[Thagomizer]

They're levitating!

[edom31]

That's an intriguing image! Care to elaborate?

Thanks - this was taken in Osorno, Chile. Beautiful green fields, cows and the sporadic bunch of trees together (likely so planted for the cows to rest from the sun, as they all seemed "umbrella-like").

The image so happens was taken smack at the solar noon, hence the downward shadows overtake below the trees. Perfect day, perfect conditions. Right time right place type of deal.

For me the shot has always resembled that old Windows background.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

Not a real bridge, but made from parts of an old one that was replaced. Fillmore, Calif. (DA18-55)

I drive through that bridge on occasion.

[djb47]

Fall Mum

K-5/DA 18-55 II

[PenPusher]

I bought my K200D + DA18-55 AL II and DA 50-200 in 2008, there's a pretty strong storm outside and finally I've made a start on properly filing all my shots for the last 10 years.

At this stage of course I've got a lot more lenses than the original kit lenses, including the DA21, 40 and 70, but I must say that, looking back, I'm pretty impressed with the DA18-55 and with its successor, bought second hand, and solely to cope with our damp climate, the DA18-55WR.

I have been wondering for some time about acquiring the DA* 16-50 mostly for the 16mm end and it's F2.8 aperture, not so much for its SDM motor, but I've pretty much decided that I'm going to stick with the DA18-55. The screw drive is reliable, I don't find it that noisy and I've never got near enough to wildlife for it to startle them, I can manage that myself. How ever I managed it I seem to have got some pretty good shots, by my standards, from both versions of the 18-55 from time to time.

I'm afraid I'm not as impressed with the DA50-200, it just does not always have the "bite" of the DA18-55 so the problem is now choosing between the DA55-300WR which will work on all cameras or the new PLM version which is only going to work on my recently acquired K70. I know the PLM version is supposed to be optically better but is it really noticeable, decisions, decisions.

At one point I did have a K7 but I found, to my eyes, that its CMOS sensor was not as good as the CCD one on the K200D and not really usable above ISO400, I find the K70's sensor is excellent, but I still like that on the K200D.

[UncleVanya]

I bought my K200D + DA18-55 AL II and DA 50-200 in 2008, there's a pretty strong storm outside and finally I've made a start on properly filing all my shots for the last 10 years.

I bought the K100D Super with the 18-55 & 50-200 when I jumped into the dslr game. I agree that the 50-200 wasn't as good as the 18-55 (even the gen1) but that reach sure helped at times and my it is a light small lens.

...the problem is now choosing between the DA55-300WR which will work on all cameras or the new PLM version which is only going to work on my recently acquired K70. I know the PLM version is supposed to be optically better but is it really noticeable, decisions, decisions.

My impression from others is that optically there's little difference and the older lens might be slightly better but most find all versions good, not worth quibbling over optically. However the PLM is much faster focusing. By an older DAL or DA and try it. If you need the better focus speed, you could keep it at the cost it goes for (to pair with the older body).

[PenPusher]

I bought the K100D Super with the 18-55 & 50-200 when I jumped into the dslr game. I agree that the 50-200 wasn't as good as the 18-55 (even the gen1) but that reach sure helped at times and my it is a light small lens.



My impression from others is that optically there's little difference and the older lens might be slightly better but most find all versions good, not worth quibbling over optically. However the PLM is much faster focusing. By an older DAL or DA and try it. If you need the better focus speed, you could keep it at the cost it goes for (to pair with the older body).

Thank you.

I've been looking at e-bay, naturally when you don't want a particular lens there's always a good selection available, when you really know what lens you want the supply dries up magically.

I have just been thinking how valuable a light WR lens is, I remember reading some time ago, in another forum, that paying for a WR lens was not necessary because nobody is going to go out in the rain.

I think that's a bit of a false argument because there are a number of occasions when you have no choice, take Jonathan Mac for instance a few pages back, caught in continuous rain in Japan on what appears to be a once off trip where the DA18-55 became invaluable in the circumstances. Where I live you can have all four seasons in a day, you might not intentionally go out in the rain but you can easily be caught out. Then again there is mile upon mile of beautiful beaches just down the road for me all full of lovely yellow sand being blown by the wind and just dying to get into the works.

I notice that the non WR 55-300's are a good bit cheaper than the WR versions but I think the extra for WR is worth it. I'm still not convinced that these super fast built in motor drives are really necessary, mainly because they are something else to go wrong and the older I get the less I like the weight.

[UncleVanya]

Thank you.

I've been looking at e-bay, naturally when you don't want a particular lens there's always a good selection available, when you really know what lens you want the supply dries up magically.

I have just been thinking how valuable a light WR lens is, I remember reading some time ago, in another forum, that paying for a WR lens was not necessary because nobody is going to go out in the rain.

I think that's a bit of a false argument because there are a number of occasions when you have no choice, take Jonathan Mac for instance a few pages back, caught in continuous rain in Japan on what appears to be a once off trip where the DA18-55 became invaluable in the circumstances. Where I live you can have all four seasons in a day, you might not intentionally go out in the rain but you can easily be caught out. Then again there is mile upon mile of beautiful beaches just down the road for me all full of lovely yellow sand being blown by the wind and just dying to get into the works.

I notice that the non WR 55-300's are a good bit cheaper than the WR versions but I think the extra for WR is worth it. I'm still not convinced that these super fast built in motor drives are really necessary, mainly because they are something else to go wrong and the older I get the less I like the weight.

Most of that makes sense. Also the WR version of the screw drive DA 55-300 is offered in HD coating which you might prefer over smc. Be wary and clean off the mount and o-ring to maintain your WR. Also be aware that lensrentals.com suggests that WR in all brands is over stated and that WR cameras aren't as tight as the manufacturers claims would indicate.

BTW the PLM Lens is lighter than the HD DA WR screw drive version by 8 grams. So don't sweat the weight, this is not a factor with the various versions of this lens. The motor could fail, the electronic aperture can't be controlled by older bodies, so the point that screw drive versions are less complex still has some utility.

[Jonathan Mac]

I remember reading some time ago, in another forum, that paying for a WR lens was not necessary because nobody is going to go out in the rain.

I think that's a bit of a false argument because there are a number of occasions when you have no choice, take Jonathan Mac for instance a few pages back, caught in continuous rain in Japan on what appears to be a once off trip where the DA18-55 became invaluable in the circumstances. Where I live you can have all four seasons in a day, you might not intentionally go out in the rain but you can easily be caught out. Then again there is mile upon mile of beautiful beaches just down the road for me all full of lovely yellow sand being blown by the wind and just dying to get into the works.

I notice that the non WR 55-300's are a good bit cheaper than the WR versions but I think the extra for WR is worth it. I'm still not convinced that these super fast built in motor drives are really necessary, mainly because they are something else to go wrong and the older I get the less I like the weight.

I really can't see myself flying for 14 hours to Japan on a trip that I've been dreaming about for years and then sitting indoors all day because it rained a bit...

WR is important if you travel or live in a climate which is either damp or dusty. It was one of the deciding factors for me going with Pentax when I bought my first DLSR.

I should mention that for much of the rainy days in Japan I had the camera and lens covered with a plastic shopping bag (the time when we were walking, not shooting). Even then, the gear was exposed to a considerable amount of rain and survived without a hitch. A lesser camera and lens would have had a much higher chance of experiencing problems.

[MrB1]

I'm still not convinced that these super fast built in motor drives are really necessary, mainly because they are something else to go wrong and the older I get the less I like the weight.

The older I get, the more I am pleased to rely on autofocus, and the PLM 55-300 seems to be both almost instant and more accurate compared with the earlier versions. This lens is not heavier than the previous models and it is more compact for carrying around and packing in the bag. I'm hoping that the PLM will prove to be of comparable reliability as the DC motor of the 18-135.

Philip

[paulh]

DA18-55 on K10D:

[ivanvernon]

Thank you.

I've been looking at e-bay, naturally when you don't want a particular lens there's always a good selection available, when you really know what lens you want the supply dries up magically.

I have just been thinking how valuable a light WR lens is, I remember reading some time ago, in another forum, that paying for a WR lens was not necessary because nobody is going to go out in the rain.

I think that's a bit of a false argument because there are a number of occasions when you have no choice, take Jonathan Mac for instance a few pages back, caught in continuous rain in Japan on what appears to be a once off trip where the DA18-55 became invaluable in the circumstances. Where I live you can have all four seasons in a day, you might not intentionally go out in the rain but you can easily be caught out. Then again there is mile upon mile of beautiful beaches just down the road for me all full of lovely yellow sand being blown by the wind and just dying to get into the works.

I notice that the non WR 55-300's are a good bit cheaper than the WR versions but I think the extra for WR is worth it. I'm still not convinced that these super fast built in motor drives are really necessary, mainly because they are something else to go wrong and the older I get the less I like the weight.

Actually, I like wandering around in our woods and flower gardens with WR lenses including the 645Z with the 90mm and 55mm which are actually labelled AW instead of WR.

[PenPusher]

The first three cameras I bought, a Werra 1 (the green body one and it still works), an Exa 500 ( the mirror slap really caught peoples attention) and a Yashica Reflex J5 (m42 mount it was cheaper than an m42 Pentax at the time), all had "Ever Ready Leather Cases" all designed to cover the 50mm lens the cameras were supplied with, I suppose you could say that it was the WR of the time. When I bought the Yashica which cost about £75 then I was earning around £5 a week so the chances of getting a lens other than the standard 50 were practically zero, so from the manufacturers point of view a 50mm ER case was a safe WR bet.

Like MrB1 above I am starting to find that autofocus is becoming more of a necessity but I prefer the nice small DA Ltd's with their more or less bullet proof screw drives to the newer souped up heavy motorised all singing all dancing lenses that seem to be necessary to keep up with the opposition, photography should be a joy not a day long exercise in weight lifting.

I like Jonathan Mac's version of belt and braces camera protection, after more than 50 years in the construction business you can be sure that if something can go wrong, it will.

[MrB1]

Like MrB1 above I am starting to find that autofocus is becoming more of a necessity but I prefer the nice small DA Ltd's with their more or less bullet proof screw drives to the newer souped up heavy motorised all singing all dancing lenses that seem to be necessary to keep up with the opposition, photography should be a joy not a day long exercise in weight lifting.

Just to clarify, I completely agree with you regarding the Limited lenses and I have no intention or desire to carry any monster like the new 50mm all day long, however good it is reported to be. However, they cover a fairly close range, so if the reach of a 300mm is required, it is going to be much bigger and heavier than the Limiteds. in the post above, I was commenting about the PLM version of the 55-300, which is relatively compact, and in which the focus motor adds little to the mass compared with other available 300mm lenses and yet adds greatly to the usability and the potential for successful shots.

Philip

[ivanvernon]

Our first frost of the season in northeast Ohio.