If you had to choose 2 lenses........help needed.

Skipper74 · 01-09-2013, 09:45 PM

I was wondering if someone could give me some advice or recomendations on a delima I am having regarding which lens to get. I currently have a Pentax 18-135 kit lens and a 15mm limited Pentax. I was thinking of getting the 16-50mm star and maybe selling one of my other lenes. I like landscape photography and northern lighs shots but in the near future when we have a baby I figured the Pentax star f2.8 16-50 mmm would be a better choice for depth of field shots with the blurr effect. Don't really use alot of zoom like wildlife or anything. Any adice would be great. I don't mind paying the extra bucks if I get good lenses I just don't want to have 3-4 lenses.

manacho2005 · 01-09-2013, 10:30 PM

If you had the money....sell both and get a DA*16-50/50-135 combo. It would give you constant f2.8, weather sealing, approximately same range with a 6% loss on the wide end.
-or-
If you don't have the money...probably drop the 18-135 for the 16-50 if you use wide end more often than the long end.

ElJamoquio · 01-09-2013, 10:39 PM

I... uh... don't want 3-4 lenses, either. But I'm not starting with 2.

I'd consider the Tamron F/2.8 right now with the silly-pricing that Pentax has going on.

Amazon.com: Tamron 17-50mm SP AF F/2.8 XR DiII LD Aspherical (IF) Lens for PENTAX Digital: Camera & Photo

https://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-16-50-vs-sigma-17-50-vs-tamron-17-50mm.html

minahasa · 01-09-2013, 11:38 PM

I can't live with just 2 lenses, but if it is a matter of survival, I'd try living with a 18-250/270 and a 50/1.2

Skipper74 · 01-09-2013, 11:45 PM

Thankyou everyone so far. Of course more lenses is always good but I don't want more than 3. But I am leaning towards the 16-50mm. I kinda want to stick with Pentax as it just makes it easier to sell in the future.

snake · 01-10-2013, 12:09 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

I... uh... don't want 3-4 lenses, either. But I'm not starting with 2.

I'd consider the Tamron F/2.8 right now with the silly-pricing that Pentax has going on.

Amazon.com: Tamron 17-50mm SP AF F/2.8 XR DiII LD Aspherical (IF) Lens for PENTAX Digital: Camera & Photo

https://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-16-50-vs-sigma-17-50-vs-tamron-17-50mm.html

I just got one, simply for use as a wide-angle lens (minimal zooming), since I was recommended away from the DA14 and didn't particularly care for the DA15 and 21.

It's ok. If I wasn't so into primes, I'd do the Tamron 17-50 and the 70-200. The latter being an extremely high rated lens for IQ, worthy of professional usage.

I work more on the other end, so if I had two lenses, it would be my FA35 and the 70-200 (or Tokina 80-200). However, I'm still left needing something wide from time to time, so the Tamron 17-50 fits that bill. I'd have not a single hesitation of doing these two zooms.

As far as being "easier to sell" if you go with Pentax, I'd not be so sure. Do your research on the SDM issues, which unknown people will claim, for the fourth year in a row, that they are resolved, with zero evidence. Additionally, the pricing scheme is all screwed up so people will likely take a hit, if they bought higher on the retail market or a correspondingly high price on the used market. Couple that with the aversion many have with arguably the two more disastrous lenses in the SDM line (16-50/50-135), and your assertion about ease of sale idea might not hold.

By the way, I just got my 17-50 new for 285 Euros shipped. It sells used (and they almost always sell) for 200-220 on ebay. Sometimes a bit lower, but they are holding their value pretty damn well. Not to mention, over the last 12 months, the 70-200 had jumped about 200 Euros on the used and NOS market since Pentax instituted its MAP pricing in the US which created used and new pricing inflation in Europe, too. When the bottom falls out, then you're going to see that your criteria of resale/retained value/ease of sale should not be a huge factor. Just get what you will use.

jpyykonen · 01-10-2013, 12:22 AM

Originally posted by Skipper74

I was wondering if someone could give me some advice or recomendations on a delima I am having regarding which lens to get. I currently have a Pentax 18-135 kit lens and a 15mm limited Pentax. I was thinking of getting the 16-50mm star and maybe selling one of my other lenes. I like landscape photography and northern lighs shots but in the near future when we have a baby I figured the Pentax star f2.8 16-50 mmm would be a better choice for depth of field shots with the blurr effect. Don't really use alot of zoom like wildlife or anything. Any adice would be great. I don't mind paying the extra bucks if I get good lenses I just don't want to have 3-4 lenses.

If I had to make that choise, I would consider buying sigma 30/1.4. 15mm, 30mm/1.4 and 18-135WR would handle quite a many situations. 15mm for wide angle shots/landscapes, 30/1.4 for shallow DoF shots/inside/artistic shots/portraits, 18-135WR for walkaround jack-of-all-trades, WR for worse weather. DA* 16-50/2.8 is very good lens (I own one) but it's not best at F2.8 and the bokeh doesn't compare to primes. It's also quite big. You may be disappointed if you expect stunning DoF shots. But then again I don't know what is "good enough" for you. But if you really want to get along with only two lenses and are ready for selling and buying, then DA* 16-50/2.8 and DA* 50-135/2.8 (or Sigma 50-150/2.8 if you can find one) makes quite a nice pair. Or if you want to save some money and WR is not that important, replace DA* 16-50/2.8 with Tamron 17-50/2.8. It's better wide open than DA* 16-50.

**Ex Finn.** · 01-10-2013, 03:53 AM

My choice would be DA*16-50 for wide and f2.8, the DA*60-250 for the reach and IQ.

Lurch · 01-10-2013, 03:57 AM

Only.... two... lenses...?
I...I....I..... dont understand.

But regardless, I'd just have to have a schmick 50mm of some description in there. Probably the 1.4. Or my full-manual Pentacon 1.8.

ploetzlich · 01-10-2013, 09:45 AM

Easy. FA 31Ltd + FA77Ltd.

snake · 01-10-2013, 09:45 AM

Originally posted by ploetzlich

Easy. FA 31Ltd + FA77Ltd.

Care to at least ground the reasons why?

JinDesu · 01-10-2013, 09:48 AM

If you want something dedicated for indoor thin DOF shooting, you might as well get a prime. Something like the DA*55 F1.4, FA 50 F1.7, DA 50 F1.8, etc.

I wouldn't necessarily trade the 18-135 for the DA*16-50, unless you really want an improvement in IQ and don't use the 50-135 range.

joe.penn · 01-10-2013, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by Skipper74

I like landscape photography and northern lighs shots but in the near future when we have a baby I figured the Pentax star f2.8 16-50 mmm would be a better choice for depth of field shots with the blurr effect

Originally posted by Skipper74

Of course more lenses is always good but I don't want more than 3

Siggy 8~16 FLD
Siggy 17~50 FLD
Siggy 70~200 FLD

ploetzlich · 01-10-2013, 09:52 AM

Originally posted by snake

Care to at least ground the reasons why?

Sure. A normal fast prime and a short tele fast prime comprise 95% of all my shooting. If I had to add a third, it'd be the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 for landscapes.

snake · 01-10-2013, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by ploetzlich

Sure. A normal fast prime and a short tele fast prime comprise 95% of all my shooting. If I had to add a third, it'd be the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 for landscapes.

So then why not any others in those classes?

01-09-2013, 09:45 PM	#1
Skipper74 Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 34	If you had to choose 2 lenses........help needed. I was wondering if someone could give me some advice or recomendations on a delima I am having regarding which lens to get. I currently have a Pentax 18-135 kit lens and a 15mm limited Pentax. I was thinking of getting the 16-50mm star and maybe selling one of my other lenes. I like landscape photography and northern lighs shots but in the near future when we have a baby I figured the Pentax star f2.8 16-50 mmm would be a better choice for depth of field shots with the blurr effect. Don't really use alot of zoom like wildlife or anything. Any adice would be great. I don't mind paying the extra bucks if I get good lenses I just don't want to have 3-4 lenses.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
If You Had To Pick One Lens You're Coveting Right Now?	magkelly	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	90	06-12-2012 05:59 AM
If you could only choose 3 lenses for a wedding, which would they be?	crossover37	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	48	02-29-2012 09:09 AM
Could Pentax sell you on the Q if they had better lenses?	devorama	Pentax Compact Cameras	17	06-29-2011 09:34 PM
If you only had 2 lenses.......	pentaxian_tmb	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	57	09-15-2009 12:56 PM
If you had to choose between these two	jgredline	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	11-25-2007 01:03 AM

01-09-2013, 10:30 PM	#2
manacho2005 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Red Oak, TX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 462	If you had the money....sell both and get a DA*16-50/50-135 combo. It would give you constant f2.8, weather sealing, approximately same range with a 6% loss on the wide end. -or- If you don't have the money...probably drop the 18-135 for the 16-50 if you use wide end more often than the long end.

01-09-2013, 10:39 PM	#3
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	I... uh... don't want 3-4 lenses, either. But I'm not starting with 2. I'd consider the Tamron F/2.8 right now with the silly-pricing that Pentax has going on. Amazon.com: Tamron 17-50mm SP AF F/2.8 XR DiII LD Aspherical (IF) Lens for PENTAX Digital: Camera & Photo https://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-16-50-vs-sigma-17-50-vs-tamron-17-50mm.html

01-09-2013, 11:38 PM	#4
minahasa Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Minahasa, North Celebes (Sulawesi) Photos: Albums Posts: 586	I can't live with just 2 lenses, but if it is a matter of survival, I'd try living with a 18-250/270 and a 50/1.2

01-09-2013, 11:45 PM	#5
Skipper74 Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 34 Original Poster	Thankyou everyone so far. Of course more lenses is always good but I don't want more than 3. But I am leaning towards the 16-50mm. I kinda want to stick with Pentax as it just makes it easier to sell in the future.

01-10-2013, 12:09 AM	#6
snake Banned Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: NY/Germany Posts: 1,183	Originally posted by ElJamoquio I... uh... don't want 3-4 lenses, either. But I'm not starting with 2. I'd consider the Tamron F/2.8 right now with the silly-pricing that Pentax has going on. Amazon.com: Tamron 17-50mm SP AF F/2.8 XR DiII LD Aspherical (IF) Lens for PENTAX Digital: Camera & Photo https://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-16-50-vs-sigma-17-50-vs-tamron-17-50mm.html I just got one, simply for use as a wide-angle lens (minimal zooming), since I was recommended away from the DA14 and didn't particularly care for the DA15 and 21. It's ok. If I wasn't so into primes, I'd do the Tamron 17-50 and the 70-200. The latter being an extremely high rated lens for IQ, worthy of professional usage. I work more on the other end, so if I had two lenses, it would be my FA35 and the 70-200 (or Tokina 80-200). However, I'm still left needing something wide from time to time, so the Tamron 17-50 fits that bill. I'd have not a single hesitation of doing these two zooms. As far as being "easier to sell" if you go with Pentax, I'd not be so sure. Do your research on the SDM issues, which unknown people will claim, for the fourth year in a row, that they are resolved, with zero evidence. Additionally, the pricing scheme is all screwed up so people will likely take a hit, if they bought higher on the retail market or a correspondingly high price on the used market. Couple that with the aversion many have with arguably the two more disastrous lenses in the SDM line (16-50/50-135), and your assertion about ease of sale idea might not hold. By the way, I just got my 17-50 new for 285 Euros shipped. It sells used (and they almost always sell) for 200-220 on ebay. Sometimes a bit lower, but they are holding their value pretty damn well. Not to mention, over the last 12 months, the 70-200 had jumped about 200 Euros on the used and NOS market since Pentax instituted its MAP pricing in the US which created used and new pricing inflation in Europe, too. When the bottom falls out, then you're going to see that your criteria of resale/retained value/ease of sale should not be a huge factor. Just get what you will use.

01-10-2013, 12:22 AM	#7
jpyykonen Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Tampere, Finland Posts: 191	Originally posted by Skipper74 I was wondering if someone could give me some advice or recomendations on a delima I am having regarding which lens to get. I currently have a Pentax 18-135 kit lens and a 15mm limited Pentax. I was thinking of getting the 16-50mm star and maybe selling one of my other lenes. I like landscape photography and northern lighs shots but in the near future when we have a baby I figured the Pentax star f2.8 16-50 mmm would be a better choice for depth of field shots with the blurr effect. Don't really use alot of zoom like wildlife or anything. Any adice would be great. I don't mind paying the extra bucks if I get good lenses I just don't want to have 3-4 lenses. If I had to make that choise, I would consider buying sigma 30/1.4. 15mm, 30mm/1.4 and 18-135WR would handle quite a many situations. 15mm for wide angle shots/landscapes, 30/1.4 for shallow DoF shots/inside/artistic shots/portraits, 18-135WR for walkaround jack-of-all-trades, WR for worse weather. DA* 16-50/2.8 is very good lens (I own one) but it's not best at F2.8 and the bokeh doesn't compare to primes. It's also quite big. You may be disappointed if you expect stunning DoF shots. But then again I don't know what is "good enough" for you. But if you really want to get along with only two lenses and are ready for selling and buying, then DA* 16-50/2.8 and DA* 50-135/2.8 (or Sigma 50-150/2.8 if you can find one) makes quite a nice pair. Or if you want to save some money and WR is not that important, replace DA* 16-50/2.8 with Tamron 17-50/2.8. It's better wide open than DA* 16-50.

01-10-2013, 03:53 AM	#8
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	My choice would be DA16-50 for wide and f2.8, the DA60-250 for the reach and IQ.

01-10-2013, 03:57 AM	#9
Lurch Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Canberra, Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 582	Only.... two... lenses...? I...I....I..... dont understand. But regardless, I'd just have to have a schmick 50mm of some description in there. Probably the 1.4. Or my full-manual Pentacon 1.8.

01-10-2013, 09:45 AM	#10
ploetzlich Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: CA Posts: 74	Easy. FA 31Ltd + FA77Ltd.

01-10-2013, 09:45 AM	#11
snake Banned Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: NY/Germany Posts: 1,183	Originally posted by ploetzlich Easy. FA 31Ltd + FA77Ltd. Care to at least ground the reasons why?

01-10-2013, 09:48 AM	#12
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	If you want something dedicated for indoor thin DOF shooting, you might as well get a prime. Something like the DA55 F1.4, FA 50 F1.7, DA 50 F1.8, etc. I wouldn't necessarily trade the 18-135 for the DA16-50, unless you really want an improvement in IQ and don't use the 50-135 range.

01-10-2013, 09:49 AM	#13
joe.penn Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Maryland (Right Outside Washington DC) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,902	Originally posted by Skipper74 I like landscape photography and northern lighs shots but in the near future when we have a baby I figured the Pentax star f2.8 16-50 mmm would be a better choice for depth of field shots with the blurr effect Originally posted by Skipper74 Of course more lenses is always good but I don't want more than 3 Siggy 8~16 FLD Siggy 17~50 FLD Siggy 70~200 FLD

01-10-2013, 09:52 AM	#14
ploetzlich Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: CA Posts: 74	Originally posted by snake Care to at least ground the reasons why? Sure. A normal fast prime and a short tele fast prime comprise 95% of all my shooting. If I had to add a third, it'd be the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 for landscapes.

01-10-2013, 10:18 AM	#15
snake Banned Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: NY/Germany Posts: 1,183	Originally posted by ploetzlich Sure. A normal fast prime and a short tele fast prime comprise 95% of all my shooting. If I had to add a third, it'd be the Samyang 14mm f/2.8 for landscapes. So then why not any others in those classes?