[res3567]

I have a K10D. I had three lenses when I bought the camera; 50mm f2.0 manual focus, 35-80 f3.5-5.6, and a Sigma 28-105 f2.8-f4.0. Remember these are film SLR lenses. Most DSLR have the smaller sensor so you get that ever so SWEET SPOT directly in the MIDDLE of the lens! Took a few pics of my two year old grandson as was BLOWN AWAY with the shrpness after I printed an 8.5 by 12 on my HP printer! The lens I used was the Sigma. The trade off of course is that I have very limited wide angle capabilities. My next lens? Why the kit 18-55 of course! Hopes this helps.

[Marc Sabatella]

The 18-55mm lens takes great pictures, now that I'm using the right metering, but I find myself switching to the 50-200mm lens because it's faster at 55mm than the 18-55mm lens and seems to take better pictures.

I agree - my 50-200 is really quite good at 50mm. Not as good as my A50/1.7, but actually not *that* far off, either. Definitely miles ahead of the 18-55 (either version) in sharpness (especially at wide apertures), as well as being a stop faster.

I really want to buy a 17-70mm DA lens when it comes out.

??? Some people seem to already have one...

FWIW, I am unlikely to get this lens, although if I were made of money, I could see myself going back and forth on it. But as it is, I'm more likely to get a DA70 to supplement my DA 18-55 II and DA40, and perhaps a DA21 to complete the pancake trio and then mostly retire the 18-55 II.

[deejjjaaaa]

Definitely miles ahead of the 18-55 (either version) in sharpness (especially at wide apertures)

how come ?

according to copies tested @ photozone.de

18-55/3.5-5.6 v1 @ 55mm

f5.6 = 1994/1819
f8.0 = 2106/1866
f11.0 = 2037/1948

50-200/4-5.6 @ 50mm

f5.6 = 1995/1308
f8.0 = 2174/1601
f11.0 = 2024/1735

you gain a little @ center (only with f8.0 really), but you lost a lot @ borders (from 5.6 onwards)

now if v2 is better than v1 it will smoke 50-200.

[pentaxshooter]

Ditto on the 16-45mm. An excellent lens all-around. I shoot weddings professionally with this lens and have never had any problems.....you will need a flash indoors though.

[Marc Sabatella]

how come ?

Because when *I* actually take pictures with these lenses, the 50-200 is clearly sharper, with what I perceived to be better color and contrast, at f/4 than the 18-55 (either version) is at f/5.6. The fall off in corner sharpness is *not* something I've noticed myself, and in any case, given that this focal length is basically one in which my most likely subject matter is portraits, corner sharpness is rarely a concern.

now if v2 is better than v1 it will smoke 50-200.

I foudn the difference betwene 18-55 I & II to be negligible compared to the difference between either of these and 50-200. On the other hand, the difference between any of these is *really* negligible compared to the improvement one gets stepping up to the 50/1.7.

[weaponx525]

The 18-55mm lens takes great pictures, now that I'm using the right metering, but I find myself switching to the 50-200mm lens because it's faster at 55mm than the 18-55mm lens and seems to take better pictures. Ebay has several 28-70mm f4 FA lenses for sale. I'm just wondering if the FA lens is better, meaning faster than the 18-55mm lens I have now. I really want to buy a 17-70mm DA lens when it comes out.

explr1, which metering did you find the most suitable when you used the 18-55?

I personally agree that the 18-55 can take some really great pics. It would just be a matter of "figuring out" it's limitations and working within them. In this learning process you will be able to learn a lot about photography and then decide on your personal upgrade path. I definitely get that LBA itch but I keep reminding myself about how much I need to learn still and also having seen some really great pics being taken by the kit lens.