Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-02-2017, 04:37 PM   #1
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 81
16-85 for portraits, or

Unfortunately I recently dropped my 16-50 2.8 and damaged it to where repair is cost prohibitive. I now need a wide angle lens as I have nothing below 50mm. I have tossed around several options but can't seem to settle on anything, so I am hoping for a little help from you all. I am strongly considering the 16-85 but am concerned about bokeh when shooting portraits so have considered buying a used 16-50. What are your thoughts, and are there any other options I haven't considered?


To clarify my original post above: (Added 9/3/17 at 9:57 am)

I have a 50-135 2.8 that I use for most of my portraits, but there are situations where I want a wider angle and still have the nice out of focus background. For example I shoot pictures in the lobby and worship center of my church where the lighting isn't so great and where I can't use a flash. Also because there are multiple people in the frame it is nice to have the shallow DOF to isolate my subject while adding context from everything else in the frame. I would purchase the 16-85 in a heartbeat if I thought I wouldn't, 1) end up having to shoot at higher ISO resulting in nosier images, and 2) lose isolation from the higher Fstop. It's also worth mentioning that I loved my 16-50 and would get a used one if I wasn't worried about the SDM failure, and I like quiet lenses, so screw drive not an option.

Reading everyone's comments definitely helps think through the options, so thank you!
Report Post


Last edited by djam; 09-03-2017 at 08:00 AM.
09-02-2017, 05:15 PM - 3 Likes   #2
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,962
Why are you worried about bokeh in portraits? Is that like a requirement or something?

I've taken that 16-85 around the world (twice in fact) and it's fine so long as there is decent light. In ultra low light it's not 'as good' but it gets the job done.

Here is an informal street snapshot I took in Istanbul just as one example taken with that lens. 43mm at f5.6. ISO 100.

09-02-2017, 05:20 PM - 1 Like   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,962
Another one taken with that lens. Sorry but I can't blow it up big like it's supposed to be. Bright (really bright) sunny conditions. Location in the badlands of Kenya. Maasai woman (interesting back story here).

28mm, f8, ISO 200

09-02-2017, 05:23 PM   #4
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 595
The 16-85 is a fine lens and works well wide open---so yes portraits are nice. The 77 FA or 70 DA are better, of course, but not as versatile when traveling.

09-02-2017, 05:25 PM   #5
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,037
Bokeh is a highly subjective thing. So look at some image samples on the forum here for the lenses you are interested in.

If you don't need WR the Tamron 17-50 2.8 is fast, sharp, cheap with a decent form factor.
09-02-2017, 09:09 PM - 1 Like   #6
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 81
Original Poster
Thanks all for the info. I am thinking the Sigma 17-50 2.8 may be the route I go. Seems to be a good compromise between the DA* 16-50 2.8 I had and the DA 16-85 3.5-5.6
09-02-2017, 09:15 PM - 1 Like   #7
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
twilhelm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Florida
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,369
I agree with Brooke that the DA 17-70 is a good choice. While the 16-85 is a great lens, for portraiture I completely agree you need faster. I prefer the FA 77, but nearly any 2.8 or f4.0 lens will render an ugly background out of focus leaving you with a more pleasant picture.

If portraits are your main purpose, but you want wide, I would look at one of the 17-70 options, be it Pentax, Sigma or Tamron.

Good luck!

09-02-2017, 11:01 PM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Italia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 354
For portraiture I would buy something in the 50-77 area, say the inexpensive 50 1,8 or the beautiful 77 ltd, depending on my budget. Otherwise , I would look for a 200 f/2,8 tele or a legacy 100 non macro (there's an old 100 f/2,8 if I'm rght) for a different way of shooting but great background blur and bokeh.
My 2 cents.
09-03-2017, 12:39 AM   #9
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 49
K

QuoteOriginally posted by djam Quote
Thanks all for the info. I am thinking the Sigma 17-50 2.8 may be the route I go. Seems to be a good compromise between the DA* 16-50 2.8 I had and the DA 16-85 3.5-5.6
Hello. The sigma 17-50 f2.8 Is a very sharp lens and is quick too. You won't regret

http://olhares.sapo.pt/luismpg

Good in interiors and outside. Nice and smooth bocket. See the dxomark site. Regards
09-03-2017, 04:31 AM - 1 Like   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Italia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 354
Perhaps I'm off-topic, but given the op original post, he wants to replace the 16-50 also for wides. I would suggest the 15 or the 21 ltd, as a single-lens solution for wide. So 15ltd+50 1,8 would replace the 16-50, giving more IQ , IMHO, at a similar price.
09-03-2017, 04:39 AM   #11
Pentaxian
Kozlok's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,145
Buy a DA50 or better yet DA55 or FA43 for portraits. If you have the room, the FA77 is even better.

And the 16-85 for travel.
09-03-2017, 05:38 AM   #12
Seeker of Knowledge
Loyal Site Supporter
aslyfox's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Topeka, Kansas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,563
My $ .02 ( or less ) worth

zoom vs. prime

where have I seen this " discussion " before

I like my DA 3.5-5.6 16 - 85 mm for how versatile it is - it is my best " wide angle " choice of all my lens

I also like my DA 2.8 40 mm xs, my DA 1.8 50 and my D FA 2.8 100 mm macro ( not the WR one )

I choose one or the other based on my anticipated need but I don't hesitate to use any of them if I don't have the " appropriate " one on the K 3 or K 5 II

I remember the old film era

below 50 mm ish = wide angle

50 mm ish = portrait

above 50 mm ish = short telephoto



if cash is short, choose the lens that is most versatile, and start hunting for bargains on something better down the road

the market place here at the forum is a great source for that, the sellers I have dealt with there were concerned about the buyers as well as selling their equipment

I am quite satisfied with the DA 2.8 40 mm xs, , D FA 2.8 100 mm macro and D FA* 70-200mm F2.8 ED DC AW, all bought in Like New condition from fellow forum members



[ please remember that my opinion and $ will buy coffee at the diner ]

Last edited by aslyfox; 09-03-2017 at 06:07 AM.
09-03-2017, 05:46 AM   #13
Veteran Member
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,186
I'm not sure I understand, OP. You have lenses above 50mm and nothing wider. So then buy something wider, and use the telephoto lenses for portraits.
Do you need FF or APSC lens? You have lots of options on the wide side, and lots of options for portrait lenses. But few lenses will do both.
I'd recommend you get something wide (between 15 and 40mm) for landscapes, travel, indoor photos. And then a lens specifically for portraits, something between 55mm and 135mm, depending on your camera and portrait style. Write a list of you needs (format, size, aperture, WR, whatever you want) and then compare lenses to that list

If you insist on zooms, something like this would be really nice: DA 20-40mm limited, DA* 50-135mm f2.8. But I don't know what lenses you already have
09-03-2017, 06:06 AM   #14
Seeker of Knowledge
Loyal Site Supporter
aslyfox's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Topeka, Kansas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,563
I wonder if the OP has looked at the photos posted in this thread?

DA 16-85 WR,show us what it can do. - Page 46 - PentaxForums.com

and if the OP found any that has a nice " back ground " that is likeable why not contact that photographer to see how they manipulated the 16 - 85 to achieve that pleasing result.
09-03-2017, 06:48 AM - 1 Like   #15
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,590
Why are you worried about bokeh in portraits? Is that like a requirement or something?


Yes.
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, dslr, options, photography, portraits
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help: FA* 85 1.4 or Zeiss Planak 85 1.4 ZK ? Jome Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 08-24-2016 12:30 PM
DA 16-85 vs. DA* 16-50; which is a better travel lens? Newtophotos Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 41 01-08-2016 08:32 AM
pentax 16-85 vs samyang 16 at 16mm? pintax Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 01-01-2016 03:44 PM
Keep DA 16-45 or Go for DA 16-85? Biro Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 12-31-2015 08:44 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:01 PM. | 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