[briannalillian]

I just bought a Pentax K-70. All I have is the 18-55mm kit lens. I've been completely frozen on what lenses to buy. I keep like 5 lenses in my cart and don't pull the trigger. I work as an art director at an agency and run / style shoots, but now I'm learning the technical side. I'd like to use the camera for my hiking + national park trips and then teach myself some studio product photography down the road (don't need lenses for that RN). I bought the astrotracer for astrolandscape photos and I'd love a telephoto for wildlife shots in Yellowstone at the end of the month. Can someone help me choose a solid set? It's so confusing, everyone has different opinions. I have a tight budget too. This is my starter camera. I want to learn and invest in something better down the road. So I can only afford lenses that are under $300-$400. The only one I'm pretty sure about so far is the Pentax HD DA 55-300mm f/4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE Telephoto Zoom Lens.

I've noticed that there are barely any really fast wide angle lenses with the crop sensors.

Someone please help!!!

[gatorguy]

I just bought a Pentax K-70. All I have is the 18-55mm kit lens. I've been completely frozen on what lenses to buy. I keep like 5 lenses in my cart and don't pull the trigger. I work as an art director at an agency and run / style shoots, but now I'm learning the technical side. I'd like to use the camera for my hiking + national park trips and then teach myself some studio product photography down the road (don't need lenses for that RN). I bought the astrotracer for astrolandscape photos and I'd love a telephoto for wildlife shots in Yellowstone at the end of the month. Can someone help me choose a solid set? It's so confusing, everyone has different opinions. I have a tight budget too. This is my starter camera. I want to learn and invest in something better down the road. So I can only afford lenses that are under $300-$400. The only one I'm pretty sure about so far is the Pentax HD DA 55-300mm f/4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE Telephoto Zoom Lens.

I've noticed that there are barely any really fast wide angle lenses with the crop sensors.

Someone please help!!!

My advice:
Add the Pentax 12-24 for wide-angle and landscapes and Pentax 50-135 for "people shots" and you're golden for now. Used for under $800 total for both, perhaps a bit less.

[Kevin B123]

Hello and welcome to the forum
My advice will be to buy very few lenses, but high quality ones from the outset. Your budget seems to be $1500+?
Total up the cost of the PLM as stated, plus HD DA 16-85MM + DA* 11-18MM F2.8, that optimal kit will see you right for many years.

For astro-landscapes, you don't need the astrotracer to track the stars, it will cause issues with the foreground. That's useful more for deep sky IMO. Of course the compass will be useful to orientate to the Milkyway, and if you are using photoshop then you can fix these in post.

There are lots of options of course, incoming now....

[briannalillian]

Wow, thanks for the great responses so far!! So helpful. Would you consider the Rokinon 16mm F/2.0 ED AS UMC CS, Manual Focus Lens for Pentax K APS-C Mount Cameras over some of the wide angle Pentax lenses since it's a bit faster?

I've heard that's the number 1 choice for astro.

I just bought a Pentax K-70. All I have is the 18-55mm kit lens. I've been completely frozen on what lenses to buy. I keep like 5 lenses in my cart and don't pull the trigger. I work as an art director at an agency and run / style shoots, but now I'm learning the technical side. I'd like to use the camera for my hiking + national park trips and then teach myself some studio product photography down the road (don't need lenses for that RN). I bought the astrotracer for astrolandscape photos and I'd love a telephoto for wildlife shots in Yellowstone at the end of the month. Can someone help me choose a solid set? It's so confusing, everyone has different opinions. I have a tight budget too. This is my starter camera. I want to learn and invest in something better down the road. So I can only afford lenses that are under $300-$400. The only one I'm pretty sure about so far is the Pentax HD DA 55-300mm f/4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE Telephoto Zoom Lens.

I've noticed that there are barely any really fast wide angle lenses with the crop sensors.

Someone please help!!!

If this is your starter camera I would not worry about "a really fast wide angle". Why do you think you need it? If I were you I would use the 18-55, because it is actually a very good lens, certainly for a kit-lens. You can even use it as a sort of macro lens. It is a very capable lens that actually delivers what you might expect from a "starter" lens. It complements your forthcoming 55-300 very well.
My advice: buy that 55-300 PLM and in a years time if you really miss a fast wide angle, buy one. With your 18-55 and 55-300 you have a great couple to learn to know your camera and its possibilities and its shortcomings. But also if you really need to buy an expensive wide angle. I would stay away from the 50-135, which is a very expensive lens and it has its issues. A really interesting lens (perhaps in a years time) is the very good 16-85. A bit more wide angle and a really nice overlap with the 55-300.
And not forgetting: there is a lovely cheap Ricoh/Pentax 35mm 2.4, each time I take a picture with it I am amazed about the sharpness and detail. It is a bit plastic, but it has good optics, sometimes called the plastic fantastic. I use it on my K-01, the mirrorless K-mount!

[jgnfld]

55-300 PLM Check

As for other lens, not sure you are considering the best choices.

Depending on your favorite targets consider the 16-85mm as well as the 20-40mm. While ultrawide lenses can be interesting, I personally don't find them interesting for nature shots of landscape anyway. You need to be up close to use them to their best effect IMO. Panos with a higher res lens do fine for landscapes if you really want wide angles and the truth is you often don't need the ultrawide in both the x and y dimensions for landscapes. Astro is a different matter, of course, and the 16mm Rokonin would work fine for that.

Not sure about the Tamron, but I have not been satisfied with my Sigma 17-50mm for landscapes. It just doesn't render any distant vistas in them right. It does fine in human spaces. Now I would have returned it for a new one, but I was more ignorant about such things then. Don't YOU be shy about working to get good copies of whatever lenses you do get.

[briannalillian]

If this is your starter camera I would not worry about "a really fast wide angle". Why do you think you need it? If I were you I would use the 18-55, because it is actually a very good lens, certainly for a kit-lens. You can even use it as a sort of macro lens. It is a very capable lens that actually delivers what you might expect from a "starter" lens. It complements your forthcoming 55-300 very well.
My advice: buy that 55-300 PLM and in a years time if you really miss a fast wide angle, buy one. With your 18-55 and 55-300 you have a great couple to learn to know your camera and its possibilities and its shortcomings. But also if you really need to buy an expensive wide angle. I would stay away from the 50-135, which is a very expensive lens and it has its issues. A really interesting lens (perhaps in a years time) is the very good 16-85. A bit more wide angle and a really nice overlap with the 55-300.

I guess I just thought I needed to be under f/2 for astrolandscapes or milky way photography and I thought I'm limiting myself on range of depth of field with all lenses being above f/3.5

[gatorguy]

FWIW my first advice was based on the OP's comments.
"I work as an art director at an agency and run / style shoots, but now I'm learning the technical side. I'd like to use the camera for my hiking + national park trips and then teach myself some studio product photography down the road"

If the use will purely be for "nature only" then ignore my original lens advice, 12-24 and 50-135. The 50-300 PLM and perhaps a really good macro for flowers, insects, etc like the DFA100WR. Or if you want to serve double duty with the wide-angle side consider Pentax's HD DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited, about $400 new. The older FA50/2.8 macro would be another option to look for. FWIW the wider end is good for flowers/plants but not so much for insects where you want to keep your distance.

IMO that 55-300PLM which might not get enough love (I didn't until I tried it, and it's a great lens) and one of the other three macros is all you need to start out with.

Re: Astrophotography. Find a night sky group in your area to go out in the field with. The stuff electronic telescopes are capable of, even relatively cheap ones, might be more compelling for you, and even if not those guys can work with you on lenses and technique. I did so for a couple of years a decade ago, Saturday nights (and predawn Sundays) twice a month weather permitting and have always been in awe of what some of those guys capture.

[gump]

I have a K-70. The 55-300 plm I have found to be more versatile than I originally thought as i was focusing on distance but it works closer and you can do panos. I have the Rokinon 16mm and it delivers good image quality. I use it for landscapes with a strong foreground. From what I have read the Pentax 15mm is also excellent. I will let others talk about the middle ground. I replaced my 18-55 kit lens with the Tamron 28-105. More options as to length and maybe a tad more quality. I find the 50mm 1.8 to be my go-to if i am serious in that "region." I have found you can have faith in the lens reviews on this site.

[Serkevan]

The Tamron 17-50/2.8 is a lot of lens for the buck, at least it was on the K-7 (which is lower resolution). If you are going to use the astrotracer, f/2.8 should be fast enough (although the Rokinon might have an easier time achieven proper infinity focus).
For the long end, the PLM is *the* best budget option I think. I would skip the primes for now (although both DA "plastic fantastic" lenses are cheap and good)

[bladerunner6]

Getting the PLM will give you a range of 18-300mm, which is pretty good.

The 35mm is an very good lens and a lot of bang for the buck.

You might save some money by buying the older version of the 55-300 either new or used. Also, you might save a few bucks buying the 35mm used but given the low price of the lenses it is not a huge amount of money.

[caliscouser]

55-300 PLM + the 18-55 is good to start with.

Use them a lot. You will then start to understand what you need and what is holding back your photography.


For many years I only owned the 18-55 and I got some of my best photos with that lens because I would tend to experiment more.

[robiles]

There can be only one answer (actually there are 3 versions of it, but same lens), and that is the Da 35mm f2.8 macro limited. Can be had second hand for about 220€ (the smc type, with the green ring, like mine), and up to 550€ for a ne one (the HD kind, with the red ring. also available in silver)

It is lens with flat field of view, sharp from wide open, metal construction with a smooth manual focus (you have to use it to understand), superb rendering and can be used for anything!

I would post some evidence to support my claims, but it seems it is not possible from a smart phone (at least from mine).

I also own the PLM, but it does not get it's use, especialy nowadays. At least you can give it a try, and if it does not work out, you can sell it and get 90% of your money back.

[Apet-Sure]

Welcome to the forum! A couple of random thoughts:

The K-70 has a pretty high ISO capability. To my mind, this makes fast lenses less important unless you really want very shallow depth-of-field. For landscapes you usually want to stop the lens down anyway for deep DOF. I found that on my K10D the images got 'noisy' above ISO 400. On my K-5IIs I could go up to ISO 1600 before the image degraded noticeably. On my KP, I've got auto-ISO set to top out at 6400. Naturally you want to keep the ISO as low as possible for best IQ, but your K-70 will allow you to crank up the ISO 'some' to compensate for slower lenses.

When I first got the K10D I sold my older-generation Pentax 18-55mm and got the much better Sigma 17-70mm DC Macro for about $220. Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC Macro Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database This is a very handy focal length range for a walk-around/hiking lens. Many of the images in my PF albums were taken with it. It's not weather resistant though. I have wanted the Pentax HD DA 16-85mm WR lens for some time. They are over your $400 budget new; maybe you could find a used one?

I've seen many outstanding images posted here on PF that were taken with the 55-300mm. I'd say you can't go wrong there.

[jeallen01]

Welcome to the forum! A couple of random thoughts:

The K-70 has a pretty high ISO capability. To my mind, this makes fast lenses less important unless you really want very shallow depth-of-field. For landscapes you usually want to stop the lens down anyway for deep DOF. I found that on my K10D the images got 'noisy' above ISO 400. On my K-5IIs I could go up to ISO 1600 before the image degraded noticeably. On my KP, I've got auto-ISO set to top out at 6400. Naturally you want to keep the ISO as low as possible for best IQ, but your K-70 will allow you to crank up the ISO 'some' to compensate for slower lenses.

When I first got the K10D I sold my older-generation Pentax 18-55mm and got the much better Sigma 17-70mm DC Macro for about $220. Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5 DC Macro Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database This is a very handy focal length range for a walk-around/hiking lens. Many of the images in my PF albums were taken with it. It's not weather resistant though. I have wanted the Pentax HD DA 16-85mm WR lens for some time. They are over your $400 budget new; maybe you could find a used one?

I've seen many outstanding images posted here on PF that were taken with the 55-300mm. I'd say you can't go wrong there.

Seconded w.r.t the K-70 and the SIgma 17-70 ! - apart from the fact that my 55-300 is the PLM version, and which is "very impressive", and I have a very old screw-drive Sigma 10-20 F4.0-5.6 which is my walk-around lens in streets/buildings with restricted spaces.