[NikoGkotsis]

The more I think about this the more it inflates my dilemma... now I am stuck between the 20-40 and the 16-85. and my question now is.... which lens can produce sharp portraits and product photography images. I am willing to adapt and master each one of those lens. If I get the 20-40 I am willing to adapt with the 40mm for the close-ups BUT I worry for the 16-85 being too heavy for daily carriage. Also will I be comfortable carrying the 16-85 on my shoulder all day in a street-photography day or is is the 20-40 more ideal.

I know I placed too many questions but I really really don't know what to choose any more hahahah!

[Ronald Oakes]

A 55-300 PLM would be the perfect companion to the 16-85.

Amen ! Exactly what I just did and couldn't be happier ...

---------- Post added 12-19-20 at 21:27 ----------

The more I think about this the more it inflates my dilemma... now I am stuck between the 20-40 and the 16-85. and my question now is.... which lens can produce sharp portraits and product photography images. I am willing to adapt and master each one of those lens. If I get the 20-40 I am willing to adapt with the 40mm for the close-ups BUT I worry for the 16-85 being too heavy for daily carriage. Also will I be comfortable carrying the 16-85 on my shoulder all day in a street-photography day or is is the 20-40 more ideal.

I know I placed too many questions but I really really don't know what to choose any more hahahah!

For portraits you already have 2 capable 50mm lenses !
I have the HD DA 20-40 Limited , and just aquired the 16-85.
There is a large size difference and I prefer the 20-40 most of the time to carry except when I need wider than 20mm....everything is a trade off.
For some reason I think you might be happier overall with the 20-40 limited.
You will end up with a headache for 5 days from thinking to hard...anyway I did

[Des]

my question now is.... which lens can produce sharp portraits and product photography images.

They probably both can, but if sharpness is the defining quality the DA 16-85 may be the better choice.

Also will I be comfortable carrying the 16-85 on my shoulder all day in a street-photography day or is is the 20-40 more ideal.

For this, I think the DA 20-40 would be the better choice.
So you have to work out which matters more to you.

like I mentioned previously I do product photography as well as portraits so I need something that can fit both. Now, I already have a few subject-specific APS-C lens but none are HD. That element is my "new" requirement since I just bought the KP, I'd like that extra clarity that my current variety of lens can provide.

I thought at first, you were particularly looking for a wide-angle lens, but with the stuff you're talking about doing, I'd suggest the 100mm macro. It's a superb full-frame lens for image quality, and will work really well for everything between microscopic close-ups to landscapes. (Pentax-D SMC FA 100mm f/2.8 WR Macro Lens; model 21530.)

@BigMackCam and @Jatrax both touched on the differences between full frame and APS-C lenses, but just to be clear, it's not about focal-length, it's about field of view. The same lens will give you a narrower field of view on an APS-C sensor, so the 100mm I'm recommending will give you a field of view that would be the same as you'd get with a 153mm lens on a full frame camera. That lens will give you more room between you and your portrait subjects, and the ability to get in much closer with products. I think there are a couple of used ones available right now on the "marketplace" section of this website.


If you do want a wide angle zoom, I'm thinking the HD Pentax-D FA 15-30mm F2.8 ED SDM WR, another full-frame lens, will give you a field of view equivalent to the use of a 25-49mm on a full-frame sensor. And, unless you're worried about the SDM crapping out, it's a terrific lens as well.

I like full frame lenses on APS-C, myself, it's like having two whole different sets of lenses without taking up too much space or costing too much money. And, if you ever want to move to full frame from the KP, they'll still be useful.


There are people who think that the pixels on the sensor somehow control the light coming into the lens, such that you're getting fewer photons per square centimeter of sensor surface, not understanding that the light coming into the lens is continuous, not discrete, so between every two photons, there's another (yup, it's turtles, all the way down). You don't lose any image quality using a full frame lens on an APS-C camera.

Moreover, it bothers some folks that you're "losing" all that light around the edges of the sensor which a full frame lens produces, as if it would be better to concentrate all that light onto the surface of the APS-C sensor, but I think that's 1) a silly emotional and nonrational concern; 2) you would actually get a reduction of image quality by squashing all that same light into a smaller space (i.e., by using an APS-C lens), because the pixels are discrete, not continuous; and 3) what difference could the "loss" of light around the edges possibly make, anyway? Most lenses are sharper in the center of the image circle, anyway, so what harm is there in losing the less distinct parts of the image?

The only reason to be concerned about the "crop factor" is that you have to mentally adjust when doing composition, setting up your shot, so that you compensate for the fact that you're getting a much tighter field of view with an APS-C camera (regardless of the focal length of the lens or the diameter of the circle it makes on the focal plane).

[robgski]

feel that Id prefer to "master" the 16-85 or even a fixed lens than invest in a FF right now

Learning how well a particular lens works with a particular camera, in all circumstances, will yield better results.

This is why the Single In Challenge can be very beneficial, participants agree to use the same lens and camera for one month, taking and posting at least one image a day with that combination. After 30 days, one really gets a feel for the combo.

Since most Pentaxians involved in SIC freely offer critiques and advice, it's very helpful in developing one's skills with that combo as well.

[NikoGkotsis]

Hey everyone! I would like to thank you ALL! for your guidance and help and all y'alls opinions!
I have to inform you that I just bought the 20-40 Limited last night therefore no more dilemmas! hahah! I cannot wait to master this beautiful glass and I shall post my thoughts and review as soon as I get it!
again thank you all!!!!

[Oktyabr]

Hey everyone! I would like to thank you ALL! for your guidance and help and all y'alls opinions!
I have to inform you that I just bought the 20-40 Limited last night therefore no more dilemmas! hahah! I cannot wait to master this beautiful glass and I shall post my thoughts and review as soon as I get it!
again thank you all!!!!

I don't think you will regret it. For daily carry, especially on the KP, it's a truly wonderful lens. Sharp, compact, light, and weather resistant. In case you start second guessing yourself, I've owned most of the glass listed in this thread at one time or another. If you want to go really wide, the 15mm F4 Limited won't take up much space in your bag. If you want to go really long, the 55-300 PLM will compliment the 20-40 nicely. I once owned the 16-85 AND the 18-135 at the same time. I might have gotten a few more "keepers" on a daily outing with the 16-85 but the difference in weight (and price) between these two lenses is not insignificant! I ended up selling the 16-85 and kept the 18-135, despite it producing slightly less IQ (arguably), just in case I ever leave the house without having a specific sort of photography in mind, and don't want to risk changing lenses in the elements. I feel it truly is a great "swiss army knife" lens, for single lens general carry. That said, I know most of my shots are in the range of the 20-40 and I feel it can quite adequately allow me to leave the 21 LTD, 35 LTD and the 40 LTD at home, especially since it's weather resistant and the others are not.

[jgnfld]

A 55-300 PLM would be IS the perfect companion to the 16-85.

FIFY!

Oddly, sometimes on super-bright days in the summer on the water I find the 16-85 almost TOO sharp. Birds, in particular, come off almost looking like mounted museum specimens. For those, I actually desharpen a tiny bit bit over default.

[ramseybuckeye]

Hey everyone! I would like to thank you ALL! for your guidance and help and all y'alls opinions!
I have to inform you that I just bought the 20-40 Limited last night therefore no more dilemmas! hahah! I cannot wait to master this beautiful glass and I shall post my thoughts and review as soon as I get it!
again thank you all!!!!

Congratulations, I predict that you will love the lens/camera combo, I know I do.