Originally posted by Cthulhugan
The 18-135 or 16-85 would be good choices as well, if you have the budget. 18mm is roughly equivalent for field-of-view to a 28mm lens on your Z1, 16 is about a 24.
There is also the DA 15 Limited, but the Limiteds can be addictive (try to stop at just one ...) :-)
I'd agree with all of that, but the OP did say good price. The 18-55 is not a bad lens at the wide end (loses a bit at the long end). I must be honest though, at 18mm on digital, it performs slightly better than a 28M on film. (At 28mm on digital, the 18-55 performs worse than a 28M on digital). So for a film shooter moving to digital, it fills an inevitable gap for not much money.
I'd slightly disagree over the Da15 though. I think the da21 would be better for an ex film shooter (bought second hand to keep costs down if needed). 28mm was your standard wide angle lens on film. 24 or wider were rare options. This is all moot though. If the OP is into his wide angle landscape stuff, those lenses may be sensible choices. If however he floats around the 50mm range more often, then the 18-55 is a rarely needs wide option if/when he needs it.
For those film shooters who are used to a simple 50mm prime on film, the the obvious suggestion is a DA35 f2.4 (or better yet, a DA35 f2.8 ltd). It all depends on what lenses the OP has. I'd still say that owning an 18-55 is worth it if your widest lens is a 28mm
---------- Post added 03-26-16 at 08:13 PM ----------
Although, there is of course the stupid option - a Pentax k-1. It'll cost you £1600, but will probably do you for the next 16 years, and will mean all of your lenses will behave exactly the same as they do now on film.