Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-08-2015, 09:53 AM   #1
Senior Member
semaca's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: RO
Posts: 130
My first Pentax

Hello,
First of all, I hope I post this in the correct category

I am tired of Canikon or "Fujison", so I think Pentax is the best solution. Yes, they all say I am a weirdo for doing that. You know the story.
My only Pentax 'gear' is an original Asahi M42 adapter. I own some 50-58mm lens, 200, 300.

I want the K3, but is the 18-135 a good enough lens for most situations? I have used a Tamron 17-50 for Nikon, but I want a WR lens.
You never have enough lens, but I can't use them all. The 18-135 sold separately is almost 750$(!!!) in Europe, but cheaper in combination with the K3.

Or K3 with a second hand 18-55 wr and another second hand lens? I don't have budget for limited lens.
I am interested in some landscapes, night photography...

02-08-2015, 10:09 AM   #2
Site Supporter
mattt's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Niagara
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,659
prob best to review this thread

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/179869-da-1...at-can-do.html
02-08-2015, 10:19 AM   #3
Imp
Pentaxian
Imp's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Washington, DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,312
If you didn't need WR I would say the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 because of the speed... There are also one or two wide angle prime lens option by third party (like a 10mm or a 16mm) that could be purchased for about $300

The 18-135 will be much better than the kit lens, although as a superzoom, you are compromising on sharpness. But I don't know of any wide-ish angle WR lenses in your budget.
02-08-2015, 10:33 AM   #4
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 233
A bit more expensive, but maybe the New 16-85 WR could be an option?

02-08-2015, 10:45 AM   #5
Senior Member
semaca's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: RO
Posts: 130
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mattt Quote
prob best to review this thread
I see that it's very good in good light. I never used this kind of zoom, but maybe I will like it.

QuoteOriginally posted by timcatn Quote
maybe the New 16-85 WR could be an option?
Maybe in the future.

Somebody told me that I can use with very good results even for landscapes the Takumar 50mm 1.4 (1st version) because of it's sharpness and I can crop if I need from a big image.
02-08-2015, 10:46 AM   #6
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 233
Isn't 50mm on APS-C a bit narrow for landscapes?
02-08-2015, 10:54 AM   #7
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,000
Welcome to the Forum and Pentax Land!

The 18-135 is very good. Normally the wider the zoom range the more compromises are made in the design of the lens. Some folks like the 18-135 better than the two lens set (18-50 and 50-200). One thing that the 18-135 does do is that you do not need to change lenses as often.

For landscapes and low light the 17-50/2.8 is very good. If you want to go wider, you can stitch using the free download of Microsoft ICE to form a panorama.

02-08-2015, 10:58 AM   #8
Senior Member
semaca's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: RO
Posts: 130
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by timcatn Quote
Isn't 50mm on APS-C a bit narrow for landscapes?
That was my opinion too, but I know a landscape photographer which uses mostly 70-200.
Recently I've seen some images with a Pentax smc FA 35mm f/2.0 AL. One used is around 200, like a tamron 17-50. Many options, but I can't buy everything I like and make no money from photography.

02-08-2015, 10:59 AM - 2 Likes   #9
Emperor and Senpai
VoiceOfReason's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Nashville, IN
Posts: 5,121
I use the 18-135 more than my other lenses, and I have some great lenses. You will be pleased with it.
02-08-2015, 02:14 PM   #10
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Trondheim
Posts: 233
QuoteOriginally posted by semaca Quote
That was my opinion too, but I know a landscape photographer which uses mostly 70-200.
Recently I've seen some images with a Pentax smc FA 35mm f/2.0 AL. One used is around 200, like a tamron 17-50. Many options, but I can't buy everything I like and make no money from photography.


It Depends on the kind of landscapes i supose. However, if you are a beginner/amateur i would suggest that it is a bit Limited With a 50mm prime.


If you are on a Budget, i would propose ditching WR for the moment, and get a Tamron 16-50 / 2,8. Alternatively the Sigma 10-20




-tim
02-08-2015, 03:49 PM   #11
Pentaxian
Just1MoreDave's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Aurora, CO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,814
Start with your experience with the Tamron 17-50. See what focal lengths you used. If most of the shots were at 50mm, you probably want the 18-135 instead of the 18-55. Check the 50mm shots to see if you cropped them even smaller. That's a key sign you wanted more telephoto in your zoom. Then look at aperture. See how often you used apertures from f2.8 to f4.5 or so. Did you choose those apertures because it was low light, or you wanted less depth of field? Could you have gotten similar results at apertures that the 18-135 has? The K-3 might be good enough at high ISOs so you could raise ISO.

Another way to decide is to figure out if the 18-135 fits into a set of lenses you want later. For example, if you are planning on getting the 55-300 and carrying that lens a lot, you don't need the extra telephoto reach. If the wide angle end is really important to you, look at the 16-85 instead.
02-08-2015, 04:30 PM   #12
Imp
Pentaxian
Imp's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Washington, DC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,312
QuoteOriginally posted by semaca Quote
but I know a landscape photographer which uses mostly 70-200.
Then.. he's probably using a FF camera, were 50mm is the normal view. 70 on APS-C is portrait range
02-08-2015, 05:39 PM   #13
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 87
Welcome.
I included the 18-135mm lens with my initial purchase last year and have enjoyed this lens. I find it has a nice range when you aren't sure what you are shooting or sneaky portrait shooting. For your purpose with low light situations would be my hesitancy...oh I am sure it can be done tripods etc, but enough to give thought to your main priorities now. What are you photographing at night? Maybe a nice 35 or 50mm fast prime could be added to the mix now or in the near future. Many those can be found reasonably used or new.
Of course you can never have enough lenses.... there are times I wish for a wider angle or more reach :-)
Best of luck choosing and welcome aboard
02-09-2015, 04:21 AM   #14
Site Supporter
ramseybuckeye's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Elida, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,113
You mention night photography and landscapes, if you are doing landscapes at night don't worry about fast lenses, you're using a tripod anyway. But if you are doing street photography at night that is different.

I would recommend the 18-135, especially at the price you can get it with a new camera. And the weather resistance can be very useful in landscapes. Just a week ago I used it on a hour and a half walk through a woods while it snowed the whole time. I didn't get any masterpieces that day, but I would have got nothing without WR.
02-09-2015, 05:47 AM   #15
Senior Member
semaca's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: RO
Posts: 130
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ramseybuckeye Quote
You mention night photography and landscapes, if you are doing landscapes at night don't worry about fast lenses, you're using a tripod anyway. But if you are doing street photography at night that is different.

I would recommend the 18-135, especially at the price you can get it with a new camera. And the weather resistance can be very useful in landscapes. Just a week ago I used it on a hour and a half walk through a woods while it snowed the whole time. I didn't get any masterpieces that day, but I would have got nothing without WR.
I've seen here on the forum some great images with the 18-135... Maybe for now I should get that lens and use it as much as I can. My old camera is really bad at ISO 800 for night photography, but I'm sure that the K3 at f/3.5 with bigger ISO is better.

The 35mm f/2.4 could be next for me, for daily use. I already have 4 50mm with manual focus.
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!
camera, hand, k3, lens, pentax, pentax help, photography, troubleshooting, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Abstract My first Pentax dslr Tootie Pentax K-3 Photo Contest 5 05-31-2014 02:25 PM
Misc First shots with my first film SLR, Pentax MX and M 50 1.7 LeDave Post Your Photos! 6 10-06-2012 05:18 PM
Misc Started a 365 with my first shots from my first DSLR. Sagitta Post Your Photos! 6 02-18-2011 10:34 PM
My first model shoot in my first own studio! FrancisK7 Post Your Photos! 16 08-29-2008 03:55 AM
My first to weeks with a K20D, my first Dslr, 35/2,8 macro LTD (alot of pictures) melander Post Your Photos! 17 08-13-2008 12:01 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:55 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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