[Kiwi645hauler]

I was consider then 18-135 too, given that's got a motor for focussing and is WR.
From memory though, it's extremely average, so think I'll pass.
.

The 18-135 has an interesting reputation, a lot of users have found they can be rather soft and show an abundance of CA, but there are a large number who have examples that do not show those attributes, I have a customer with one and it is super crisp, so much so i think it is an 11am Monday lens... Put together mid morning on a Monday, so the tech is awake and not yet over the week

[awa355]

I was tempted to place a bid on the 18-135 but once the auction has been finished a while the pain of having been so close gradually diminishes.

[NZ_Ross]

I was tempted to place a bid on the 18-135 but once the auction has been finished a while the pain of having been so close gradually diminishes.

I wasn't following the auctions - just curious - what did the 55-300 WR go for in the end?

[Transit]

$422 to zkarj

[NZ_Ross]

$422 to zkarj

Thanks Pete

[zkarj]

I was consider then 18-135 too, given that's got a motor for focussing and is WR.
From memory though, it's extremely average, so think I'll pass.

The 18-135 has an interesting reputation, a lot of users have found they can be rather soft and show an abundance of CA, but there are a large number who have examples that do not show those attributes, I have a customer with one and it is super crisp, so much so i think it is an 11am Monday lens... Put together mid morning on a Monday, so the tech is awake and not yet over the week

I've had some extreme cases of CA lately with this lens, but in general it's OK. I've not studied it, but I think it's only really bad right at the long end. Its value lies in its versatility rather than quality.

The 55-300 WR went for $422. I should have it tomorrow.

[NZ_Ross]

The 55-300 WR went for $422. I should have it tomorrow.

Very cool, it is always very nice to get a new lens

[awa355]

Those buggars were there alright,, There's an empty coke bottle thrown into one of the craters Hand held tonight peering through light cloud cover. Not a serious attempt, was sitting outside enjoying a cuppa and decided why not have a play.

[NZ_Ross]

Those buggars were there alright,, There's an empty coke bottle thrown into one of the craters Hand held tonight peering through light cloud cover. Not a serious attempt, was sitting outside enjoying a cuppa and decided why not have a play.

You sure it wasn't a Tui bottle in the carter

[pixelsaurus]

You sure it wasn't a Tui bottle in the carter

Yeah right!

[GUB]

Now that you lads have blown your budgets there is a proper lens come up!! PENTAX SMC, PENTAX F, F28mm 2.8 | Trade Me

[NZ_Ross]

Now that you lads have blown your budgets there is a proper lens come up!! PENTAX SMC, PENTAX F, F28mm 2.8 | Trade Me

I don't even want to talk about how blown my photography budget is this year.....

---------- Post added 03-10-17 at 11:26 PM ----------

I am in the USA next week. Places we are going:
LA: Universal Studios, Rodeo Drive, Disney, Santa Monica Pier
Albuquerque: International Ballon Festival, Zoo, Route 66

I am planning to take the K-3 and the following lenses:

DA 15 - for wide angle with the ballons
DA 20-40 for wide angle walk around
DA*55 portraits and night photography of the ballons
DA 55-300 wildlife, zoom at the theme parks, landscapes,
FA 24-90 for walk around

The DA 20-40, DA*55 and DA 55-300 are now my standard 3 lens travel kit, all WR, and all fit nicely with the camera in my Crumpler shoulder day bag.

My backpack has lens pockets, so I can take a few extra lens, but I have to watch the total laptop bag weight.

I am of two minds regarding the 24-90 - it means less swapping out of lenses during a typical day's walk around, but then it also means I am duplicating focal lengths with the 20-40 and 55-300. The 20-40 has better image quality.

Any suggestions or wisdom regarding this, or perhaps other alternatives - see the equipment list in my signature for what lenses I own (not taking the 250-600 - it is simply too heavy for this type of trip. I would take take it to Africa for wildlife, but not urban walk around)

Ross

[GUB]

I am supposed to do a talk on night photography in a week or so at my C club. Thought I had better go out and do some!!. Interesting the difference in starburst here with the A 28 2.8 at f4 in the first and 5.6 in the second. EV the same in both - 1 sec and 2 sec.
Take no notice of the different editing - that is my way - no presets - muddle my way through. Best way to learn though.

[NZ_Ross]

I am supposed to do a talk on night photography in a week or so at my C club. Thought I had better go out and do some!!. Interesting the difference in starburst here with the A 28 2.8 at f4 in the first and 5.6 in the second. EV the same in both - 1 sec and 2 sec.
Take no notice of the different editing - that is my way - no presets - muddle my way through. Best way to learn though.

That is crazy how much difference stopping down a little bit makes to the starbursts

[GUB]

Not greatly changed at f2.8. But this was exposed 1 EV more (1 sec) and I think that might be a tad overblown as far as the light is concerned. Sorry there is no exif - it is a Gimp thing - it strips exif from tifs for some reason. I never get around to re-attaching them!!