K50 w/18-135mm, Good Choice?

Setter Dog · 02-01-2016, 09:19 AM

Hi Folks,

I haven't been hanging around the Pentax forums for awhile now, having sold my K50 about 6 months ago and changed to m43 as my main system.

I now have a potential "need" for a WR camera in the National Parks this March and am wondering what to get. I'm thinking of the Pany FZ300 but can't shake the memory of the K50 from my head. I liked the camera and have regretted selling it. I'm considering the K50 w/18-135mm WR lens. It would be okay for most of my shooting in the parks. I don't like to change lenses much and would probably only add one other lens, a fast prime for indoor shooting.

As a JPEG shooter, I liked the results of the K50 and also it's low light results. The ability to use AA batteries was a nice feature.

Technology changes rapidly and I'm wondering if there's a better option than the K50/18-135 in the same price range, $500-600? If there's a good long zoom available, I'm not locked into the 18-135mm.

Thanks for any input. You folks are the experts!

Jack

Outis · 02-01-2016, 09:28 AM

I think the K-50 with the 18-135 would be a great choice. If you get more use out of the wide end than the long end of a zoom, you might look at the 16-85, or if you really want a newer and slightly more advanced body, you might consider the K-S2, but honestly I think you'd be very happy with what you already have in mind.

**jatrax** · 02-01-2016, 09:31 AM

Originally posted by Setter Dog

Technology changes rapidly and I'm wondering if there's a better option than the K50/18-135 in the same price range, $500-600? If there's a good long zoom available, I'm not locked into the 18-135mm.

In that price range the k-50 and 18-135 is still a very good combo. You might consider a used k-3 and 18-135 if you can find one in your budget, that would give you the 24mp sensor. There is also the Pentax K-S2 with a 20mp sensor. Not sure about prices on that but worth a look.

The 18-135 is still the best available in that focal length and price range. You would need to spend significantly more to get better and it would be two lenses, not one.

pathdoc · 02-01-2016, 09:33 AM

The alternative lens often discussed is the 16-85mm f/3.5 - 5.6. Furious arguments rage around which of the two is the best. I think in WR terms it's the only other lens that comes close in zoom and WR terms together - the 16-50 SDM is faster (f/2.8 throughout), but has a cloud over its head because of AF motor reliability issues, and has less zoom range. Those things may or may not be deal breakers for you, assuming you can find one at the right price.

As far as cameras go, I cannot advise you. I bought my K-5 as a necessary replacement for a very dead *ist-DL, so I missed all the K's in between, and I've been sufficiently happy with it that I've never felt the need to buy another digital camera since (the fact that the K-3 and arguably even the KS-2 are much better cameras notwithstanding). The next DSLR I buy will almost certainly be the full-frame, and that's certainly not within your nominated budget!

If for some reason I had to replace my K-5 with another DSLR before the FF came out, it would be with another K-5 - i.e. I would replace like with like, just as you are thinking of doing.

Setter Dog · 02-01-2016, 09:58 AM

Thanks to all for the friendly and helpful replies. Now I remember what a great forum this is. I'll look into the other suggestions but will likely go with the K50 since I remember liking it very much.

Jack

**W.j.christy** · 02-01-2016, 10:03 AM

Honestly, I would look for a new k5ii with the 18-135. You would get the same sensor and image processing with more features and a magnesium alloy body plus no aa fliter which from the sounderlying of the ops original post might be useful. I think there are still some kits left on ebay and amazon for good prices. Might be worth a look.

jimr-pdx · 02-01-2016, 01:38 PM

Originally posted by W.j.christy

Honestly, I would look for a new k5ii with the 18-135. You would get the same sensor and image processing with more features and a magnesium alloy body plus no aa fliter w...

Note it must be the IIs for no aa filter, the II still has it.

Setter Dog · 02-01-2016, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by jimr-pdx

Note it must be the IIs for no aa filter, the II still has it.

Thanks, Jim. I'll look around for the Kiis,....sounds like a great choice.
Jack

jimr-pdx · 02-01-2016, 02:34 PM

It's still a fine choice. I like my red K-50 but some times the extra battery life, iso80 or other K-5 feature is worth having!

**psubadger** · 02-01-2016, 02:54 PM

I got a K30 with the 18-135 for similar purposes, though I wanted to be able to get some range for wildlife as well. I think that it is a great combo for me, and I'm quite pleased with my choice. That being said, I since have added the 55-300 WR (the wildlife interest), so if I had it to do over, I'd think awfully hard about the 16-85.

fredralphfred · 02-01-2016, 06:21 PM

Originally posted by jimr-pdx

It's still a fine choice. I like my red K-50 but some times the extra battery life, iso80 or other K-5 feature is worth having!

Well, he said he was going to be using AA's, so he'll have the same battery life as the K-5 already. However, we know that because of the AA batteries, he won't be able to take professional pictures. And the AA's have no place in the camera. But perhaps he can make do. (Not trying to pick on jimr-pdx; just trying to derail the thread with a discussion of the inferior AA battery.)

Setter Dog · 02-01-2016, 06:34 PM

Originally posted by fredralphfred

Well, he said he was going to be using AA's, so he'll have the same battery life as the K-5 already. However, we know that because of the AA batteries, he won't be able to take professional pictures. And the AA's have no place in the camera. But perhaps he can make do. (Not trying to pick on jimr-pdx; just trying to derail the thread with a discussion of the inferior AA battery.)

Not sure if you're serious or what, but your post makes no sense to me,........

jimr-pdx · 02-01-2016, 08:40 PM

I was referring to Li90 vs Li109 capacity, didn't think about AA since I cannot find my adapter

As to IQ for each the K-50 has a newer model-year of the sensor but the aa filter is in place unlike the 5IIs. Other than snickering that a 'pro' is using AA batteries I see no downside to a camera that can make use of them.

Theov39 · 02-02-2016, 09:15 AM

That is the combo I use and I am constantly amazed at the tonal quality of my photos. I'd say go for it. Yes, a K-3 would nice but then you are looking at a whole different price range.

**W.j.christy** · 02-02-2016, 09:34 AM

Originally posted by jimr-pdx

Note it must be the IIs for no aa filter, the II still has it.

Yep thanks for the correction, I got a little confused as to which was which.

craigslist has been a great help to if you are in an area that it reaches for used and sometime new gear. .

02-01-2016, 09:19 AM	#1
Setter Dog Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Location: Orange County California Posts: 117	K50 w/18-135mm, Good Choice? Hi Folks, I haven't been hanging around the Pentax forums for awhile now, having sold my K50 about 6 months ago and changed to m43 as my main system. I now have a potential "need" for a WR camera in the National Parks this March and am wondering what to get. I'm thinking of the Pany FZ300 but can't shake the memory of the K50 from my head. I liked the camera and have regretted selling it. I'm considering the K50 w/18-135mm WR lens. It would be okay for most of my shooting in the parks. I don't like to change lenses much and would probably only add one other lens, a fast prime for indoor shooting. As a JPEG shooter, I liked the results of the K50 and also it's low light results. The ability to use AA batteries was a nice feature. Technology changes rapidly and I'm wondering if there's a better option than the K50/18-135 in the same price range, $500-600? If there's a good long zoom available, I'm not locked into the 18-135mm. Thanks for any input. You folks are the experts! Jack

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax k50 + 18-135mm lens star shooting help.	max77p	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	10	08-28-2015 10:05 PM
Overall size K50 w/18-55 WR?	csa	Pentax K-30 & K-50	2	09-20-2014 12:13 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax k50 bundle w/SMC DAL 18-55 WR, CustomSLR Mplate/cloop/strap, Mefoto, accrs	sjducks	Sold Items	4	02-20-2014 01:59 PM
K30 w/ 18-135mm or K5 w/ 18-55mm AL WR & SMCP-DA 50-200mm WR	biscohuffer	Pentax DSLR Discussion	8	06-25-2013 08:30 PM

02-01-2016, 09:28 AM	#2
Outis Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Cambridge, MA Posts: 935	I think the K-50 with the 18-135 would be a great choice. If you get more use out of the wide end than the long end of a zoom, you might look at the 16-85, or if you really want a newer and slightly more advanced body, you might consider the K-S2, but honestly I think you'd be very happy with what you already have in mind.

02-01-2016, 09:31 AM	#3
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by Setter Dog Technology changes rapidly and I'm wondering if there's a better option than the K50/18-135 in the same price range, $500-600? If there's a good long zoom available, I'm not locked into the 18-135mm. In that price range the k-50 and 18-135 is still a very good combo. You might consider a used k-3 and 18-135 if you can find one in your budget, that would give you the 24mp sensor. There is also the Pentax K-S2 with a 20mp sensor. Not sure about prices on that but worth a look. The 18-135 is still the best available in that focal length and price range. You would need to spend significantly more to get better and it would be two lenses, not one.

02-01-2016, 09:33 AM	#4
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	The alternative lens often discussed is the 16-85mm f/3.5 - 5.6. Furious arguments rage around which of the two is the best. I think in WR terms it's the only other lens that comes close in zoom and WR terms together - the 16-50 SDM is faster (f/2.8 throughout), but has a cloud over its head because of AF motor reliability issues, and has less zoom range. Those things may or may not be deal breakers for you, assuming you can find one at the right price. As far as cameras go, I cannot advise you. I bought my K-5 as a necessary replacement for a very dead *ist-DL, so I missed all the K's in between, and I've been sufficiently happy with it that I've never felt the need to buy another digital camera since (the fact that the K-3 and arguably even the KS-2 are much better cameras notwithstanding). The next DSLR I buy will almost certainly be the full-frame, and that's certainly not within your nominated budget! If for some reason I had to replace my K-5 with another DSLR before the FF came out, it would be with another K-5 - i.e. I would replace like with like, just as you are thinking of doing.

02-01-2016, 09:58 AM	#5
Setter Dog Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Location: Orange County California Posts: 117 Original Poster	Thanks to all for the friendly and helpful replies. Now I remember what a great forum this is. I'll look into the other suggestions but will likely go with the K50 since I remember liking it very much. Jack

02-01-2016, 10:03 AM	#6
W.j.christy Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2015 Location: Texas Photos: Albums Posts: 558	Honestly, I would look for a new k5ii with the 18-135. You would get the same sensor and image processing with more features and a magnesium alloy body plus no aa fliter which from the sounderlying of the ops original post might be useful. I think there are still some kits left on ebay and amazon for good prices. Might be worth a look.

02-01-2016, 01:38 PM	#7
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	Originally posted by W.j.christy Honestly, I would look for a new k5ii with the 18-135. You would get the same sensor and image processing with more features and a magnesium alloy body plus no aa fliter w... Note it must be the IIs for no aa filter, the II still has it.

02-01-2016, 01:43 PM	#8
Setter Dog Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Location: Orange County California Posts: 117 Original Poster	Originally posted by jimr-pdx Note it must be the IIs for no aa filter, the II still has it. Thanks, Jim. I'll look around for the Kiis,....sounds like a great choice. Jack

02-01-2016, 02:34 PM	#9
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	It's still a fine choice. I like my red K-50 but some times the extra battery life, iso80 or other K-5 feature is worth having!

02-01-2016, 02:54 PM	#10
psubadger Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2013 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 19	I got a K30 with the 18-135 for similar purposes, though I wanted to be able to get some range for wildlife as well. I think that it is a great combo for me, and I'm quite pleased with my choice. That being said, I since have added the 55-300 WR (the wildlife interest), so if I had it to do over, I'd think awfully hard about the 16-85.

02-01-2016, 06:21 PM	#11
fredralphfred Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Location: Orting, WA Posts: 252	Originally posted by jimr-pdx It's still a fine choice. I like my red K-50 but some times the extra battery life, iso80 or other K-5 feature is worth having! Well, he said he was going to be using AA's, so he'll have the same battery life as the K-5 already. However, we know that because of the AA batteries, he won't be able to take professional pictures. And the AA's have no place in the camera. But perhaps he can make do. (Not trying to pick on jimr-pdx; just trying to derail the thread with a discussion of the inferior AA battery.)

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-01-2016, 06:34 PM	#12
Setter Dog Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Location: Orange County California Posts: 117 Original Poster	Originally posted by fredralphfred Well, he said he was going to be using AA's, so he'll have the same battery life as the K-5 already. However, we know that because of the AA batteries, he won't be able to take professional pictures. And the AA's have no place in the camera. But perhaps he can make do. (Not trying to pick on jimr-pdx; just trying to derail the thread with a discussion of the inferior AA battery.) Not sure if you're serious or what, but your post makes no sense to me,........

02-01-2016, 08:40 PM	#13
jimr-pdx Pentaxian Join Date: May 2010 Location: now 1 hour north of PDX Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,897	I was referring to Li90 vs Li109 capacity, didn't think about AA since I cannot find my adapter As to IQ for each the K-50 has a newer model-year of the sensor but the aa filter is in place unlike the 5IIs. Other than snickering that a 'pro' is using AA batteries I see no downside to a camera that can make use of them.

02-02-2016, 09:15 AM	#14
Theov39 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Sydney Posts: 594	That is the combo I use and I am constantly amazed at the tonal quality of my photos. I'd say go for it. Yes, a K-3 would nice but then you are looking at a whole different price range.

02-02-2016, 09:34 AM	#15
W.j.christy Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2015 Location: Texas Photos: Albums Posts: 558	Originally posted by jimr-pdx Note it must be the IIs for no aa filter, the II still has it. Yep thanks for the correction, I got a little confused as to which was which. craigslist has been a great help to if you are in an area that it reaches for used and sometime new gear. .