What lenses do you use on your KP?

edri · 10-01-2019, 08:33 AM

I also have 18-135mm, it is the workhorse for travel, but the experience with 20-40mm is more pleasant. I bought it from BF with a significant discount.

gatorguy · 10-01-2019, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by edri

I also have 18-135mm, it is the workhorse for travel, but the experience with 20-40mm is more pleasant. I bought it from BF with a significant discount.

I've questioned my choice of the 12-24 over the 20-40 a few times. It's not a range I shoot all that often anyway and my thought was I already had the Sigma 17-50. Still, some of the 20-40 images I see posted here are darn nice. The 12-24 has captured a few good images for me in the short time I've had it but nothing yet that's knocked my socks off.

**MiguelATF** · 10-01-2019, 09:17 PM

Initially, my only lens - and hence my 'walkaround' - was the DA 21 Ltd.
Then it was joined by the DA 40 - which pretty much replaced the DA21 which is saying quite a lot since the 21 is a remarkable lens. But the tiny dimensions of the DA40 pancake, its ultra sharpness, and its utility for general interior available-light shooting - made it a natural.
On occasion I use the 10-17 fisheye zoom which is such a cool lens but much bulkier than the tiny prime limiteds.
And recently I gave in and got one more tiny Ltd lens, the DA 70, which is in the rotation now.
The primes definitely get the most use however. In this order: DA40, DA21, DA70
How can you go wrong?

edri · 10-01-2019, 09:26 PM

I used the most 20-40 and 10-17 in this year's summer vacation in the mountains. Occasionally 40mm prime. I also had 70mm in my bag.

**bkpix** · 10-02-2019, 03:50 PM - **1 Like**

I keep hoping for a 16-50 PLM. Perfect walkaround kit with the 55-300.

edri · 10-02-2019, 06:02 PM

Yes, it would be a good combination for travelers, but according to the speed at which Rich / Pentax is moving we have much more to expect.

**Ranchwagon** · 10-04-2019, 12:04 PM

I use my 16-85 for car shows, just got the 55-300 PLM that will be used mostly for wildlife, and then the 18-135 for general stuff and want the lighter/compact package. Also have the DA 35 2.4 and DA 50 1.8, and some A and M lenses that are fun to play with.

**Mbaez** · 10-07-2019, 07:15 AM

In my last vacation I used the old 10-17, the 16-85, and the 55-300, plus a couple of fat primes (Sigma 30 1.4 Art, and the Pentax 55 1.4)

Vmax911 · 10-07-2019, 07:35 AM

Originally posted by Ranchwagon

I use my 16-85 for car shows, just got the 55-300 PLM that will be used mostly for wildlife, and then the 18-135 for general stuff and want the lighter/compact package. Also have the DA 35 2.4 and DA 50 1.8, and some A and M lenses that are fun to play with.

How does the 18-135 compare to the 16-85 on the KP? I have the 18-135 and have considered the 16-85, though it is hard to justify since the range is similar, especially when paired with a 55-300.

**Mbaez** · 10-07-2019, 09:02 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Vmax911

How does the 18-135 compare to the 16-85 on the KP? I have the 18-135 and have considered the 16-85, though it is hard to justify since the range is similar, especially when paired with a 55-300.

I know you didn't ask me but I had the 18-135 and sold it, it was the softest of my zooms. There's no comparison in sharpness between it and the 16-85, it has good colors and contrast but that's it. You are better off pairing your 55-300 with the 16-85, and those 2 extra mm in the wide end make a difference.

Vmax911 · 10-07-2019, 09:35 AM

Thanks for the input, I've heard that the 16-85 is a notch higher in IQ. Sound like you would definitely agree with that.

edri · 10-07-2019, 11:30 AM

The 18-135 advantage is portability. 16-85 is a bulky lens, not too suitable for hiking, traveling.

Vmax911 · 10-07-2019, 07:17 PM

Originally posted by edri

The 18-135 advantage is portability. 16-85 is a bulky lens, not too suitable for hiking, traveling.

Good point. Looks like the 16-85 is even bigger than the 55-300 PLM, but bet they would make an awesome pair!

**Ranchwagon** · 10-07-2019, 08:53 PM

Originally posted by Vmax911

Good point. Looks like the 16-85 is even bigger than the 55-300 PLM, but bet they would make an awesome pair!

I agree with Mbaez and edri.

**K2 to K50** · 10-07-2019, 09:37 PM

Originally posted by Vmax911

Good point. Looks like the 16-85 is even bigger than the 55-300 PLM, but bet they would make an awesome pair!

Yes, the front of the 16-85mm is BIG - filter size is 72mm, compared to 58mm for the 55-300mm. I did not realise this when I finally bought my first kit of brand new digital camera and lens.

BUT -

I had done a fair bit of reading, and came to the conclusion that for both sharpness, and to cover a decent and overlapping focal range, I wanted the 55-300mm PLM, and the 16-85mm. And the 100mm 2.8 Macro for - well, obviously, close-ups and macros.

They - and my nice new KP - fit into my LowePro backpack. I am 75 yrs old, and have wandered around with this kit for up to 3-5 hrs at a stretch, and I am no incredible hulk - quite the opposite. I consider myself a "delicate little runt".

If I had been forced to choose only two lenses, even now, in hindsight and with experience of them all, I would keep the 55-300mm, and the 16-85mm, which are both capable of decent close-ups, macros.

I recently took a few shots of my son and daughter-in-law's new Merc with the 16-85mm, with and without them in the shot. They, and I, were very pleased with the results. Also pleased with some landscapes shots taken with the 16-85mm. It's focal range gives a good range of framing choices in landscape photography.

The second shot is no landscape photography competition winner, but shows the 16-85mm at 16mm. The car shot was taken at 35mm

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Your vehicle: what do you have, why do you like it, and what do you not like?	Auzzie-Phoenix	General Talk	2980	6 Days Ago 05:06 PM
KP vs K-70 - to KP or not to KP, that is the question	OldChE	Pentax DSLR Discussion	28	11-02-2019 05:29 AM
Which lenses do you use for portraits or do you recommend?	Kaisas	Pentax Full Frame	91	03-08-2019 04:12 PM
Do you use only manual focus lenses?Do a lot of folks use only manual lenses?	heralu	Pentax DSLR Discussion	12	01-05-2011 04:06 PM
Do you name your lenses like you name your kids????..I do	jackbullet	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	40	08-03-2009 05:28 PM

10-01-2019, 08:33 AM	#46
edri Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: walking in the air Posts: 1,315	I also have 18-135mm, it is the workhorse for travel, but the experience with 20-40mm is more pleasant. I bought it from BF with a significant discount.

10-01-2019, 10:28 AM	#47
gatorguy Moderator Join Date: Feb 2015 Location: Central Florida Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,092	Originally posted by edri I also have 18-135mm, it is the workhorse for travel, but the experience with 20-40mm is more pleasant. I bought it from BF with a significant discount. I've questioned my choice of the 12-24 over the 20-40 a few times. It's not a range I shoot all that often anyway and my thought was I already had the Sigma 17-50. Still, some of the 20-40 images I see posted here are darn nice. The 12-24 has captured a few good images for me in the short time I've had it but nothing yet that's knocked my socks off.

10-01-2019, 09:17 PM	#48
MiguelATF Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Somewhere in Southern Oregon Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 464	Initially, my only lens - and hence my 'walkaround' - was the DA 21 Ltd. Then it was joined by the DA 40 - which pretty much replaced the DA21 which is saying quite a lot since the 21 is a remarkable lens. But the tiny dimensions of the DA40 pancake, its ultra sharpness, and its utility for general interior available-light shooting - made it a natural. On occasion I use the 10-17 fisheye zoom which is such a cool lens but much bulkier than the tiny prime limiteds. And recently I gave in and got one more tiny Ltd lens, the DA 70, which is in the rotation now. The primes definitely get the most use however. In this order: DA40, DA21, DA70 How can you go wrong?

10-01-2019, 09:26 PM	#49
edri Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: walking in the air Posts: 1,315	I used the most 20-40 and 10-17 in this year's summer vacation in the mountains. Occasionally 40mm prime. I also had 70mm in my bag.

10-02-2019, 03:50 PM - 1 Like	#50
bkpix Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Creswell, Oregon Photos: Albums Posts: 568 Original Poster	I keep hoping for a 16-50 PLM. Perfect walkaround kit with the 55-300.

10-02-2019, 06:02 PM	#51
edri Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: walking in the air Posts: 1,315	Yes, it would be a good combination for travelers, but according to the speed at which Rich / Pentax is moving we have much more to expect.

10-04-2019, 12:04 PM	#52
Ranchwagon Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Kansas Posts: 34	I use my 16-85 for car shows, just got the 55-300 PLM that will be used mostly for wildlife, and then the 18-135 for general stuff and want the lighter/compact package. Also have the DA 35 2.4 and DA 50 1.8, and some A and M lenses that are fun to play with.

10-07-2019, 07:15 AM	#53
Mbaez Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2018 Location: NY Photos: Albums Posts: 3,774	In my last vacation I used the old 10-17, the 16-85, and the 55-300, plus a couple of fat primes (Sigma 30 1.4 Art, and the Pentax 55 1.4)

10-07-2019, 07:35 AM	#54
Vmax911 Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: ABQ Photos: Gallery Posts: 826	Originally posted by Ranchwagon I use my 16-85 for car shows, just got the 55-300 PLM that will be used mostly for wildlife, and then the 18-135 for general stuff and want the lighter/compact package. Also have the DA 35 2.4 and DA 50 1.8, and some A and M lenses that are fun to play with. How does the 18-135 compare to the 16-85 on the KP? I have the 18-135 and have considered the 16-85, though it is hard to justify since the range is similar, especially when paired with a 55-300.

10-07-2019, 09:02 AM - 1 Like	#55
Mbaez Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2018 Location: NY Photos: Albums Posts: 3,774	Originally posted by Vmax911 How does the 18-135 compare to the 16-85 on the KP? I have the 18-135 and have considered the 16-85, though it is hard to justify since the range is similar, especially when paired with a 55-300. I know you didn't ask me but I had the 18-135 and sold it, it was the softest of my zooms. There's no comparison in sharpness between it and the 16-85, it has good colors and contrast but that's it. You are better off pairing your 55-300 with the 16-85, and those 2 extra mm in the wide end make a difference.

10-07-2019, 09:35 AM	#56
Vmax911 Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: ABQ Photos: Gallery Posts: 826	Thanks for the input, I've heard that the 16-85 is a notch higher in IQ. Sound like you would definitely agree with that.

10-07-2019, 11:30 AM	#57
edri Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: walking in the air Posts: 1,315	The 18-135 advantage is portability. 16-85 is a bulky lens, not too suitable for hiking, traveling.

10-07-2019, 07:17 PM	#58
Vmax911 Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: ABQ Photos: Gallery Posts: 826	Originally posted by edri The 18-135 advantage is portability. 16-85 is a bulky lens, not too suitable for hiking, traveling. Good point. Looks like the 16-85 is even bigger than the 55-300 PLM, but bet they would make an awesome pair!

10-07-2019, 08:53 PM	#59
Ranchwagon Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Kansas Posts: 34	Originally posted by Vmax911 Good point. Looks like the 16-85 is even bigger than the 55-300 PLM, but bet they would make an awesome pair! I agree with Mbaez and edri.