[bartonkj]

I'm looking for thoughts/recommendations on a zoom lens for my K3. The lenses I currently have:
The basic 18-55 kit lens I got with my K10D
A Pentax 50mm 1.4
A Tamron 90mm 2.8 Macro

I want to get a zoom that goes out to 200 or 300, but would also consider something less than 200mm. I like the better quality of something like the Tamron 70-200 2.8, but it just seems too big/heavy for walking around the zoo or the kids soccer games, school events, etc.... But at the same time it also seems like I never have enough light when I'm using my kit lens and I'm worried I will have the same problem unless I get a lens that can do 2.8 or maybe 4.0 throughout it's focal range. I guess what it boils down to is that I don't like my kit lens all that much and a really good lens is too bulky for how I want to use it (not to mention more than what I really want to pay) - so what are some good in between options and what focal length do I really need (I've never really used anything longer than my 90mm)? Thanks.

[Adam]

I'd replace the 18-55mm with the 16-85mm:

HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

And then grab the 55-300mm as your tele zoom. It's nice and compact, and sharp The only tradeoff is loud AF.

HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4-5.8 ED WR Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews

[UncleVanya]

What's the budget? The DA* 60-250 f/4 is out there but be aware it loses reach when used close - inside 6m it is more like a 135mm but as you get farther away it performs as a 250mm lens. This is a sharp lens but costly and a bit bulky.

As far as faster options go there are 17-70 Sigma lenses that are f/2.8 at the wide end and f/4 on the long end that might help. The HD DA 55-300 Adam mentions is very good and would be fine albeit slower. The 16-85 he mentions is a fine lens albeit no faster than what you have. What is the body you are using and at what ISO do you see more noise than you want? Do you shoot raw or jpg?

[Paul the Sunman]

I agree with Adam: the 16-85 as a general walk-around wide zoom, and the 55-300 for reach. An excellent combo.

[UncleVanya]

I've had two soccer dad's use my DA* 60-250 - both decided that lens was THE lens for that use.
The lens however grows and grows and grows - it gets really long. It is also only f/4 and the SDM focusing can be sluggish for action shots if you aren't using quickshift or other techniques to improve hit ratios.

[hcc]

You will find that the K-3 allows you to shoot at much higher ISO than the K10, and this will enable to you to shoot in darker places, without fast lenses.

You already received some good advice and I will offer you another view. I have a K-3 (as main body), with a K-01 and K-7 as secondary bodies.

I like to shoot with an all-around zoom lens: the DA18-270mm or even the DA18-250mm. The DA18-270mm is very quiet and has a slightly longer reach; it can be purchased new. The DA18-250mm can be found 2nd hand and is a good value one IMO. Both lenses are very compact at 18 mm and excellent to travel/move around. They are also good all-around lenses compared to other brands, and they are light (much lighter than the Sigma 18-250mm or 18-300mm for example).

My DA18-270mm is my work hosed. When I want to do some special shots (low lights, portrait, ...), I use my primes.

Since you already have two decent prime lenses, I feel that an all-around lens (DA18-270mm or DA18-250mm) would make sense IMO.

Hope that the comment may help.

[pathdoc]

My thoughts:

WR one lens does all for the big-city urban shooter: 16-85mm
WR one lens does all for the wide open spaces: 18-135mm (the one I picked, because I spend very little time in big cities)
WR two-lens kit: 16-85 and 55-300 (minimises overlap, maximises total reach).
One lens to rule them all: secondhand 18-250 (which I own) or 18-270 - but neither is WR if this matters, and both are slow at the long end (f/6.3; hope you have lots of light or a tripod).

The problem with all of these, of course, is that they slow down at the long end.

The D-FA f/2.8 trinity are of course also compatible with the K3, but are fearsomely expensive and I would want to have won the lottery before buying any/all of these (I do not shoot professionally to amortize the expense, and cannot justify the cost as an enthusiast).

[bartonkj]

Thanks for the suggestions. Originally I was thinking of getting something more like a pro grade rather than consumer grade zoom lens but just wasn't sure. But after your suggestions and looking at reviews etc..., and realizing I am disappointed with the 18-55 kit lens, I decided to get 2 lower cost lenses: 1 to replace the kit lens and a telephoto zoom for longer reach. I went with a used Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 and I will also get the Pentax 55-300 3.5-5.6 DA WR. Thanks.

[clackers]

I went with a used Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 and I will also get the Pentax 55-300 3.5-5.6 DA WR. Thanks.

That's a very good combination, Bartonkj.


You said you want a zoom that goes up to 200 or 300mm and f2.8/4 but don't want the lens to be big - these are contradictory specifications!

[bartonkj]

You said you want a zoom that goes up to 200 or 300mm and f2.8/4 but don't want the lens to be big - these are contradictory specifications!

Hahaha, I know, I know, but big, or not, is all a matter of relativity. Besides, I was painting with broad strokes to get a general picture hoping the discussion would let me figure things out better as I went along - and that it did.

[clackers]

Hahaha, I know, I know, but big, or not, is all a matter of relativity. Besides, I was painting with broad strokes to get a general picture hoping the discussion would let me figure things out better as I went along - and that it did.

Sure. Glad it's all worked out ... post some pics when you can!

[zapp]

Football is well covered with 200mm on APS-C cameras. Soccer does not exist.
Try a decent (/70)-200 lens before sitting on the side playing with super zoom factors insteat of moving your feet. The Tamron 2.8 zoom is probably the best option here. Large aperture to capture sufficient light - you want to freeze fast moving objects. That said the Pentax 2.8/70-200 performs outstandingly on APS-C, but price and weight are very different from your 90 mm lens.

[BirdDude007]

I have used the 18-135 lens over the last 4 years. It is actually really good for an all around walk around lens. I have recently completed the zoom coverage with a 16~50, and a 50~135, along with Sigma 8~16 for some extra wide angle shots. I still keep the 18~135 on my camera for emergencies sake..... I just love the convenience and the IQ this lens provides...

[Kunzite]

With the new firmware, I guess the best option for a zoom reaching up to 300mm would be the DA 55-300 RE PLM (not the older, non-retractable versions).