[PeterDM]

Hi, I've been using Canon/Fuji but lately I've purchased into Nikon/Pentax - I've been loaded a 50mm 2.8 macro to use on the K3 while I decide on a lens kit - I'd appreciate suggestions for a three lens kit for travel - possibly a zoom, a macro and two primes. Any thoughts?

[Robert Parslow]

Hi Peter,

I have just come back from 5 weeks in Europe/UK. Before i went i was undecided what to take as i didn't want to loose any shot opportunities through swapping lens, plus the fact that weight is a big factor when flying, so i took a bit of advise from a professional who suggested that i get a 22-250mm Sigma. Absolutely magic!! It gave me great pano's quite adequate zoom and had the range to get in real close on foliage. I never regretted once not have a ton of lenses.

Rob

[PeterDM]

Thanks Rob, I'll check out the 22-250mm Sigma.

I'll be travelling to Panama and then later to Paris - expecting to need both long and wide so the Sigma may be a good reach for a general walk-around lens.

[Adam]

Hi, I've been using Canon/Fuji but lately I've purchased into Nikon/Pentax - I've been loaded a 50mm 2.8 macro to use on the K3 while I decide on a lens kit - I'd appreciate suggestions for a three lens kit for travel - possibly a zoom, a macro and two primes. Any thoughts?

18-135mm as a walkaround lens, then add the 77mm limited, 15mm limited, and the 35mm macro and you should be set

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[PeterDM]

Thanks Adam, how does the 35 macro compare to the 100 macro? - does HD mean the lens are a better quality?

[Kerrowdown]

Welcome to the forum, me I'd go for a fast wide prime as a walk around, but then I'm just a bit different with my approach to photography.

[Rondec]

Thanks Adam, how does the 35 macro compare to the 100 macro? - does HD mean the lens are a better quality?

I don't know that the HD makes a lot of difference -- a little more resistant to flare, perhaps, although the DA 35 is more resistant to flare than the DFA 100 macro. Both are decent macro lenses, but the working distance with the 35 is not very conducive to bug photography. Obviously the biggest difference is the focal length -- 100 versus 35 and the question is which focal length works better for you. DA 35 is probably the better walk around lens/all around lens, for what it is worth.

[PeterDM]

I don't know that the HD makes a lot of difference -- a little more resistant to flare, perhaps, although the DA 35 is more resistant to flare than the DFA 100 macro. Both are decent macro lenses, but the working distance with the 35 is not very conducive to bug photography. Obviously the biggest difference is the focal length -- 100 versus 35 and the question is which focal length works better for you. DA 35 is probably the better walk around lens/all around lens, for what it is worth.

Great comments - I discussed them and my needs with my retailer (Jeff at PhotoCreative here in Toronto) - I've just ordered the HD 20-40, HD 35 macro, HD 70 and 60-250 f/4 - this and my K3 should fit in my Temba backpack as carry-on luggage.

When traveling, for city wandering the 20-40, 35 and 70 should fit into my Think Tank shoulder bag, which I bring folded in the checked luggage - for nature I'll use the Temba bag and expect the reach of the 60-250 will be appreciated. (It was hard to decide between the 50-135 f/2.8 and the 60-250 f/4 - the longer reach and a few "highly recommended" reviews pushed me towards the 60-250)

When I think about this kit in Canon/Nikon equipment - it was never a pleasant travel experience.

Thanks everyone for the warm welcome to Pentax Forums.

[Adam]

Thanks Adam, how does the 35 macro compare to the 100 macro? - does HD mean the lens are a better quality?

The 35mm macro is a much wider lens. They're both very sharp, but for macro work I tend to prefer longer lenses as it doesn't require the subject to be as close.

HD vs SMC isn't going to make any different for macro lens.

[Rondec]

Great comments - I discussed them and my needs with my retailer (Jeff at PhotoCreative here in Toronto) - I've just ordered the HD 20-40, HD 35 macro, HD 70 and 60-250 f/4 - this and my K3 should fit in my Temba backpack as carry-on luggage.

When traveling, for city wandering the 20-40, 35 and 70 should fit into my Think Tank shoulder bag, which I bring folded in the checked luggage - for nature I'll use the Temba bag and expect the reach of the 60-250 will be appreciated. (It was hard to decide between the 50-135 f/2.8 and the 60-250 f/4 - the longer reach and a few "highly recommended" reviews pushed me towards the 60-250)

When I think about this kit in Canon/Nikon equipment - it was never a pleasant travel experience.

Thanks everyone for the warm welcome to Pentax Forums.

Sounds like a great starting kit to me! Have fun shooting.

[PeterDM]

The 35mm macro is a much wider lens. They're both very sharp, but for macro work I tend to prefer longer lenses as it doesn't require the subject to be as close.

HD vs SMC isn't going to make any different for macro lens.

Adam - chose the 35 macro for travel - offers a bit more light at the 40 end of the 20-40 - good getting close to larger subjects. The 100 macro is still on my lens roadmap - for smaller subjects or when more working distance is needed - anxious to see if the K3 and these lens will deliver the great expectations I have for it.

[frogoutofwater]

Adam - chose the 35 macro for travel - offers a bit more light at the 40 end of the 20-40 - good getting close to larger subjects. The 100 macro is still on my lens roadmap - for smaller subjects or when more working distance is needed - anxious to see if the K3 and these lens will deliver the great expectations I have for it.

A somewhat less expensive alternative to the Pentax 100mm macro is the Tamron 90mm - also f/2.8 and about $200 cheaper (but a couple of ounces heavier at around 400g). It gets very good reviews, too. I haven't put it through its paces as a macro lens yet, but Mr frogoutofwater and I have used it for portrait-type photography in lower light situations.

PS - I just got the K-3 recently and have been enjoying learning how to get the most out of it.

[RobG]

Hi, I've been using Canon/Fuji but lately I've purchased into Nikon/Pentax - I've been loaded a 50mm 2.8 macro to use on the K3 while I decide on a lens kit - I'd appreciate suggestions for a three lens kit for travel - possibly a zoom, a macro and two primes. Any thoughts?

In the past I've travelled with a DA 16-45 and a DA 55-300, and once with an additional DA35 limited macro. The answer to your question depends a lot on what sort of photos you want to take - I like to photograph birds and animals, so I needed the long zoom. You also didn't mention how much you're prepared to spend, because that can make a big difference with some of the primes and zooms costing over $1K. I just bought a Tamron 17-50 f2.8 which I plan to use for travel, because ostensibly it has better IQ than the DA 16-45, but I'll have to wait and see! With respect to macro, the DA35 limited macro is a beautiful lens, but for the sort of subjects I find in Australia, the focal length is too short - if I'm photographing a bee or a wasp I really don't want to be that close to it, and with many flowers close to the ground, the short focal length means being on hands and knees. I think having the 100mm macro might alleviate some of these issues, but I can't really say because I haven't bought one. So if you are OK with having to be very close to your macro subjects, the DA 35 limited might work for you. The 35mm focal length also makes it a useful prime lens for other general subjects. The 100mm macro may be useful as a portrait lens. As for another prime, your choices will depend on what sort of subjects you're most likely to want to capture. I was considering a 40mm limited because it's small and light, and with the crop factor it's a reasonable compromise focal length. Another consideration is whether WR is important for you, because that narrows your choices considerably.

If you want to cover a wide focal range for a reasonable price I'd suggest:
1. If you want WR - the DA18-135 WR, DA 55-300 HD WR and DFA 100 WR macro
2. If WR isn't so important maybe Sigma 17-50 f2.8 or Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and DA 55-300 WR and DFA 100 WR macro or DA 35 limited macro.

I realise that's two zooms and one prime, but it's hard to cover a wide range of focal lengths otherwise. If you don't need the long zoom, you could replace it with another short prime or a wider zoom.

[Jean Poitiers]

Welcome to PF and bonjour from France, Peter ... enjoy the forum and your K-3 ... hope to see an image or two soon ... Salut, J

[PeterDM]

Welcome to PF and bonjour from France, Peter ... enjoy the forum and your K-3 ... hope to see an image or two soon ... Salut, J

Thanks everyone for the warm PF welcome - great gear advice and - bonus - helpful tips for my international travel plans. I've ordered my lens - see "PROUD OWNER" below - should have them by the end of week - will post images.