Perfect lens suite?

**Des** · 01-16-2018, 01:37 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by whafrog

Great shots, thanks for the examples!

Pleasure. I should add that none of the options mentioned would make your 55-300 redundant (except 55-300 PLM, if your current one is a screw-driven version) - it covers a very useful range and it's an easy-to-carry lens.

For completeness I should mention one more option some people have used: 200mm f2.8 lens (e.g. DA*200 f2.8) with 2x TC or with stacked TCs. @Normhead has used this option (for a compact carry kit) very successfully. However it wouldn't be WR unless you used two of the DA 1.4x converters - and by then there would be no saving over a DA*300 + TC.

janelgreo · 02-09-2018, 03:52 PM

I don't know if it is perfect since I haven't had much time to use it but this is what I have:

Pentax 16-45mm
Pentax 50mm f1.8 Prime
Pentax 55-300 PLM

Covers all of my ranges except for 45-50 and 50-55 LOL. Can't wait to get more time with each, I bought the 50mm with the body (didn't get the kit) and it is an AMAZING lens. Have had so many great portrait photos and regular walk around shots.

So excited to start using the 16-45, got it a few weeks ago and the 55-300 PLM which I received a couple days ago.

**TER-OR** · 02-20-2018, 11:22 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by whafrog

I'm pondering upgrading my current lenses. I have a K-70 with the following Pentax lenses: 16-45mm, and 55-300mm. This gives good coverage, but I'm missing a few things. The main thing is a macro lens: although the 16-45 can focus down to a few inches, it's not very clear...definitely fuzzy at f4, reasonable at f5.6, but it doesn't get close enough for what I want to get pictures of. I actually get better "close up" results from the 55-300mm at a couple meters away. I'm tempted by the 100mm FA lens, but has anyone had experience with this lens on an APS-C sensor? Are there any good 3rd party macro lenses? Weather sealing is a "must-have"...

The other missing thing is a good super-telephoto. 300mm is okay for large birds, but for small birds in the wild it's just not working for me. I've been tempted by the 150-450, but I'm not sure it's going to make that much of a difference, plus I'm not crazy about the size (for this I'm considering M4/3 as an option).

Lastly, my current lenses are "slow"...f4 at best. But current lenses are decent, but the 16-45 has fairly severe chromatic aberration...a recent high contrast image of "trees against the sky" was practically purple throughout. I'm very much considering upgrading everything, as f2.8, or even a constant f4 would be preferable.

Basically I'm after a set of high quality lenses that offer the FF equivalent of 24-600 + macro. Any opinions/experience with the current Pentax lens lineup, that is weather sealed, that would fit the bill?

I use the FA100 f2.8 macro and like it a lot. Have a look at my Flickr link in my signature. It does take practice, though, so don't expect immediate miracles.
Other thoughts:

Pancakes are fun and fantastic quality. I have the 21mm and 40mm. The 21 is my favorite non-macro lens. Do keep them in mind and maybe put a marketplace watch-word to get a feel for used pricing. Both are well-built, may as well buy used.

The 18-135 and 55-300 WR lenses serve me well enough right now, but I'd like better at the long end. This year I may buy the DA300.

whafrog · 03-10-2018, 11:31 AM - **1 Like**

This is a bit of a rambling post, but in the end I recommitted to Pentax for the next few years. Even though they aren't pumping out models and lenses at a furious rate like Canikon, what they do have is quality stuff. And even if they went belly-up tomorrow, I'd still get years of use out of what I am buying.

So after hedging and waffling for a few months, I finally got a chance to try out an OMD EM-10 iii and was ... underwhelmed. There were some appealing things about the m4/3 form factor: size, AF was super quick and quiet, etc., and I look forward to the day I can transition with confidence. But I didn't like the DOF extension (even at f2.8 distant objects were only fuzzy around the edges), and even my old K-30 was better at ISO 800...with the K-70 it is no contest. So for now I can accept the weight and bulk of the middle ground world of APS-C. If the successor to the K3-ii is good (especially improved AF), then I'll be using Pentax gear for the next decade at least, or until m4/3 IQ rises to the level of the K-70. I have zero need for all the bells and whistles of the other cameras, video especially, and while the AF isn't on par with the competition, it's good enough for now.

The nice thing about waffling for months is you get to save money for the transition. So, taking the advice you all presented, yesterday I was able to order the 16-50 f2.8, 100macro, 60-250 f4, and a 1.4 teleconverter. I've read mixed reviews about using the teleconverter with the 60-250, but I'm going to give it a try. If it works, then it's an improvement over what I have now (FF equivalent 525 vs 450), and if it doesn't then I'll spring for the 300 f4. I'm super excited about it, but I have to wait a couple weeks for it to ship as the market here is too small for anybody to stock Pentax gear.

I'm like a kid waiting for Christmas!

whafrog · 03-18-2018, 08:23 PM

If anyone is interested: the first lens arrived, the 16-50 f2.8. Unbelievable quality, I'm absolutely thrilled so far. Focus is quick and almost inaudible. IQ far surpasses my previous 16-45 f4 lens, even wide open it's sharper than anything the 16-45 ever produced. I can even crop into detail to get almost macro-like results. I'm just blown away. If anyone is on the fence between these lenses, jump over!

Looking forward to the real macro!

**Des** · 03-18-2018, 09:35 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by whafrog

So, taking the advice you all presented, yesterday I was able to order the 16-50 f2.8, 100macro, 60-250 f4, and a 1.4 teleconverter.

The makings of a great kit.

Originally posted by whafrog

I've read mixed reviews about using the teleconverter with the 60-250, but I'm going to give it a try. If it works, then it's an improvement over what I have now (FF equivalent 525 vs 450), and if it doesn't then I'll spring for the 300 f4.

Have a look at what @Normhead says about the 60-250 + TC. Seems to work pretty well. Only limitation might be that the focus breathing on the 60-250 means significantly less effective reach than 250mm + 1.4x TC might suggest (that is, 350mm equivalent), and maybe less than a 300 prime.

Originally posted by whafrog

If anyone is interested: the first lens arrived, the 16-50 f2.8. Unbelievable quality, I'm absolutely thrilled so far. Focus is quick and almost inaudible. IQ far surpasses my previous 16-45 f4 lens, even wide open it's sharper than anything the 16-45 ever produced. I can even crop into detail to get almost macro-like results. I'm just blown away. If anyone is on the fence between these lenses, jump over!

Great to hear it. Of course this means we have to see some pix. :-)

biz-engineer · 03-18-2018, 10:36 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by jddwoods

The DA*300 and the TC is the most cost effective and weight effective way to get the highest quality 420 mm

I have compared both DA*300 with TC and DFA150-450. At the same aperture, if you nail focus with the DA*300 with TC it renders better pictures then DFA150-450, and DA300+TC is relatively portable. The difficulty is to nail focus with the DA300. Focus repeatability is much much better with the DFA150-450 and that make the difference practically.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
wondering about Perfect Photo Suite ...	zman	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	5	07-03-2014 11:43 PM
Perfect Photo Suite 8 system requirements	jv.pentax	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	2	03-15-2014 05:13 AM
Photoshop vs Lightroom w/ Perfect Photo Suite	noahdsnell	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	10	05-16-2013 06:44 AM
Perfect subject with perfect light	codiac2600	Post Your Photos!	13	07-20-2008 06:35 AM

01-16-2018, 01:37 PM - 1 Like	#16
Des Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Victoria Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 6,423	Originally posted by whafrog Great shots, thanks for the examples! Pleasure. I should add that none of the options mentioned would make your 55-300 redundant (except 55-300 PLM, if your current one is a screw-driven version) - it covers a very useful range and it's an easy-to-carry lens. For completeness I should mention one more option some people have used: 200mm f2.8 lens (e.g. DA200 f2.8) with 2x TC or with stacked TCs. @Normhead has used this option (for a compact carry kit) very successfully. However it wouldn't be WR unless you used two of the DA 1.4x converters - and by then there would be no saving over a DA300 + TC.

02-09-2018, 03:52 PM	#17
janelgreo New Member Join Date: Jan 2018 Posts: 15	I don't know if it is perfect since I haven't had much time to use it but this is what I have: Pentax 16-45mm Pentax 50mm f1.8 Prime Pentax 55-300 PLM Covers all of my ranges except for 45-50 and 50-55 LOL. Can't wait to get more time with each, I bought the 50mm with the body (didn't get the kit) and it is an AMAZING lens. Have had so many great portrait photos and regular walk around shots. So excited to start using the 16-45, got it a few weeks ago and the 55-300 PLM which I received a couple days ago.

02-20-2018, 11:22 AM - 1 Like	#18
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	Originally posted by whafrog I'm pondering upgrading my current lenses. I have a K-70 with the following Pentax lenses: 16-45mm, and 55-300mm. This gives good coverage, but I'm missing a few things. The main thing is a macro lens: although the 16-45 can focus down to a few inches, it's not very clear...definitely fuzzy at f4, reasonable at f5.6, but it doesn't get close enough for what I want to get pictures of. I actually get better "close up" results from the 55-300mm at a couple meters away. I'm tempted by the 100mm FA lens, but has anyone had experience with this lens on an APS-C sensor? Are there any good 3rd party macro lenses? Weather sealing is a "must-have"... The other missing thing is a good super-telephoto. 300mm is okay for large birds, but for small birds in the wild it's just not working for me. I've been tempted by the 150-450, but I'm not sure it's going to make that much of a difference, plus I'm not crazy about the size (for this I'm considering M4/3 as an option). Lastly, my current lenses are "slow"...f4 at best. But current lenses are decent, but the 16-45 has fairly severe chromatic aberration...a recent high contrast image of "trees against the sky" was practically purple throughout. I'm very much considering upgrading everything, as f2.8, or even a constant f4 would be preferable. Basically I'm after a set of high quality lenses that offer the FF equivalent of 24-600 + macro. Any opinions/experience with the current Pentax lens lineup, that is weather sealed, that would fit the bill? I use the FA100 f2.8 macro and like it a lot. Have a look at my Flickr link in my signature. It does take practice, though, so don't expect immediate miracles. Other thoughts: Pancakes are fun and fantastic quality. I have the 21mm and 40mm. The 21 is my favorite non-macro lens. Do keep them in mind and maybe put a marketplace watch-word to get a feel for used pricing. Both are well-built, may as well buy used. The 18-135 and 55-300 WR lenses serve me well enough right now, but I'd like better at the long end. This year I may buy the DA300.

03-10-2018, 11:31 AM - 1 Like	#19
whafrog Guest	This is a bit of a rambling post, but in the end I recommitted to Pentax for the next few years. Even though they aren't pumping out models and lenses at a furious rate like Canikon, what they do have is quality stuff. And even if they went belly-up tomorrow, I'd still get years of use out of what I am buying. So after hedging and waffling for a few months, I finally got a chance to try out an OMD EM-10 iii and was ... underwhelmed. There were some appealing things about the m4/3 form factor: size, AF was super quick and quiet, etc., and I look forward to the day I can transition with confidence. But I didn't like the DOF extension (even at f2.8 distant objects were only fuzzy around the edges), and even my old K-30 was better at ISO 800...with the K-70 it is no contest. So for now I can accept the weight and bulk of the middle ground world of APS-C. If the successor to the K3-ii is good (especially improved AF), then I'll be using Pentax gear for the next decade at least, or until m4/3 IQ rises to the level of the K-70. I have zero need for all the bells and whistles of the other cameras, video especially, and while the AF isn't on par with the competition, it's good enough for now. The nice thing about waffling for months is you get to save money for the transition. So, taking the advice you all presented, yesterday I was able to order the 16-50 f2.8, 100macro, 60-250 f4, and a 1.4 teleconverter. I've read mixed reviews about using the teleconverter with the 60-250, but I'm going to give it a try. If it works, then it's an improvement over what I have now (FF equivalent 525 vs 450), and if it doesn't then I'll spring for the 300 f4. I'm super excited about it, but I have to wait a couple weeks for it to ship as the market here is too small for anybody to stock Pentax gear. I'm like a kid waiting for Christmas!

03-18-2018, 08:23 PM	#20
whafrog Guest	If anyone is interested: the first lens arrived, the 16-50 f2.8. Unbelievable quality, I'm absolutely thrilled so far. Focus is quick and almost inaudible. IQ far surpasses my previous 16-45 f4 lens, even wide open it's sharper than anything the 16-45 ever produced. I can even crop into detail to get almost macro-like results. I'm just blown away. If anyone is on the fence between these lenses, jump over! Looking forward to the real macro!

03-18-2018, 09:35 PM - 1 Like	#21
Des Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2014 Location: Victoria Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 6,423	Originally posted by whafrog So, taking the advice you all presented, yesterday I was able to order the 16-50 f2.8, 100macro, 60-250 f4, and a 1.4 teleconverter. The makings of a great kit. Originally posted by whafrog I've read mixed reviews about using the teleconverter with the 60-250, but I'm going to give it a try. If it works, then it's an improvement over what I have now (FF equivalent 525 vs 450), and if it doesn't then I'll spring for the 300 f4. Have a look at what @Normhead says about the 60-250 + TC. Seems to work pretty well. Only limitation might be that the focus breathing on the 60-250 means significantly less effective reach than 250mm + 1.4x TC might suggest (that is, 350mm equivalent), and maybe less than a 300 prime. Originally posted by whafrog If anyone is interested: the first lens arrived, the 16-50 f2.8. Unbelievable quality, I'm absolutely thrilled so far. Focus is quick and almost inaudible. IQ far surpasses my previous 16-45 f4 lens, even wide open it's sharper than anything the 16-45 ever produced. I can even crop into detail to get almost macro-like results. I'm just blown away. If anyone is on the fence between these lenses, jump over! Great to hear it. Of course this means we have to see some pix. :-)

03-18-2018, 10:36 PM - 1 Like	#22
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,231	Originally posted by jddwoods The DA300 and the TC is the most cost effective and weight effective way to get the highest quality 420 mm I have compared both DA300 with TC and DFA150-450. At the same aperture, if you nail focus with the DA*300 with TC it renders better pictures then DFA150-450, and DA300+TC is relatively portable. The difficulty is to nail focus with the DA300. Focus repeatability is much much better with the DFA150-450 and that make the difference practically.