I feel the same way that they are perfect for me. And thats why I kept on trying to find something like that from Pentax. I went through Aperture Library and I can only find a handful of pictures at 18mm (I had the kit lens for the longest time). I also have a old 24mm M42 Mount (i think Pentax) and I thought that was fine too.

How do you like the 24-105? I am considering replacing my kit 28-135 with it. I pretty much am wanting the two lenses you have as my setup, seems very ideal. One problem with Canon for me is there are too many choices. I have been consider the 17-50, 15-85, 24-70, and 24-105 all as my general purpose walkaround lens.

[nanok]

okay, if you like that focal length range, though it might be that you just got used to it (i also was very tele-biased before i started seriously shooting wideangles, as in, "thinking" wide when shooting them, and thinking "narrow" when shooting a tele). but i digress. that's already an answer, if you really like those lenses and don't want lighter, more "suitable" lenses (in quotes, what's suitable for me doesn't have to be for you, you don't whant to know what my lens lineup looks like ), you're probably safe staying with canon. i'd still try to play with the k-7/k-5, now that you put so much effort/research into it, just to be sure

ps: i was back in the shop where i got my k-5 today, it turns out that, along with my own k-5 (it seems), they had the decency to order one more, so now they do have one on the shelf, along the k-x. that's nice to see, that's the main reason i support these brick and mortar shops. maybe they are showing up in your area as well, as people keep asking about them

[WillCarney]

So what are you doing here? There are other photo forums you know!

Some of us still use Pentax film cameras (like me) but refuse for one reason or another (like me) to buy any Pentax DSLR. Till now at least for me the DFS was a killer. I will always have a Pentax film camera for astrophotography. My next DSLR will be a T2i not KR/K5.

William

[thashef]

How do you like the 24-105? I am considering replacing my kit 28-135 with it. I pretty much am wanting the two lenses you have as my setup, seems very ideal. One problem with Canon for me is there are too many choices. I have been consider the 17-50, 15-85, 24-70, and 24-105 all as my general purpose walkaround lens.

I absolutely love it. Though I am wondering if getting the EFS 17-55mm f/2.8 is worth replacing the 24-105. I have heard really good things about it, but I usually don't need something that wide, but I do like the 2.8 vs 4.

If you are thinking about getting the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 then get the VC one as that is suppose to much better. I have played with 24-70 before but found the weight to be too much to use it as a walk around lens, there are rumors that Canon is going to release a IS version of that one.

[Miguel]

If you are thinking about getting the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 then get the VC one as that is suppose to much better.

From just about everything I've read online (I have only owned the older non-VC lens in both Pentax- and EOS-mounts) the newer version is inferior optically. Soft corners especially seem to be an issue. The older version is considered among the sharpest zooms in that focal range.
Photozone has analysis on both.

ME