Da* lenses


gtis

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 19:46
Hi all
This is a hypothetical question if money was no object would you invest
In all da* lenes since I have already have two it would only cost me
About 3500
cheers Neil
pentax k3 k5 super A
DA* 300 f4 DA* 50-135 f 2.8 smc DA* 16-50 f2.8 50mm f1.7 af 360 fgz pentax1.4xhd converter
sigma 17-70




Panasonic Dmc Fz200

DrOrloff

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 19:55
Not really. It's all about how the lens collection fits together. I have the DA*50-135 and DA*300. Even though the DA*200 looks stellar it is a bit too specialist in terms of what I do. Because I have those two lenses there seens little point in a 60-250. And I am an even bigger fan of the FALtds so I am not tempted by the 55.
You can see some of my photos here if you are so inclined

gtis

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 20:05
Hi
I too have the 50-135 and the 300 I would like the 16-50 instead of the 17-70
cheers Neil
pentax k3 k5 super A
DA* 300 f4 DA* 50-135 f 2.8 smc DA* 16-50 f2.8 50mm f1.7 af 360 fgz pentax1.4xhd converter
sigma 17-70




Panasonic Dmc Fz200

Gamka

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 22:39
I have the 16-50, 50-135 and 300. I did think about getting the 200 at the same time but decided it was not significantly different to the 50-135 at the top and would sit unused.

Since buying them, I have never though "I need a 200" and am happy with my set.

I do have other non DA* such as 24-90, 50-200, 100, 20-35 which sometimes get taken along when I only want one lens and know what I want to do.

CMW

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 22:58
gtis wrote:
I would like the 16-50 instead of the 17-70

The 16-50 does not exactly shine in the reviews. Photozone.de is fairly unimpressed, and even the new review carried on Pentax User identifies some limitations that would be significant for some. I chose the 17-70 over the 16-50 largely on the basis of what I read. I find the 17-70 fine. It's not exceptional. It is curious that Pentax has not made a really stand-out modern zoom for this popular focal range.
Regards, Christopher

ChristopherWheelerPhotography

gtis

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 23:01
hi cmw
my 17-70 is a sigma so i can not comment on the pentax 17-70
cheers Neil
pentax k3 k5 super A
DA* 300 f4 DA* 50-135 f 2.8 smc DA* 16-50 f2.8 50mm f1.7 af 360 fgz pentax1.4xhd converter
sigma 17-70




Panasonic Dmc Fz200

davidstorm

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 23:05
I have a Pentax 17-70 (which I like) and will have a Sigma 17-70 tomorrow which I think I might also like! I've just bought a 50-135 and would really like a DA*300 but I'm not hankering after any of the others. I'll probably sell one of the 17-70's, depending on which one I get on with the least. My focus at present is gathering some decent glass, but I don't think that DA* is the be all and end all.

Regards
David
Flickr

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs

CMW

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 23:08
Ah, OK. But I suppose my point is that I'd have anticipated that Pentax would have ensured that this popular range (16/17--50/70) would have a stunning lens comparable to the 50-135 in terms of quality.
Regards, Christopher

ChristopherWheelerPhotography

johnriley

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 23:16
The DA* 16-50mm is the companion lens to the 50-135mm.
Best regards, John

davidtrout

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 23:29
I've got three DA* lenses, 16-50, 50-35 and 200 and love all three, they cover 99% of all my photographic requirements. If I need to go wider than 16mm I've got a Sigma 10-20 which used to get used a lot but not very often now, although it still there when I need it.
I can't imagine why the DA*16-50 gets indifferent reviews, for me its superb.
The DA* 200mm, which I bought last summer when my DA*50-135 autofocus was playing up, is now used an awful lot. Its great for head on action shots of steam trains at speed on the main line and also for events like the Pickering Steam Fair and Edinburgh Fringe were I use it for portraits using shallow depth of field to separate the subject from the crowds.
I don't suffer from LBA and have no ambition to buy any more lenses although I recently acquired the DA f2.4 35mm with a new K3 and fancy using it as a walk about lens.
The earlier Pentax lenses from my film days don't get used now simply because the image quality doesn't compete with the DA* series.
David

PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout
PPG: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/davidtrout

CMW

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 23:30
johnriley wrote:
The DA* 16-50mm is the companion lens to the 50-135mm.

Formally, yes, I understand that. That wasn't really the point.
Regards, Christopher

ChristopherWheelerPhotography

johnriley

Link Posted 28/03/2014 - 23:31
How would you summarise the point?
Best regards, John

Mannesty

Link Posted 29/03/2014 - 07:19
I have had all of the DA* lenses except the 200mm. With the 60-250mm there seemed little point in having the 200mm as well apart from it's faster aperture.

I sold the 300mm because it was getting very little use and used the cash towards a K-5 II.

Whilst I still have the 60-250mm, it's max aperture of f4 is too limiting for my winter nighttime motorsport needs and I now use a Sigma 70-200mm 1:2.8. I'll be using the 60-250mm again in the summer daylight for its image quality which only very slightly beats the Siggy.

I still have, and regularly use, the 16-50 & 50-135.
Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream

malcolmk

Link Posted 29/03/2014 - 08:49
davidtrout wrote:
I can't imagine why the DA*16-50 gets indifferent reviews, for me its superb.

I agree. I switched from the 18-135 to DA* 16-50 as my walk about lens and will not be going back.

CMW

Link Posted 29/03/2014 - 09:41
johnriley wrote:
How would you summarise the point?

Please see my post above (23:08 ). For a * lens it has attracted quite critical reviews that while acknowledging undoubted strengths, find its shortcomings more or less astonishing in a lens of its price and intended quality. The criticisms below were pretty much pulled at random from reviews. It would be easy to multiply them many times over.

'it has some obvious problems like a weak border performance at max. aperture and very pronounced lateral chromatic aberrations (CAs)'
Photozone

'Unfortunately, the sharpness delivered at maximum aperture towards the edges of the frame falls short of what you may expect from a premium lens from a camera manufacturer'
Pentax User

'Unfortunately, it isn't all that sharp at its maximum aperture and displays significant distortion at the wide end of its zoom range'
PC Magazine

It's clearly possible to use this lens and play to its strengths. I suspect that's where the discrepancies between reviews and 'lived experience' arise. If you stop down enough, if software corrects the distortions etc.... But is it credible that so many reviewers are outright wrong about the limitations of this lens?

And my point, simply, was that Pentax do not yet appear to have provided, if the reviews as a whole have any merit, a true companion (in qualatitive terms) to the 50-135.
Regards, Christopher

ChristopherWheelerPhotography
Last Edited by CMW on 29/03/2014 - 09:41
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.