1:2 is an f2 lens and completely different and is the ugliest of the 4 manual 50mm sisters. the K55/1.8 and K55/2 are the 2 older adopted twin sisters of the 50mm family. meet the 50mm family: 50/1.2 , 50/1.4, 50/1.7, 50/1:2, 55/1.8, 55/2

01-22-2010, 01:49 PM	#9
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by AirSupply The 70-200/2.8 seems interesting to me, but I am a bit afraid of its lacking of weather sealed (in comparison with the 50-135) because I always hiking or exploring with my Boy Scout troop and really need a well built lens for it. The 55-300 seems ok to me but a bit shorter than my expectation, but still a good deal with a tempting price tag. I don't understand how you can be considering a 50-135 or 70-200 but then turn around and say the 55-300 is a bit shorter than your expectation. I'm also confused as to how you could find any of these - or the 12-24 - to be an "upgrade" to your 1645. That's like me getting a 32" LCD TV as an upgrade to my refrigerator.

01-22-2010, 02:02 PM	#10
AirSupply Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Minnesota Posts: 153 Original Poster	@Marc: sorry for the confusing. I am just an amatuer to the Pentax world and still don't have a good knowledge about the lens etc. Back to the original purpose, I may keep my 16-45 for a while, but I will get a long-range telezoom lens and a 50mm as people suggested above. Thanks for your comment Marc

01-22-2010, 02:05 PM	#11
Damn Brit Guest	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella That's like me getting a 32" LCD TV as an upgrade to my refrigerator. LOL, haven't you heard Marc? Next years model of refrigerators have a 32" LCD TV built into the door. Admittedly the tv is built in 'portrait' style but I like to lay down and watch tv anyway.

01-22-2010, 02:09 PM	#12
panoguy Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,327	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella I'm also confused as to how you could find any of these - or the 12-24 - to be an "upgrade" to your 1645. That's like me getting a 32" LCD TV as an upgrade to my refrigerator. Hilarious! My humble guess is that the OP finds his 16-45 too limited in focal length on both the wide and tele ends, and is not thinking "upgrade" but rather "in addition to." Otherwise, I agree, it's a 32" LCD refrigerator... Just keep the 16-45mm and get the 50-135mm. Great for portraits and "close-ups" of events with kids, but not for th bigger picture unless you are some distance from the action.

01-22-2010, 04:02 PM	#13
Oggy Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: West Sussex UK Posts: 235	Originally posted by Marc Sabatella I don't understand how you can be considering a 50-135 or 70-200 but then turn around and say the 55-300 is a bit shorter than your expectation. I'm also confused as to how you could find any of these - or the 12-24 - to be an "upgrade" to your 1645. That's like me getting a 32" LCD TV as an upgrade to my refrigerator. Thanks Marc. I was begining to think it was me

01-22-2010, 08:06 PM	#14
AirSupply Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Minnesota Posts: 153 Original Poster	Before I opened this post, I was thinking the DA 50-135 would be my next purchase ... However, finally, after reading a lot about the SDM issues and u guys comments, I convinced myself go for the Tamron 70-200. I love the Pentax built on the 50-135, but they didn't do a serious job on solving the SDM problems. So Tamron is on my list ....