Recommendations for Substitute for Kit Lens (18-55 DAL)

Paul the Sunman · 10-08-2018, 04:11 PM

The DA 16-85 is exceptional. You won't miss the long end compared to the DA18-135 if you also have the DA 55-300, and the extra 2mm at the short end is a huge boon.

For indoor use though, you may want a faster lens. The DA 50 f/1.8 and the DA35 f/2.4 are both very cheap and very good. The FA 50 f/1.4 is not too expensive either. If you want a fast wide-normal zoom, Sigma or Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 are worth a look.

Brooke Meyer · 10-08-2018, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by dieselpunk

Hi folks.

I'm looking for advice on a substitute for the DAL-18-55mm lens that came with my K-r.

I've been shooting with the Pentax K-r since 2011 and overall it's served me well.

However, even after all these years, I've still not really "mastered" the 18-55mm kit lens that came with the camera. There are times when I get amazing shots with it, but indoors it's always been a bit of a mixed bag for me. When I look at shots with my Pentax-DA 55-300 lens I immediately notice the difference in quality. Granted I use that lens outdoors and with good light the 18-55 kit lens performs well so I can't really be sure that I'm just not a great photographer or if I could benefit from new equipment.

I primarily shoot family events and vacations, indoor museum exhibits, airshows, comic conventions, and the very occasional walk around in the city.

I get to this question in my Basic Photography class about 3 weeks in, after everyone understands light levels, ISO, shutter speed and aperture. And how reflective light meters in cameras get fooled a lot. And how inexpensive, variable aperture lenses make using manual mode very difficult. So they are left with a semi-auto mode like shutter or aperture priority and exposure compensation. Which ends up pretty much the same as manual and adjust except it isn't as consistent.

Our next stop with my laptop connected to the projector are visits to UsedPhotopro.com and KEH.com to illustrate how little a constant aperture lens with a six month warranty costs. I tell them about Tokina, Tamron and Sigma.

jeallen01 · 10-09-2018, 12:53 AM

Originally posted by normhead

Based on my experience with Sigma lenses and other reports of failure with that particular lens, there's chance I'll still be shooting my ancient 18-135 long after your 17-70 is dead.

But it is probably a better lens as long as it lasts.

Maybe so with the later versions of the 17-70 (HSM failure & so on) but this old non-HSM girl is at least a decade old (and probably had more than 1 owner before me) and still works extremely well - so I'm not expecting a failure anytime soon

.

**i_trax** · 10-09-2018, 03:17 AM

After purchasing K-x years ago, more less instantly, I have purchased used Sigma 17-70 Macro 2.8 -4.5 non HSM to replace the kit lens.
Still love it and use it, you can get now used one very cheap.

jeallen01 · 10-09-2018, 03:32 AM

Originally posted by i_trax

After purchasing K-x years ago, more less instantly, I have purchased used Sigma 17-70 Macro 2.8 -4.5 non HSM to replace the kit lens.
Still love it and use it, you can get now used one very cheap.

Same one that I have and, when I did back-to-back tests, it was sharp enough to show up the differences in the K-30 & K-3 sensors = the K-3 images were sharper than those from the K-30 (which is what I kinda hoped for, but didn't actually expect to see)

**pres589** · 10-09-2018, 06:18 AM

I had one of the Sigma 17-70's and it was pretty good. That's probably one of the most cost effective options available. That said I would still rather have an f2.8 constant aperture zoom for indoor use if it had to be a zoom.

There were some fast primes from Sigma that shouldn't be ignored. I really like the image quality of my Sigma 28mm f1.8 EX although I have what appears to be some rare AF issues that most other people with this lens don't mention. There's also the 30mm f1.4's that Sigma sold although those seem to be much more likely to have weird AF performance to the point that it's hard to recommend one. Which is a shame as a 30mm f1.4 prime that's decently sharp in the middle wide open would be lovely to use for indoor shooting.

timb64 · 10-09-2018, 07:06 AM

Originally posted by Paul the Sunman

The DA 16-85 is exceptional. You won't miss the long end compared to the DA18-135 if you also have the DA 55-300, and the extra 2mm at the short end is a huge boon.

For indoor use though, you may want a faster lens. The DA 50 f/1.8 and the DA35 f/2.4 are both very cheap and very good. The FA 50 f/1.4 is not too expensive either. If you want a fast wide-normal zoom, Sigma or Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 are worth a look.

Just this /\ /\ /\

dieselpunk · 10-09-2018, 05:54 PM

Thanks to everyone for this amazing information. I have a lot to research it seems. Sad, but I think I've learned more about photography in this one post than I have in the last year.

Great tip about looking at my EXIFs for focal length information. Years of grooming my flickr site have finally paid off! The overall utility of a zoom is definitely needed when I looked back over my vacation and event shooting. Lots of 18-32mm shots with 55mm being the 3rd most common (probably because it's both the highest and lowest focal lengths on the two lenses I own). I like the idea of a fast prime, but I'm not yet sure I would use them that much if I had to do a lot of swapping. Something in the ~30mm range would be ideal prime for me based on an unscientific averaging of my collection of shots.

I'm ashamed to say I've never heard of the concept of the fixed aperture zoom until now! I can definitely see how that would have made my life easier in many situations. So many things to consider. I will report back what I decided to do.

dieselpunk · 10-10-2018, 05:07 AM

Originally posted by MrB1

See: DA* 16-50mm vs. Sigma and Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 Comparison Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

For a standard zoom, the Tamron should feel well-balanced on a K-r, being the lightest and the most compact, and it is also the best value of those three.

Philip

Was reading the linked review and had a question about this passage about the Sigma

While it’s somewhat redundant on a Pentax dSLR thanks to the company's omnipresent in-body SR, the in-lens OS might possibly up your keeper rate, and it also stabilizes the image in your viewfinder. The use of OS on a Pentax body does have a couple caveats: OS is not designed to be used with the body’s SR system active, and it will not work at all on older bodies that lack SDM/HSM support.

Does this mean I should disable SR when using this lens?

seventysixersfan · 10-10-2018, 06:55 AM

Originally posted by dieselpunk

Was reading the linked review and had a question about this passage about the Sigma

While it’s somewhat redundant on a Pentax dSLR thanks to the company's omnipresent in-body SR, the in-lens OS might possibly up your keeper rate, and it also stabilizes the image in your viewfinder. The use of OS on a Pentax body does have a couple caveats: OS is not designed to be used with the body’s SR system active, and it will not work at all on older bodies that lack SDM/HSM support.

Does this mean I should disable SR when using this lens?

Sigma has removed the OS from current production models of this lens for Pentax K-mount, so you probably won't have to deal with this issue unless you happen to buy a used copy that has OS built-in. Those are very early copies of this lens, though, so it is probably hard to find them for sale.

dieselpunk · 10-11-2018, 05:10 PM - **2 Likes**

Hey.

So after two nights of serious research into everything posted in this thread I decided to start with doing the easy thing first and get the DA 35 f2.4. I might still get the Sigma 17-50 or the Pentax DA 16-85 later. I figured with a relatively fast prime this well reviewed (and cheap) I can better tell if equipment is really my limiting factor. Thanks again to everyone who chimed in. I really considered every lens mentioned in the replies.

Piotrek K · 10-22-2018, 11:59 AM

Good copy of DA 16-45 or HD 18-50 and one of the primes listed above should be OK.

10-09-2018, 12:53 AM	#18
jeallen01 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2008 Location: London, UK Posts: 1,697	Originally posted by normhead Based on my experience with Sigma lenses and other reports of failure with that particular lens, there's chance I'll still be shooting my ancient 18-135 long after your 17-70 is dead. But it is probably a better lens as long as it lasts. Maybe so with the later versions of the 17-70 (HSM failure & so on) but this old non-HSM girl is at least a decade old (and probably had more than 1 owner before me) and still works extremely well - so I'm not expecting a failure anytime soon. Last edited by jeallen01; 10-09-2018 at 01:02 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: K-2000 kit(body and DAL 18-55), DAL 50-200, A 28/2.8	Matcha	Sold Items	6	04-17-2012 06:13 PM
Need suggestions for Hoods for DAL 18-55 Kit Lens and DAL 55-300mm Lens	photoleet	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	09-20-2011 03:15 PM
For Sale - Sold: K-x with 18-55 DAL and 50-200 DAL kit lenses	leadfoot	Sold Items	2	08-07-2011 08:12 AM
Good walkaround lens to augment/substitute kit 18-55?	moSIN	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	35	01-11-2010 03:17 PM
kx w/ 18-55 & 55-300bdal for $643 or k20d W/ grip & 18-55 & 55-300 DAL for $850.	tubey	Pentax DSLR Discussion	6	01-10-2010 11:30 AM

10-08-2018, 04:11 PM	#16
Paul the Sunman Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,843	The DA 16-85 is exceptional. You won't miss the long end compared to the DA18-135 if you also have the DA 55-300, and the extra 2mm at the short end is a huge boon. For indoor use though, you may want a faster lens. The DA 50 f/1.8 and the DA35 f/2.4 are both very cheap and very good. The FA 50 f/1.4 is not too expensive either. If you want a fast wide-normal zoom, Sigma or Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 are worth a look.

10-08-2018, 07:42 PM	#17
Brooke Meyer Guest	Originally posted by dieselpunk Hi folks. I'm looking for advice on a substitute for the DAL-18-55mm lens that came with my K-r. I've been shooting with the Pentax K-r since 2011 and overall it's served me well. However, even after all these years, I've still not really "mastered" the 18-55mm kit lens that came with the camera. There are times when I get amazing shots with it, but indoors it's always been a bit of a mixed bag for me. When I look at shots with my Pentax-DA 55-300 lens I immediately notice the difference in quality. Granted I use that lens outdoors and with good light the 18-55 kit lens performs well so I can't really be sure that I'm just not a great photographer or if I could benefit from new equipment. I primarily shoot family events and vacations, indoor museum exhibits, airshows, comic conventions, and the very occasional walk around in the city. I get to this question in my Basic Photography class about 3 weeks in, after everyone understands light levels, ISO, shutter speed and aperture. And how reflective light meters in cameras get fooled a lot. And how inexpensive, variable aperture lenses make using manual mode very difficult. So they are left with a semi-auto mode like shutter or aperture priority and exposure compensation. Which ends up pretty much the same as manual and adjust except it isn't as consistent. Our next stop with my laptop connected to the projector are visits to UsedPhotopro.com and KEH.com to illustrate how little a constant aperture lens with a six month warranty costs. I tell them about Tokina, Tamron and Sigma.

10-09-2018, 03:17 AM	#19
i_trax Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Perth Western Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,621	After purchasing K-x years ago, more less instantly, I have purchased used Sigma 17-70 Macro 2.8 -4.5 non HSM to replace the kit lens. Still love it and use it, you can get now used one very cheap.

10-09-2018, 03:32 AM	#20
jeallen01 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2008 Location: London, UK Posts: 1,697	Originally posted by i_trax After purchasing K-x years ago, more less instantly, I have purchased used Sigma 17-70 Macro 2.8 -4.5 non HSM to replace the kit lens. Still love it and use it, you can get now used one very cheap. Same one that I have and, when I did back-to-back tests, it was sharp enough to show up the differences in the K-30 & K-3 sensors = the K-3 images were sharper than those from the K-30 (which is what I kinda hoped for, but didn't actually expect to see)

10-09-2018, 06:18 AM	#21
pres589 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Wichita, KS Photos: Albums Posts: 4,529	I had one of the Sigma 17-70's and it was pretty good. That's probably one of the most cost effective options available. That said I would still rather have an f2.8 constant aperture zoom for indoor use if it had to be a zoom. There were some fast primes from Sigma that shouldn't be ignored. I really like the image quality of my Sigma 28mm f1.8 EX although I have what appears to be some rare AF issues that most other people with this lens don't mention. There's also the 30mm f1.4's that Sigma sold although those seem to be much more likely to have weird AF performance to the point that it's hard to recommend one. Which is a shame as a 30mm f1.4 prime that's decently sharp in the middle wide open would be lovely to use for indoor shooting.

10-09-2018, 07:06 AM	#22
timb64 Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: /Situation : Doing my best to avoid idiots! Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,510	Originally posted by Paul the Sunman The DA 16-85 is exceptional. You won't miss the long end compared to the DA18-135 if you also have the DA 55-300, and the extra 2mm at the short end is a huge boon. For indoor use though, you may want a faster lens. The DA 50 f/1.8 and the DA35 f/2.4 are both very cheap and very good. The FA 50 f/1.4 is not too expensive either. If you want a fast wide-normal zoom, Sigma or Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 are worth a look. Just this /\ /\ /\

10-09-2018, 05:54 PM	#23
dieselpunk Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2018 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 30 Original Poster	Thanks to everyone for this amazing information. I have a lot to research it seems. Sad, but I think I've learned more about photography in this one post than I have in the last year. Great tip about looking at my EXIFs for focal length information. Years of grooming my flickr site have finally paid off! The overall utility of a zoom is definitely needed when I looked back over my vacation and event shooting. Lots of 18-32mm shots with 55mm being the 3rd most common (probably because it's both the highest and lowest focal lengths on the two lenses I own). I like the idea of a fast prime, but I'm not yet sure I would use them that much if I had to do a lot of swapping. Something in the ~30mm range would be ideal prime for me based on an unscientific averaging of my collection of shots. I'm ashamed to say I've never heard of the concept of the fixed aperture zoom until now! I can definitely see how that would have made my life easier in many situations. So many things to consider. I will report back what I decided to do.

10-10-2018, 05:07 AM	#24
dieselpunk Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2018 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 30 Original Poster	Originally posted by MrB1 See: DA* 16-50mm vs. Sigma and Tamron 17-50mm F2.8 Comparison Review - Introduction \| PentaxForums.com Reviews For a standard zoom, the Tamron should feel well-balanced on a K-r, being the lightest and the most compact, and it is also the best value of those three. Philip Was reading the linked review and had a question about this passage about the Sigma While it’s somewhat redundant on a Pentax dSLR thanks to the company's omnipresent in-body SR, the in-lens OS might possibly up your keeper rate, and it also stabilizes the image in your viewfinder. The use of OS on a Pentax body does have a couple caveats: OS is not designed to be used with the body’s SR system active, and it will not work at all on older bodies that lack SDM/HSM support. Does this mean I should disable SR when using this lens?

10-10-2018, 06:55 AM	#25
seventysixersfan Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Alexandria, VA Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by dieselpunk Was reading the linked review and had a question about this passage about the Sigma While it’s somewhat redundant on a Pentax dSLR thanks to the company's omnipresent in-body SR, the in-lens OS might possibly up your keeper rate, and it also stabilizes the image in your viewfinder. The use of OS on a Pentax body does have a couple caveats: OS is not designed to be used with the body’s SR system active, and it will not work at all on older bodies that lack SDM/HSM support. Does this mean I should disable SR when using this lens? Sigma has removed the OS from current production models of this lens for Pentax K-mount, so you probably won't have to deal with this issue unless you happen to buy a used copy that has OS built-in. Those are very early copies of this lens, though, so it is probably hard to find them for sale.

10-11-2018, 05:10 PM - 2 Likes	#26
dieselpunk Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2018 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 30 Original Poster	Hey. So after two nights of serious research into everything posted in this thread I decided to start with doing the easy thing first and get the DA 35 f2.4. I might still get the Sigma 17-50 or the Pentax DA 16-85 later. I figured with a relatively fast prime this well reviewed (and cheap) I can better tell if equipment is really my limiting factor. Thanks again to everyone who chimed in. I really considered every lens mentioned in the replies.

10-22-2018, 11:59 AM	#27
Piotrek K Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,384	Good copy of DA 16-45 or HD 18-50 and one of the primes listed above should be OK.