Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-27-2014, 06:03 PM   #1
Forum Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 69
Lens comparing ..28-80 or a 18-55 help a newbie please.

Read somewhere that the PENTAX SMC FA CAMERA LENS 1:3.5 28-80 MM DSLR-SLR AUTO FOCUS
Is pretty much the same as the pentax kit ken for k-50 .. The 18-55mm I believe urs a DA .. I'm was THISCLOSE! to bidding in the 28-80 lens when I read they were the same and since I already have (gog to have) the 18-55 I thought I'd save some money.

08-27-2014, 06:16 PM - 1 Like   #2
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,569
I have a Quantaray 28-90mm with 1:2 macro, and if you are not planning on wide shooting it's a good lens for general purpose. Especially since it often goes for about $50 but often can be found lower. Flare into the sun is its weak point, but sharpness color and closeups up to 1/2 life size are quite nice!

I have not tried the FA 28-80, but without the 'macro' setting I would not keep my 28-90. The FA was the kit lens for film, so I wouldn't expect it to be much better than the 18-55 kit lens for digital.
08-27-2014, 06:33 PM - 1 Like   #3
Pentaxian
Kozlok's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,802
The focal lengths are different, but the quality is probably similar.
08-27-2014, 06:39 PM - 1 Like   #4
Pentaxian
Just1MoreDave's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Aurora, CO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,874
There are apparently three slightly different FA 28-80mm lenses, plus an FA-J 28-80 and an FA 28-90. They aren't the same as the DA 18-55. The only distant similarity is if you had a Pentax film camera like a ZX with a 28-80. On a Pentax DSLR, the 18-55 has approximately the same field of view. But if you don't have or want a film camera, just forget about all that equivalent nonsense. On the DSLR, a 28-80 starts out in the normal range and goes to mid-telephoto, while the 18-55 is wide to short telephoto.

I tried a few of these and wasn't that excited by them. They all work almost the same as the DA 18-55 on a DSLR - autofocus, aperture, focal length reported to the camera, except if you need in-camera lens corrections. You get an aperture ring with the FA lenses, not with the FA-J lens. Some have plastic mounts, no big deal. The DA 18-55 has a greater magnification ratio, so it's better close up (1:3 magnification). Most are 1:4, the 28-90 is in between. The focal length either works for you or not. Build quality is similar to the DA 18-55.

08-27-2014, 07:07 PM - 1 Like   #5
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,825
QuoteOriginally posted by when-daybreaks Quote
I'm was THISCLOSE! to bidding in the 28-80 lens when I read they were the same and since I already have (gog to have) the 18-55 I thought I'd save some money.
Outside of both being a "kit" lens, no they are not at all the same. The 28-80 will not go as wide (only 28mm) but goes a bit further (to 80mm). Both are usable on your k-50 and if you prefer a slightly longer focal length and are willing to give up the 18-27 range the 28-80 might serve even better. I often use an F 35-105 when I want a light lens for casual shooting and I lose almost all of the wide angle range but gain a nice short tele range.
08-27-2014, 08:24 PM   #6
Forum Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 69
Original Poster
Wow you are all just a wealth of knowledge .. I think I understood all that .. And Im going to stick with just the 18-55mm for now .. What I'm really looking for is a lens for star trails and shooting multiple exposures of the MilkyWay. I know in the olympus brand people tend to use a 7-14mm zoom lens any idea what that equivalent would be for my k-50? The 28-80 was the smallest range I have found on ebay at least that wasn't a fisheye lens.
08-27-2014, 08:31 PM - 1 Like   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,825
QuoteOriginally posted by when-daybreaks Quote
I know in the olympus brand people tend to use a 7-14mm zoom lens any idea what that equivalent
I believe the Olympus would be micro 4/3 so 2x crop factor to FF, so you are looking at 14-28mm. Then you have to calculate the 1.5x crop back to APS-C so 10-20 zoom would give you roughly the same angle of view as the 7-14mm on m4/3. In Pentax world you have two different Sigma 10-20's, a Tamron 10-24, and the Pentax 12-24. Check the lens database for reviews. Look at the top of the screen under "lenses"
08-27-2014, 09:26 PM - 1 Like   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,892
QuoteOriginally posted by when-daybreaks Quote
Wow you are all just a wealth of knowledge .. I think I understood all that .. And Im going to stick with just the 18-55mm for now .. What I'm really looking for is a lens for star trails and shooting multiple exposures of the MilkyWay. I know in the olympus brand people tend to use a 7-14mm zoom lens any idea what that equivalent would be for my k-50? The 28-80 was the smallest range I have found on ebay at least that wasn't a fisheye lens.
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
I believe the Olympus would be micro 4/3 so 2x crop factor to FF, so you are looking at 14-28mm. Then you have to calculate the 1.5x crop back to APS-C so 10-20 zoom would give you roughly the same angle of view as the 7-14mm on m4/3. In Pentax world you have two different Sigma 10-20's, a Tamron 10-24, and the Pentax 12-24. Check the lens database for reviews. Look at the top of the screen under "lenses"
Though a bit longer, the DA 16-45 might work well and is fairly inexpensive.

Samyang makes a nice 14mm prime that isn't all that expensive either.

08-28-2014, 05:08 AM   #9
Forum Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 69
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
I believe the Olympus would be micro 4/3 so 2x crop factor to FF, so you are looking at 14-28mm. Then you have to calculate the 1.5x crop back to APS-C so 10-20 zoom would give you roughly the same angle of view as the 7-14mm on m4/3. In Pentax world you have two different Sigma 10-20's, a Tamron 10-24, and the Pentax 12-24. Check the lens database for reviews. Look at the top of the screen under "lenses"
Oh my gosh that ^ is amazing. :0 Thats exactly what I needed! Makes sense too. lol finally starting to understand how all this works.
08-28-2014, 11:15 PM   #10
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
I don't know if it is still true, but at the onset with the 4/3 format cameras, while the camera itself was as small as for example the *istD series bodies, the equivalent FOV lens, like the 7-14mm 4/3 lens to a sigma 10-20 was prohibitively expensive. Something like a 3:1 price differential between the ultra wide zoom for the 4/3 compared to the APS-C format sensor in the pentax cameras.

Is this still the case?

Just curious
08-29-2014, 05:00 AM   #11
Forum Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Ohio
Posts: 69
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
I don't know if it is still true, but at the onset with the 4/3 format cameras, while the camera itself was as small as for example the *istD series bodies, the equivalent FOV lens, like the 7-14mm 4/3 lens to a sigma 10-20 was prohibitively expensive. Something like a 3:1 price differential between the ultra wide zoom for the 4/3 compared to the APS-C format sensor in the pentax cameras.

Is this still the case?

Just curious
First one I found on ebay v .. Over $1000

Olympus Zuiko Digital 7 14mm 1 4 Ed Zoom Lens Fours Thirds Mount | eBay
08-29-2014, 05:21 AM   #12
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
TER-OR's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dundee, IL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,868
When I bought my K10 I read the original 18-55 wasn't great, so I bought a used 16-45 and it's a good short zoom. Great indoors, with that focal range. I haven't sold it yet, even though it's been mostly replaced by the 18-135. I took the 16-45 out in snow with the dogs and started to realized I really should get a WR lens if I continued to do so... Since we have huskies and a malamute, the camera would be out in snow!
08-29-2014, 07:42 AM   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
altopiet's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The Great Karoo, South Africa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,927
QuoteOriginally posted by TER-OR Quote
When I bought my K10 I read the original 18-55 wasn't great, so I bought a used 16-45 and it's a good short zoom. Great indoors, with that focal range. I haven't sold it yet, even though it's been mostly replaced by the 18-135. I took the 16-45 out in snow with the dogs and started to realized I really should get a WR lens if I continued to do so... Since we have huskies and a malamute, the camera would be out in snow!
Is the IQ on the 18-135 better than the 16-45?
08-29-2014, 09:17 AM   #14
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
TER-OR's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dundee, IL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,868
QuoteOriginally posted by altopiet Quote
Is the IQ on the 18-135 better than the 16-45?
I really don't know. I was pretty much satisfied with the 16-45 but it was never long enough for outdoors with the dogs. From what I've read the 16-45 is pretty well regarded, but also considered a bit fragile. Mine was never pampered and it's still a good lens.

It is considered better than the 18-45, and the extra wide space is noticable vs. the 18-135. Maybe I should do some tests on close pictures to see if there's a discernable difference.
08-29-2014, 09:21 AM   #15
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
altopiet's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The Great Karoo, South Africa
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,927
QuoteOriginally posted by TER-OR Quote
I really don't know. I was pretty much satisfied with the 16-45 but it was never long enough for outdoors with the dogs. From what I've read the 16-45 is pretty well regarded, but also considered a bit fragile. Mine was never pampered and it's still a good lens.

It is considered better than the 18-45, and the extra wide space is noticable vs. the 18-135. Maybe I should do some tests on close pictures to see if there's a discernable difference.
I've got a used 16-45 and if the IQ on the 18-135 is in the same ballpark, I might go for it...
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
28mm, camera, lens, pentax, pentax help, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Please help a newbie make sense of superzoom lenses thechumpen Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 10-11-2012 04:43 AM
Buying a K5 - but with 18-135mm lens kit? Or an 18-55 + 50-200mm lens kit? robinfaz Pentax K-5 12 06-04-2012 01:44 PM
A little help please, 18-55 lens? InlawBiker Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 02-28-2011 04:00 AM
my first lens - please help a newbie out n8cas Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 24 01-23-2008 08:39 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:04 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top