[pocky]

An f/2.8 zoom from about 28-80mm would have been super

sorry to dig this back up, but what about a 35-70mm f2.8 manual focus? i just picked one up for about 30 bucks, i'd say that's pretty affordable. your thread actually inspired me to look for it

[K1D27H]

An f/2.8 zoom from about 28-80mm would have been super

Craig

There is one. Tokina AT-X 280 Pro 28-80mm F2.8. This thing is damn hard to find (for a pentax mount). Ordered mine from a certain camera shop in UK for 42x GBP. Still, not sure if it fits your price criteria.

The photographs at F2.8 are a bit soft, but I still consider them usable and pretty sharp from F4 onwards. The major drawback of this lens is that it is prone to flare when point towards light source but from discussion with other guys that also use Tokina it seems to be a common issue for this brand.

[spystyle]

I guess as technology marches on, and we get usable ISO 6000 and more, maybe we won't really need 2.8 zooms (???)

[K1D27H]

Possibly, but you never know the mind of men. Some just like having what they always have. And if the market is driven the same way, manufacturers can only adhere to it.

[spystyle]

Well the purpose matters - if a person buys a 2.8 lens because they want to constantly throw the background out of focus (like shooting a single portrait at a crowded event), in other words shallow "depth of field", then I guess large aperture zooms will always be important.

(See Cliff Mautner's "Shoot Around the Clock" video lesson for a good example)

But if a person only needs to be able to achieve 1/60th shutter speed in poor light, at a clean ISO, with no flash - like an "event shooter". Then high ISO that is "clean" is more desirable than a heavy expensive 2.8 lens.

I used to shoot violin concerts for my daughter and I needed 1/60 at reasonable ISO in poor light. A 2.8 zoom would have made it easier, but clean ISO 6000 would work too LOL. For me depth of field was not a concern.

At the time I had clean ISO 800 then later clean ISO 1600, but now clean ISO 6000 and soon more LOL - I wish I could go back in time and shoot those events with the gear I have now A Pentax K-X

Have fun!
Craig

[spystyle]

sorry to dig this back up, but what about a 35-70mm f2.8 manual focus? i just picked one up for about 30 bucks, i'd say that's pretty affordable. your thread actually inspired me to look for it

LOL, if you can find me one for a good price I'll buy it. I must be looking in the wrong places but I always see those go up past $125 on eBay.

I'd like to see Pentax make some zoom lenses with a constant 3.5 aperture. With today's clean high ISO's aperture 3.5 can practically replace aperture 2.8. It's got all but 2/3 of a stop of the speed, without the high cost or heavy weight.

See this chart :

Pentax K-X f/stops chart (spread this to all K-X users) | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

3.5 and 2.8 are closer than you think LOL

[RioRico]

*Notice, Nikon lenses can not be adapted to Pentax K-mount without optical adapter

I guess I'll have to tell that to the Nikkor 35/2 and 85/2, and the Nikon-mount Vivitar 28/2 CF-WA and Tokina 35-135, and others, that ride my K20D without any optical adapters. They will be so disappointed...

[spystyle]

How do you get them to fit ?

[deejjjaaaa]

I've read that the Sigma is very soft wide open, did you guys read anything about that ?

here is 24-60/2.8 wide open (unresized) :

http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/9049/imgp1026kxs246028acrrgb.jpg

and

http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/6702/imgp1024kxs246028acrrgb.jpg

[RioRico]

How do you get them to fit ?

FORCE-FIT! I'm no Nikonian so I may have the terminology wrong, but here goes: I have encountered 3 types of Nikon lens bases. There are AF lenses, which I can't force-fit onto my K20D mount (but I only tried one). Among manuals, there are AI lenses, which have what I call "nub and arc" protrusions from the aperture ring. Also manual, there are non-AI lenses, which have a continuous skirt around the aperture ring.

Non-AI lenses can be simply force-fit onto my K20D's mount. I might get about 8mm of grip of the bayonet lugs. I feel very unsafe doing this with a big heavy lens. Also, the aperture ring may press against the camera body, making it hard to change f-stops. I alleviate that by CAREFULLY unscrewing the lens base, then sticking wee little bits of tape under the base to push it out maybe 0.4mm.

With AI lenses, I use a Dremel metal-cutting blade to chop off the"nub and arc", and make sure the bottom of the aperture ring is smooth. The lens then force-fits to about the same degree as with non-AI, but the aperture ring now turns freely. And the lens' metal base safely shorts the PK mount signal pins, which lets me use Catch-In-Focus.

No, force-fitting does not produce a lock-tight fit. One of these days, I may dremel a small slot into the lens base for the PK mount locking pin to fit into. THEN it will be secure! But I haven't lost any yet, and I've modded four lenses, with more awaiting surgery. Note that this surgery probably reduces a lens's resale value a bit, so you probably won't want to cut a costly lens.

[metalmania]

here is 24-60/2.8 wide open (unresized) :

Those are the pictures that poisoned me. I remember you posted in the For Sale thread. Unfortunately the seller sold it to someone else. I didn't have the luck to get it. So instead I had to get a Tamron 17-50. Pretty sharp too.

[deejjjaaaa]

Sigma also does sometimes a decent job w/ the kit lenses too, but there you need to step 'em down

24-135/2.8-4.5 (USD $99 new) @ 5.6, 8.0: