[Williquette]

Guys,

I'm new to the forum and have a quick question for landscape/cityscape photographers. I've got a K-3, a PENTAX-DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 lens and a new Sigma 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM Contemporary Lens. I think these two lenses will cover my needs when at the Grand Canon, Door County, Wisconsin, or in Myanmar or Chad, Africa. Do you agree? Will the quality and speed of these lenses be sufficient?

Thanks for your thoughts,

Scott

[Adam]

Yes, but bear in mind that the image quality of the 18-300mm will be behind that of the star lens. You will want to stop down whenever possible. Also, 18mm isn't that wide. You might want to supplement the kit with something like the 12-24mm (or the new DA* 11-18mm) if you find 18mm to be not wide enough.

[ramseybuckeye]

I would agree with Adam, the Sigma lens will have a lot of compromises in IQ. Better to go with the lenses Adam suggested, or the 15, 16-85, 18-135, or something like the Sigma 17-50. If you're spending the time and money to go to these exotic places, take good lenses.

[aslyfox]

Guys,

I'm new to the forum and have a quick question for landscape/cityscape photographers. I've got a K-3, a PENTAX-DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 lens and a new Sigma 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM Contemporary Lens. I think these two lenses will cover my needs when at the Grand Canon, Door County, Wisconsin, or in Myanmar or Chad, Africa. Do you agree? Will the quality and speed of these lenses be sufficient?

Thanks for your thoughts,

Scott

do a search for " safari " in the " search the forum " box and you will find some threads discussing cameras, lenses and techniques

since you live in the US, you could spend some money and rent various lenses so you can determine what you might want to use for landscape or other purposes before deciding what you actually want to buy

Information on Businesses that offer cameras and lenses for rent - PentaxForums.com

my widest lenses are the SMC Pentax-DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited and Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 EX DC HSM

you can check out reviews under " Lenses " above

---

Last edited by aslyfox; 02-04-2019 at 08:01 PM.

[pres589]

Do you like the Sigma 18-300 at the long end off the zoom range? If I were looking for a kit for a trip to the Grand Canyon, Myanmar, and Chad, I would probably do the following;

Pentax DA 15
Pentax DA 18-135
Pentax DA 55-300 (I have a K-5 so I'm stuck with the earlier version, I would get the new RE PLM if I wasn't)

If the Sigma gives the IQ you like from ~100 to 300mm then stick with that. Honestly I don't think the 50-135 would be of nearly as much use as the 18-135. There are other combinations but this is what I would do partially based on the fact that I own a DA 15 and a DA 18-135. I like the image quality they give me enough that the 16-85 isn't a temptation although I could see being swayed that way instead.

[UncleVanya]

The 50-135 is fantastic. It works great for telephoto landscapes and portraits and any mild telephoto work. The 18-300 is rumored to be fine but it is not in the same class.

There are many many lens choices. Keep telling us about what kinds of shots you want to make.

[Snafu711]

I find it hard to come up with a recommendation since your description doens't draw a clear picture of you and your needs.


Worldwide travel seems to be a main field for your photography, including dusty, humid and expensive far-away places.


So a rugged K3 fits well. A star-lens 50-135 fits well, too. This says: you're serious about reliable equipment and top-notch IQ.


The Sigma Superzoom, on the other hand, makes a very different statement. It says that you are a casual photographer who is willing to pay a convenience fee (lower IQ) for not having to change lenses.


This leaves me confused.


One thing is obvious to me, though: you might want to consider a wide-angle lens for landscapes, landmarks and cities/buildings. I can't imagine you travelling around half the globe only to miss out on a lot of shots. 18mm will not be wide enough in many cases - and stiching a panorama is not always a feasible option.


Given the lenses you already have I'd suggest you either stick with Sigma and add their super-wide-angle zoom (10-20mm/3.5) to your collection. This is the economy option. Or you complement your star-lens with it's siblings 11-18 and 16-50, which is the upscale way.

[savoche]

I've got a K-3

An excellent, sturdy and reliable camera.

a PENTAX-DA* 50-135mm f/2.8

About as good a lens as you can get.

a new Sigma 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 DC MACRO OS HSM Contemporary

Definitely a very versatile lens, and it looks to do a good job at the long end (based on the Reviews as I have never used it). It does require a lot of light, though. Be prepared to ramp up the ISO if you're out on a safari around sunrise/sunset.

The best way to figure out if you're covered is simply to get out and shoot. Get to know your tools, learn where their weaknesses are so you know what to avoid. And do it before you go on any once-in-a-lifetime trips!

[aslyfox]

an additional thought, you may want to consider a second camera body for your safari which would work with your lenses.

1 in case of a problem with your primary camera

2 so you can have immediately available two different lenses - a " wider " one and a " longer " one without the need to change lenses on your primary camera.


of course a zoom helps but if you can have two set ups it can even be more effective if your " targets " appear both near and far while you are on safari.

even a good point and shoot or bridge camera might be of help in those situations.

[Williquette]

an additional thought, you may want to consider a second camera body for your safari which would work with your lenses.

1 in case of a problem with your primary camera

2 so you can have immediately available two different lenses - a " wider " one and a " longer " one without the need to change lenses on your primary camera.


of course a zoom helps but if you can have two set ups it can even be more effective if your " targets " appear both near and far while you are on safari.

even a good point and shoot or bridge camera might be of help in those situations.

Guys, this is all very helpful. I should mention that I own the Pentax 16-85 and have been very happy with it. It has been my go to lens for landscapes/cityscapes for the last few years. The reason I have turned to the Sigma 18-300 is primarily for those times when I need to zoom in on wildlife. Neither my 16-85 nor my 50-135 is sufficient. The reviews I've read on the Sigma have been good especially on this forum. The reason I didn't mention the 16-85 is that I want to pack light ( I don't want to haul three lenses onto the plane). I was hoping the 50-135 2.8 would cover most low light situations and the Sigma 18-300 would cover the rest. I've ordered the Sigma from Adorama but it's on backorder. Should I cancel it and go another route?

Thanks,

Williquette

[clackers]

Guys, this is all very helpful. I should mention that I own the Pentax 16-85 and have been very happy with it. It has been my go to lens for landscapes/cityscapes for the last few years. The reason I have turned to the Sigma 18-300 is primarily for those times when I need to zoom in on wildlife. Neither my 16-85 nor my 50-135 is sufficient. The reviews I've read on the Sigma have been good especially on this forum. The reason I didn't mention the 16-85 is that I want to pack light ( I don't want to haul three lenses onto the plane). I was hoping the 50-135 2.8 would cover most low light situations and the Sigma 18-300 would cover the rest. I've ordered the Sigma from Adorama but it's on backorder. Should I cancel it and go another route?

Thanks,

Williquette

You know, you could save money by just going with the 16-85 and a 55-300, which will be WR, be faster to focus and have better image quality.

[Des]

^ What Clackers said. The 55-300 PLM will be the perfect companion for the 16-85. HD coatings, WR (a real advantage for nature travel), rounded blades for pleasant bokeh and the best AF of all the Pentax lenses.

To round out the kit I'd think about a compact prime (such as one of the Limiteds or even a nifty 50) for low light, street, indoors, portraits etc. The prime could also be used for images to stitch in a panorama.

[Williquette]

OK guys I'll give you a little more information about me. My travel overseas is for work, I'm a missionary teaching in 3rd world countries. When I'm overseas I take my camera and I have limited opportunities to get away and take pictures of the landscapes and the people. I want to take high quality pictures but the convenience of a super zoom is very attractive because it allows me to travel light. If however using a super zoom will compromise the quality of the pictures then that's not what I want.

[aslyfox]

if you are willing to go for " experienced " equipment keep an eye on what you can find in the forum's market place

you can filter it so it shows items from specific countries:

The Pentax Marketplace | Buy & Sell Pentax Cameras and Lenses (United States) - PentaxForums.com

[normhead]

OK guys I'll give you a little more information about me. My travel overseas is for work, I'm a missionary teaching in 3rd world countries. When I'm overseas I take my camera and I have limited opportunities to get away and take pictures of the landscapes and the people. I want to take high quality pictures but the convenience of a super zoom is very attractive because it allows me to travel light. If however using a super zoom will compromise the quality of the pictures then that's not what I want.

I'd take the 16-85, a 55-300 PLM and wide aperture 50 for low light.
There are many instances where the 18-300 will not seriously affect your IQ, in that it will adequately resolve the important elements of a scene. I used to carry a Sigma 18-250 for the same reasons you want to. We got some very nice images with it. Some of the comparison images were good enough they were selected over images taken with my DA*60-250 for publication. While the DA*s have a higher top end, on many images you won't see a difference. In the end, it comes down to "Will you have time to change lenses?" In my case, travelling with groups of people and having a responsibility to keep up with the group, my 18-250 meant I had the right lens on the camera all the time, and could carry a camera case as opposed to a camera bag. That's an advantage that is often understated in these types of discussions.

Sometimes using higher quality glass, instead of getting a better image results in getting no image. There's a reason these lenses are popular. One often ignored by the tech heads for whom everything is about technical perfection in glass, but who are totally impractical for many shooting situations. In the end, in your case, where you don't have a lot of time to shoot, the 18-300 to cover everything, and then a 21 ltd, 35 2.4 and 50 1.8 would make a nice light easy to manage travel kit. The primes would be for use use on those occasions when you have time for lens changes and zooming with your feet.

I have friend who shoots an 18-250 and has come up for fall colours, and when we come home and look at the images, it's composition etc. that makes the images. I've never once seen an image where one of mine was better because I was using better glass. The added value of "better glass" is for the most part exaggerated. The fact that you might see a small difference if you put two similar images side by side in no way suggests you'd enjoy one image more than the other. Especially since much of the advantage of better glass is lost when you reduce the image size for conventional viewing on a computer monitor or up to 11x14 print.

The worst lens I own an old FA 28-200 takes images that look great on a 4k monitor. You can over think these things.