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

dieselpunk · 10-08-2018, 08:50 AM - **2 Likes**

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.

DeadJohn · 10-08-2018, 09:12 AM

Originally posted by dieselpunk

18-55 ... indoors it's always been a bit of a mixed bag for me

Your first post; welcome. In low light, you're stuck with boosting ISO or slowing the shutter speed. High ISO can get grainy. Too slow a shutter can cause motion blur. Either one can decrease image quality. Also, the K-r autofocus isn't great in low light and you could be seeing blur from missed focus.

The DA 35 f2.4 has a bigger aperture (lower f/ number) and gathers more light than the 18-55. At $100 new it's an economical upgrade. The DA 50 f1.8 is another option but has a narrow field of view for general indoor use.

The DA* 16-50 f2.8 offers the flexibility of zoom, but is significantly more expensive.

**jatrax** · 10-08-2018, 09:23 AM - **1 Like**

For APS-C zooms in order of image quality you have:
DA 18-55

DA 18-135
DA 16-85
DA*16-50
The 18-135 is very good and a significant step up. The 16-85 is IMHO a bit better particularly on the edges than the 18-135 but much shorter focal range. The 16-50 is a '*' lens and f/2.8, but a lot more money. Any of these will be better than what you have.

There are also third party lenses in the 17-50 range but I have no experience with them.

Cthulhugan · 10-08-2018, 09:24 AM

Shooting indoors with available light means a faster lens is more desirable. The DA16-85 or DA18-135 are great lenses (I have the 16-85), but are a little slow. I’d look for a constant f/2.8 zoom lens, like the DA*16-50/2.8, Sigma 17-50/2.8 or Tamron 16-50/2.8. I had the older Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX DC Macro on my K-x (the immediate predecessor of your K-r), and that worked very well (my daughter has them now, and they still work well). The DA20-40/2.8-4 Limited and Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 Contemporary might also work well, even though they are variable aperture, especially if you work more towards the wide end. The newly announced (not yet available) DA*11-18/2.8 might also be a good candidate for indoor work, but it’s really wide .. and not yet shipping ... and probably quite expensive.

Be warned though, getting a high quality “normal” lens will get you thinking how much better the DA*60-250 or D-FA150-450 are compared to the 55-300, and a full-blown case of LBA could ensue ... :-)

Dericali · 10-08-2018, 09:25 AM - **1 Like**

Get the DA 50mm prime lens if you don't have it already. That was a game changer for me with APS-C. Super fun to shoot with. Can't do everything of course, but it's great as a walk around lens.

MrB1 · 10-08-2018, 09:59 AM

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

runswithsizzers · 10-08-2018, 10:42 AM - **1 Like**

Two of the primes recommended here - the DA 35 f2.4, and the DA 50 f1.8 - are pretty good lenses, and fantastic value considering their affordable prices. I have both, and I use the 35mm quite a bit.

Regarding family events: Inside my small house, and the homes of my friends and family, the 35mm is almost too long, and the 50mm is almost always too long for me unless I want a tight head and shoulders shot. In bigger rooms, they would work a lot better. The 50mm might work well inside museums or at conventions. You might want to get both.

Before buying a prime, look at the metadata of those indoor shots and see which focal lengths you used the most.

Recently, I have learned to really prefer shooting zooms (not Pentax) and my Pentax primes don't get used as much as they used to. But unfortunately, compared to my Pentax primes, the Pentax zooms tend to be big and heavy, and either slow and affordable, or fast and expensive.

I would like to have a better Pentax zoom than the kit zoom which came with my Kx (probably the same one as yours). The best choice for me would be the 16-85mm. I would expect the image quality to be a bit better than my kit zoom, but it's no faster, so we wouldn't gain much in low light.

normhead · 10-08-2018, 11:16 AM

Originally posted by runswithsizzers

Two of the primes recommended here - the DA 35 f2.4, and the DA 50 f1.8 - are pretty good lenses, and fantastic value considering their affordable prices. I have both, and I use the 35mm quite a bit.

Regarding family events: Inside my small house, and the homes of my friends and family, the 35mm is almost too long, and the 50mm is almost always too long for me unless I want a tight head and shoulders shot. In bigger rooms, they would work a lot better. The 50mm might work well inside museums or at conventions. You might want to get both.

Before buying a prime, look at the metadata of those indoor shots and see which focal lengths you used the most.

Recently, I have learned to really prefer shooting zooms (not Pentax) and my Pentax primes don't get used as much as they used to. But unfortunately, compared to my Pentax primes, the Pentax zooms tend to be big and heavy, and either slow and affordable, or fast and expensive.

I would like to have a better Pentax zoom than the kit zoom which came with my Kx (probably the same one as yours). The best choice for me would be the 16-85mm. I would expect the image quality to be a bit better than my kit zoom, but it's no faster, so we wouldn't gain much in low light.

The 16-85 is the lens to go to at the moment.
I'd supplement it with a fast lens.

DA 50 1/8
Or for indoors, FA 31 1.8 ltd. (brace yourself before you look up the price.)

I really don't find 2.4 enough better than 2.8 to bother messing with the 35 2.4. It's easily my least used lens.

I'm still using my 18-135, but my wife needs a new kit type lens, and she doesn't like my 18-135, for her, the 16-85 is a better choice, and Christmas is coming. I shoot a lot of shots that are never going to be printed big or on a screen at less than a 1:2 oversample, so getting the framing I want is more important than absolute sharpness. She's a sharpness freak. She approaches every image as if it's going to be large size print.

Qman · 10-08-2018, 01:01 PM

As stated already, the DA 16-85 is a good step up from your kit lens. Sharper, fast and quiet focus, usefully wider range. Indoors you may want to go wide and fast. A good option is the DA 14 2.8. It's a very good step up from your kit and surprisingly versatile.

seventysixersfan · 10-08-2018, 01:08 PM

I happen to have a Sigma 17-70mm Contemporary for sale right now in the PF Marketplace that would be a great step up for you: Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro HSM Contemporary - PentaxForums.com

**pres589** · 10-08-2018, 01:29 PM - **1 Like**

Some background; most consumer camera lenses are at their best optically a few stops down from wide open. "Better" glass will act nicely closer to wide open, or completely wide open aka at max aperture aka smallest numerically available f-stop. Kit lenses like the 18-55 are very much a compromise where cost is a top factor in how the lens is made. For what it is, it offers a lot, but it really doesn't perform that well until f8 or f11 are used. Some versions of this lens are better than others and my original type 18-55 is one of the worst. Later ones got better. To the casual user this basically means the lens isn't that great unless you're in a bright area to shoot in. The camera gets leaned on to increase sensor sensitivity.

In any case, a more specialized / costly lens may be constructed in such a way to perform better closer to wide open. One such lens is the DA 35mm f2.4 "plastic fantastic" prime lens that was previously mentioned. This lens is very sharp wide open and will grab more light than your 18-55 due to having a larger max aperture (numerically smaller) available for use. I personally don't love this lens but others do, your mileage may vary.

On the used market there's a few other prime lenses you may consider. Sigma had a 24mm f2.8 lens called the Super-Wide II and there is an autofocus version of that lens. Pentax had both an F and an FA 28mm f2.8 that are probably better lenses overall (the Sigma isn't built very tough). I feel like these are more useful focal lengths for general use. Tamron still sells a 17-50mm f2.8 zoom which is also very affordable although build quality isn't quite up to Pentax standards.

jeallen01 · 10-08-2018, 02:23 PM - **1 Like**

Not a new thought, but my very old original Sigma 17-70 (so not the "Contemporary"!) version is a really cracking lens - once I got that last year for less than $100, my 18-135 wasn't used again and was soon sold.

normhead · 10-08-2018, 02:42 PM

Originally posted by jeallen01

Not a new thought, but my very old original Sigma 17-70 (so not the "Contemporary"!) version is a really cracking lens - once I got that last year for less than $100, my 18-135 wasn't used again and was soon sold.

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.

**Des** · 10-08-2018, 03:22 PM

Welcome to PF.

@Cthulhugan mentioned the DA 20-40 Ltd. I've got that lens and it really produces lovely images, even at its widest aperture. It's a surprisingly good lens for portraits (especially group and environmental portraits). It's also capable of fine outdoor images, when it can be stopped down. The colours and rendering are very pleasing, it has HD coatings, is beautifully built and is similar in size and weight to the kit lens. It is faster (ie wide maximum aperture) than the kit lens but not by a whole lot: its widest aperture is f2.8 from 20mm to about 23mm, the f3.5 to about 35mm, then f4. As fine as it is, I suspect that, except at the widest end, you might want something faster for the sort of indoor use you are describing.

I'm mainly an outdoor photographer, so I don't usually need a really fast lens. As your post suggests, many lenses - including the kit lenses - can do well in good light. But in low light, when flash is not an option, there's no substitute for a wide aperture (f2.8 or faster). I think the needs you have described require a fast lens. You would know from experience by now whether a prime could meet this need - if so something like a DA 35 f2.4 would be a good cheap option. Otherwise I think it has got to be one of the constant f2.8 zooms which has been mentioned.

Sandy Hancock · 10-08-2018, 04:07 PM

Second hand DA*16-50's can be had at a pretty good price. The Sigma and Tamron 17-50/2.8's are also excellent (I've owned one of the Sigmas).
Hard to go past one of these for indoor use.

A DA50/1.8 wouldn't go astray either as a budget bokeh master.

10-08-2018, 08:50 AM - 2 Likes	#1
dieselpunk Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2018 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 30	Recommendations for Substitute for Kit Lens (18-55 DAL) 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.

10-08-2018, 02:42 PM	#13
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by jeallen01 Not a new thought, but my very old original Sigma 17-70 (so not the "Contemporary"!) version is a really cracking lens - once I got that last year for less than $100, my 18-135 wasn't used again and was soon sold. 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. Last edited by normhead; 10-08-2018 at 04:20 PM.

10-08-2018, 03:22 PM	#14
Des Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Victoria Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 6,423	Welcome to PF. @Cthulhugan mentioned the DA 20-40 Ltd. I've got that lens and it really produces lovely images, even at its widest aperture. It's a surprisingly good lens for portraits (especially group and environmental portraits). It's also capable of fine outdoor images, when it can be stopped down. The colours and rendering are very pleasing, it has HD coatings, is beautifully built and is similar in size and weight to the kit lens. It is faster (ie wide maximum aperture) than the kit lens but not by a whole lot: its widest aperture is f2.8 from 20mm to about 23mm, the f3.5 to about 35mm, then f4. As fine as it is, I suspect that, except at the widest end, you might want something faster for the sort of indoor use you are describing. I'm mainly an outdoor photographer, so I don't usually need a really fast lens. As your post suggests, many lenses - including the kit lenses - can do well in good light. But in low light, when flash is not an option, there's no substitute for a wide aperture (f2.8 or faster). I think the needs you have described require a fast lens. You would know from experience by now whether a prime could meet this need - if so something like a DA 35 f2.4 would be a good cheap option. Otherwise I think it has got to be one of the constant f2.8 zooms which has been mentioned. Last edited by Des; 10-09-2018 at 02:41 PM.

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, 09:12 AM	#2
DeadJohn Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: New York Posts: 4,833	Originally posted by dieselpunk 18-55 ... indoors it's always been a bit of a mixed bag for me Your first post; welcome. In low light, you're stuck with boosting ISO or slowing the shutter speed. High ISO can get grainy. Too slow a shutter can cause motion blur. Either one can decrease image quality. Also, the K-r autofocus isn't great in low light and you could be seeing blur from missed focus. The DA 35 f2.4 has a bigger aperture (lower f/ number) and gathers more light than the 18-55. At $100 new it's an economical upgrade. The DA 50 f1.8 is another option but has a narrow field of view for general indoor use. The DA* 16-50 f2.8 offers the flexibility of zoom, but is significantly more expensive.

10-08-2018, 09:23 AM - 1 Like	#3
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	For APS-C zooms in order of image quality you have: DA 18-55 DA 18-135 DA 16-85 DA16-50 The 18-135 is very good and a significant step up. The 16-85 is IMHO a bit better particularly on the edges than the 18-135 but much shorter focal range. The 16-50 is a '' lens and f/2.8, but a lot more money. Any of these will be better than what you have. There are also third party lenses in the 17-50 range but I have no experience with them.

10-08-2018, 09:24 AM	#4
Cthulhugan Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2015 Location: Calgary Alberta Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 227	Shooting indoors with available light means a faster lens is more desirable. The DA16-85 or DA18-135 are great lenses (I have the 16-85), but are a little slow. I’d look for a constant f/2.8 zoom lens, like the DA16-50/2.8, Sigma 17-50/2.8 or Tamron 16-50/2.8. I had the older Sigma 18-50/2.8 EX DC Macro on my K-x (the immediate predecessor of your K-r), and that worked very well (my daughter has them now, and they still work well). The DA20-40/2.8-4 Limited and Sigma 17-70/2.8-4 Contemporary might also work well, even though they are variable aperture, especially if you work more towards the wide end. The newly announced (not yet available) DA11-18/2.8 might also be a good candidate for indoor work, but it’s really wide .. and not yet shipping ... and probably quite expensive. Be warned though, getting a high quality “normal” lens will get you thinking how much better the DA*60-250 or D-FA150-450 are compared to the 55-300, and a full-blown case of LBA could ensue ... :-)

10-08-2018, 09:25 AM - 1 Like	#5
Dericali Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2016 Location: Berlin Posts: 298	Get the DA 50mm prime lens if you don't have it already. That was a game changer for me with APS-C. Super fun to shoot with. Can't do everything of course, but it's great as a walk around lens.

10-08-2018, 09:59 AM	#6
MrB1 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2013 Location: Hertfordshire, England Posts: 845	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

10-08-2018, 10:42 AM - 1 Like	#7
runswithsizzers Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: USA Posts: 186	Two of the primes recommended here - the DA 35 f2.4, and the DA 50 f1.8 - are pretty good lenses, and fantastic value considering their affordable prices. I have both, and I use the 35mm quite a bit. Regarding family events: Inside my small house, and the homes of my friends and family, the 35mm is almost too long, and the 50mm is almost always too long for me unless I want a tight head and shoulders shot. In bigger rooms, they would work a lot better. The 50mm might work well inside museums or at conventions. You might want to get both. Before buying a prime, look at the metadata of those indoor shots and see which focal lengths you used the most. Recently, I have learned to really prefer shooting zooms (not Pentax) and my Pentax primes don't get used as much as they used to. But unfortunately, compared to my Pentax primes, the Pentax zooms tend to be big and heavy, and either slow and affordable, or fast and expensive. I would like to have a better Pentax zoom than the kit zoom which came with my Kx (probably the same one as yours). The best choice for me would be the 16-85mm. I would expect the image quality to be a bit better than my kit zoom, but it's no faster, so we wouldn't gain much in low light.

10-08-2018, 11:16 AM	#8
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by runswithsizzers Two of the primes recommended here - the DA 35 f2.4, and the DA 50 f1.8 - are pretty good lenses, and fantastic value considering their affordable prices. I have both, and I use the 35mm quite a bit. Regarding family events: Inside my small house, and the homes of my friends and family, the 35mm is almost too long, and the 50mm is almost always too long for me unless I want a tight head and shoulders shot. In bigger rooms, they would work a lot better. The 50mm might work well inside museums or at conventions. You might want to get both. Before buying a prime, look at the metadata of those indoor shots and see which focal lengths you used the most. Recently, I have learned to really prefer shooting zooms (not Pentax) and my Pentax primes don't get used as much as they used to. But unfortunately, compared to my Pentax primes, the Pentax zooms tend to be big and heavy, and either slow and affordable, or fast and expensive. I would like to have a better Pentax zoom than the kit zoom which came with my Kx (probably the same one as yours). The best choice for me would be the 16-85mm. I would expect the image quality to be a bit better than my kit zoom, but it's no faster, so we wouldn't gain much in low light. The 16-85 is the lens to go to at the moment. I'd supplement it with a fast lens. DA 50 1/8 Or for indoors, FA 31 1.8 ltd. (brace yourself before you look up the price.) I really don't find 2.4 enough better than 2.8 to bother messing with the 35 2.4. It's easily my least used lens. I'm still using my 18-135, but my wife needs a new kit type lens, and she doesn't like my 18-135, for her, the 16-85 is a better choice, and Christmas is coming. I shoot a lot of shots that are never going to be printed big or on a screen at less than a 1:2 oversample, so getting the framing I want is more important than absolute sharpness. She's a sharpness freak. She approaches every image as if it's going to be large size print.

10-08-2018, 01:01 PM	#9
Qman Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2017 Posts: 232	As stated already, the DA 16-85 is a good step up from your kit lens. Sharper, fast and quiet focus, usefully wider range. Indoors you may want to go wide and fast. A good option is the DA 14 2.8. It's a very good step up from your kit and surprisingly versatile.

10-08-2018, 01:08 PM	#10
seventysixersfan Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Alexandria, VA Posts: 2,054	I happen to have a Sigma 17-70mm Contemporary for sale right now in the PF Marketplace that would be a great step up for you: Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4 DC Macro HSM Contemporary - PentaxForums.com

10-08-2018, 01:29 PM - 1 Like	#11
pres589 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Wichita, KS Photos: Albums Posts: 4,529	Some background; most consumer camera lenses are at their best optically a few stops down from wide open. "Better" glass will act nicely closer to wide open, or completely wide open aka at max aperture aka smallest numerically available f-stop. Kit lenses like the 18-55 are very much a compromise where cost is a top factor in how the lens is made. For what it is, it offers a lot, but it really doesn't perform that well until f8 or f11 are used. Some versions of this lens are better than others and my original type 18-55 is one of the worst. Later ones got better. To the casual user this basically means the lens isn't that great unless you're in a bright area to shoot in. The camera gets leaned on to increase sensor sensitivity. In any case, a more specialized / costly lens may be constructed in such a way to perform better closer to wide open. One such lens is the DA 35mm f2.4 "plastic fantastic" prime lens that was previously mentioned. This lens is very sharp wide open and will grab more light than your 18-55 due to having a larger max aperture (numerically smaller) available for use. I personally don't love this lens but others do, your mileage may vary. On the used market there's a few other prime lenses you may consider. Sigma had a 24mm f2.8 lens called the Super-Wide II and there is an autofocus version of that lens. Pentax had both an F and an FA 28mm f2.8 that are probably better lenses overall (the Sigma isn't built very tough). I feel like these are more useful focal lengths for general use. Tamron still sells a 17-50mm f2.8 zoom which is also very affordable although build quality isn't quite up to Pentax standards.

10-08-2018, 02:23 PM - 1 Like	#12
jeallen01 Pentaxian Join Date: May 2008 Location: London, UK Posts: 1,697	Not a new thought, but my very old original Sigma 17-70 (so not the "Contemporary"!) version is a really cracking lens - once I got that last year for less than $100, my 18-135 wasn't used again and was soon sold.

10-08-2018, 04:07 PM	#15
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	Second hand DA*16-50's can be had at a pretty good price. The Sigma and Tamron 17-50/2.8's are also excellent (I've owned one of the Sigmas). Hard to go past one of these for indoor use. A DA50/1.8 wouldn't go astray either as a budget bokeh master.