18-55 DA replacement

Glad to hear you're getting your money's worth, at least!

I was in the same situation as widezu69 a few years ago, having bought a K100 with the 18-55 DA MkI kit lens. Upgrading from a compact camera, I was disappointed by the lack of sharpness. I then bought the 16-45 DA and was happy with it - good sharpness from corner to corner and no pin cushion, but at the cost of carrying more bulk. I resolved this by bying the 40 DA. I can recommend this 'solution' and I still use all three lenses: 16-45 when quality matters, 18-55 for general photography giving the best trade-off between bulk/weight and range, and 40 when I want to travel light. I hope this helps.

When I upgraded from the DA18-55 I bought a DA*16-50 which is a very nice lens but I found it rather bulky and heavy for a general purpose walk about lens. I now have the DA17-70f4 which is a bit smaller and lighter as well as giving more reach which I find surprisingly useful. I have been very happy with it but of course it is more expensive than the 16-45.

Archie

Wow a few days and this thread has evolved into a nice and informative discussion. Thanks for everyone's input. I think I'm going to do go for the sigma 17-70 with hsm as I'm quite keen on some faster quiet focusing (my tammy sounds like a bloody tractor) and I also like the f/2.8 which aside from the 16-50 (which is out of my price range) the other pentax alternatives don't have. Can anyone point me to cheap stock?

I recently bought a Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5 on a K10D body ( both 3nd hand ). I was after a 2nd body and this lens was kind of in my focal range I needed so I bought the pair. I wasn't sure at first with the 17-70, but after editing a 500 shot shoot in Lightroom tonight where I used it for the first time, I am happy with it. 17-70 is a good range.

The macro facilty is great too.

I think you'll enjoy it.

^^Great name

I too have been considering getting a different standard lens, thinking about the Sigma 17-70 but then I the 18-55 DA_L surprises me. The only reason for the Sigma would be the range and the closer focusing opportunities, but at the sake of having slightly larger lens and different filter/cap sizes than the rest of my kit. Yet to see anyone say much bad about the sigma on here.

I would certainly recommend trying out some of the older manuals. Having the 50mm 1.7 I really see the sharpness compare to the kit, but somehow something is not quite a warm as the kit and the problems with flare. This is not the case with my Corsina 21mm which is incredible for £30!

Would love to try out the DA40 to see how this compares to the old 50mm.

Well I took this shot today with the trusty 50/1.7, cropped from portrait format:




I am very pleased although perhaps I front-focused slightly. If you are having flare issues, you could always try a 2.99 ebay lens hood.

And the 24mm sigma superwide ii, last weekend in Bath - I was extremely pleased with the performance of the lens wide open... very sharp, and fast enough to throw the background just out of focus enough to give the shot depth:

I'm not sure if that's your sig or what the woman was saying.

i would spend your money on old glass every time,(1)its a investment ,(2)your not likely to break it,(3)to use it you have to improve your skills,alway a plus,(4)though its climbed a lot in price in recent years it still represents great value for money..I now have a hell of a lot of old glass,but its of no consequence to me,as i know it wont loose value.do you think i could say that of £2000 worth of new glass,its like a car 20% lost the moment it leaves the shop,and then gradually loosing value from there,with the soft plastic picking up scratches andlooking grubby a lot faster than a old super takumar ever did, ie-if you could go back in time and check the average tak at three years of age i bet 95%+ looked mint.one cheap 50mm 1.7f i rate is the chinon,but i prefere 55mm version more.and i think at 58mm helios 44m lenses are tak sharp.agree sigma 24mm is a gem that can still be found cheap,and cheaper still if you spot a cheap camera with three good primes with it.got zenit olympic 1980em with 28mm helios,58mm helios,135mm helios set for £42 in great condition other day.bargains are out there to be had.sorry for waffling but see some of you debating expensive glass and wonder if your wives know that you can achieve the same shots with glass a fraction of the price,or even have any idea how much your hobbies actually cost..as a example of loosing money,spotted a olympus e20p(5mp)for sale with all extra lenses including 300mm,all boxed £150,jumped on it of course.but in each box was reciept from 2001/2002 totalling over £2000..and looking at the camera it doesnt look like its took 2000 shots.i rest my case ,old glass rules ..

ROFLMAO!! - Nice one!!

Sorry to go over oldw ground but have just joined this forum and this thread is exactly my dilema at the moment. Having read through the thread, I had decided on the 12-24 as actually the IQ of my DAL 18-55 is not bad at all.
... but ... then I checked prices !
Looking back in the thread, some of you guys managed to catch the sell off at Jessops and got these for circa £250, the cheapest I can now see one on the web is circa £600 !
At this price, it is now neck and neck with the 16-50 DA*

AS my funds are extremely limited, my question is such, should I hold off and save some more while hopefully the exchange rate picks up at the same time, try and source used (any guide for current used prices ?) or look at something else ?

The only "bargains" I can see at the moment are the 16-45 at £220 or somethng completely different, the 100 DFA Macro for £299 (which I would eventually like some day).

What say you ?

There is not much to say since it all depends on what you want.
The DA12-24 and the DA*16-50 are two complete different lenses, not like for like comparable so personal preference play a big roll then.

For secondhand prices of the current model lenses I think it's normal they cost 2/3th to 3/4th of the new price but it can depend on the lens and the state of the lens of course.

A good decision. There is one on Pentax Forums right now for $600 (no affiliation). That is well worth it for the best wide-angle zoom you are going to find.

Whilst the Sigma 17-70 has been mentioned a few times, note that it's not a constant f2.8 throughout the zoom range. The Sigma 18-50 EX DC however is a constant f2.8 and also offers an excellent macro facility.

Coupled with the Sigma 10-20 they make a great pair IMHO, and I highly recommend the pair.

Regards
Adrian

Completely understand the 12-24 and 16-50 are totaly different ranges, I was using this as an example of how much the price of the 12-24 seems to have been inflated beyond exchange rate ...
12-24 has no focus motor and is neither limited ar * range, where the 16-50 is. Threfore, cost to produce 12-24 is significantly less than the 16-50 but the street price at the moment is roughly the same.
I understand there is nothing I can do about it, just having a moan. Its a pain though when you do the research, save the pennies to what you think you require then go to purchase and the price has doubled.

Might end up going with more "old" glass, as mentioned above.