Dissapointed,Now after a sharp lens

Just came back from a week in morroco, Excellent trip however I fired in excess of 400 shots, however so many seem soft and lack impact,the composure is perfect so its down to the lens and not technique, i took the 28-200 , i had some nice shots but really want something i can use to better the image quality, is the 17-70 ideal for my use or should i go even better again got about £400 to spend

The 28-200 is quite an old design (if you mean the Pentax).

From what others have said, the 17-70 is excellent, and for most people will be more useful as a general purpose lens. The 28-200 was designed for film cameras, and obviously lacks wide-angle on digital.

Image quality is probably not far off the 16-50, at a much more modest price.

G

Just noticed you have a Sigma 28-200. But the same applies; I would guess it is an old lens. In fact, I had one once, it might be the same version. It was pretty poor.

G

Check the EXIF to determine the range that covers most of the shots that you took and use that information to guide your decision.

I agree with George's comment, when it comes to zooms a newer 'designed for digital' usually translates to better IQ.

Steve

I think the Tamron 18-250 is excellent for an all in one. It can be a little flat in bright light (but so can many lenses) and you can currently pick one up at Jessops for £199 (their website is hopeless at the moment so you may need to phone to get one to the store).

I'd then sell your 28-200 and keep saving for the 60-250!

Can't vouch for any other lenses mentioned above but I have the 17-70 DA lens and am really pleased with it - although have been getting some AF hunting, but that might be the camera. It stays on the camera (K10D) most of the time. Have used it to produce a panoramic print approx 50 cm wide from the one 'frame' and the detail is incredible
Andy

i think thats what i will do then get the 17-70 and sell the 28-200 and get maby a longer zoom lens,hoping that i am off to africa next year for safari,so will need a nice zoom for that

You'll certainly need more than the 17-70 in Africa. But it would be good paired with the 50-300.

G

think i am going for a 50-500 for my africa trip, the bigma i think peeps call it, that should do me nicely

Many people buy the Bigma. Many sell it again. Because if you're serious about the long end for wildlife you need better IQ, something like the DA*300. And if you're shooting at 50mm you hardly need something that massive and slow. You know what they say about trying to please everybody.

Your superzoom should clue you in to the fact that they are average lenses for average purposes. They trade IQ for utility. That is fine for many people, but you have noticed it is not fine for you. Do not make the same mistake again.

Is your FA50/1.4 fast enough and sharp enough? If so, you know what you have to do: buy great primes for the tasks you need to perform. Do not compromise.

Thanks for the info rparmar i will take a look at the da*300, i will want pin sharp for this trip, as will be out on tour jeeps etc most of my time, also will be doing a lot of reptile photography so wont really need a long lens then, thats when my 50 will come in handy

I am not into telephoto myself, so my DA55-300 is good enough for my usage. I will say that I am quite picky about IQ. For example, the 50-200 was not good enough and neither was the Sigma 50-300 or whatever it is.

I have not used the DA*300 since every Pentax lens I have ever used I had to buy myself. But check around and you will see some absolutely fantastic images. No compromises here! For zoos and stuff the DA*200 is likely a better choice, but for safari you need long.

I have a Pentax F* 300mm f4.5 which is very very close IQ wise to the DA* 300mm f4, I recently (3 months ago) was lucky enough to find a used Sigma 50-500mm for a very good price.

Since I aquired the Bigma I can honestly say I have used the 300mm about 3 times. The prime is superior to the Sigma quality wise (there is not tha much in it tbh) but the Bigma more than makes up for it with the wide focal length. Also, with Pentax having inbody SR it is more than possible to hand hold in good light.

I know which I would take on safari ... and I'm serious about all my pictures, not just wildlife.

I wouldn't take a Bigma on safari for reasons of practicality.

When you are bumping around in a Land Cruiser full of other people the last thing you want is huge and heavy gear.

Furthermore, 500mm is over-kill unless you want to shoot birds. But then you'd be better off hiring your own car and going to somewhere like Lake Nakuru.

G

The Pentax 18-55mm and Bigma will easily fit in a reasonably sized bag and the lens itself is not that large or heavy when compared to some of the mad lenses you will see the Canon/Nikon crowd carrying on Safari