Lens for hillwalking DA* 16-50

Have to agree here, and they're are many others who would too.

The 18-55 kit is a superbly useful and light lens, and stopped down to F8-F11 its sharp as you need. If I had a K5 with its reputed ISO excellence, I would be stopping down on the Av ot TAv setting and letting the camera figure out the rest. (Then selling all my other lenses if things hit the wall financially )

You could spend 7 times the money yes, but your only going to get a tiny percentage improvement. Just like most hobbys (I used to really be into audio equipment )

As above says the 16-45 gives the 16-50 a run for its money, a far cheaper alternative

Save your money IMO, or blow it on a FA77 Ltd for a 'magazine shot maker'

The 77 sounds really good but will maybe see if I could find one for sale second hand for a bit cheaper than new (I had better get saving! But getting married this year heh). I decided to go for the Tamron because I doubt my fiancé would let me stand around taking photos in the rain at the top of a Munro anyway lol Plus I have a Panasonic FT3 waterproof compact camera for really foul weather.

Maybe I do indeed have a wonky 18-55 never actually tested it in the house for BF or FF but just never seemed to get sharp results. I have been trying to get my fiancé into photography so if I find I need a more weather resistant lens I may just give it to her and go to the DA* 16-50 route in the end if it bugs me that much

Since i have ordered the Tamron now I have been having a look around at covers. Anyone know of a good make? The Kata one looks a bit bulky and you have to look through the plastic of the cover to see into the viewfinder. Will get a couple of optech rainsleeves as a backup but saw a couple of sites such as here and here which may be better.

Sadly srs didn't have the Tamron in stock (they will on Tuesday) but I recieved the other lenses I ordered. The battery grip makes a huge difference in the feel of the camera I love it! I haven't had a chance to use the lenses I got but wow the 40mm is so tiny!

Im still a bit torn about the Tamron even though I have it on order, the fact I could still cancel it and get the Pentax has me wondering if I should just get it for the piece of mind having a lens that can withstand a bit of rain (which is why I bought a Pentax anyway) ... But then again it is £300 more

I appreciate all the advice from everyone Happy new year to everyone ^_^

I used to be indecisive but now I'm not so sure

I would always say if you can afford the Pentax get the Pentax. Equally applies to all marques by the way - the maker's own products usually gel best together.

There are times when I want to take photos in heavy rain, and a WR lens would come in useful (I use the 18-55mm - it's not thaaat bad! :wink

But I have to admit, these occasions are pretty rare, for me. Heavy rain which has 'set in' tends to reduce visibility, although it can be quite atmospheric. In light rain or drizzle, a non-WR lens is fine if mainly kept in its bag or under your coat.

A WR lens does make a lot of sense if you are out in the rain with the camera exposed for long periods - sports or wildlife for example.

have you tried the DA*16-50 on your camera . i had K7/16-45 combo now have K5/ DA*16-50 and in comparison to the K7 set up the K5 set up is very heavy to carry around due to the weight of the lens.

I have now tried it now! I spoke to SRS and they cancelled the Tamron and I recieved the DA*16-50 today

To be honest I like a heavier lens and camera combination, as it feels more solid which was another of the big factors for me choosing pentax over the nikon that was cheaper at the time of buying my K10D. The pentax felt so much more solid and less like a kids toy!

Dwiea, I hope you like the 16-50. I've had one since I bought my K20d in 2008. I've used it in rain heavier than I like to be out in with no problems.

Bit late to this one but...

I do tend to think WR is a bit overplayed, for "normal" usage at least. I frequently take my DA17-70 into the Snowdonia mountains in all weathers and in the 3yrs I've owned it have never given a thought to it not being WR and never had a problem. If it's raining so heavy as to risk wrecking a lens then the photos you take will be pretty awful anyway!!

Anyway I see you've bought the 16-50 and I'm sure it will serve you well!!

Simon

I normally carry a set of Ltd lenses for my trips to the Scottish hills and generally find they are fine in most conditions so long as you dry them out afterward. However for the worst weather I take the DA* 16-50mm despite its bulk. For example I was out in blizzard conditions on 2nd Jan and did not want to be changing lenses etc., whilst taking pictures of the snow and wind captured the flavour of the day. Conditions were bad enough that the camera bag was full of snow!

The DA* lenses are the only lenses that I use a protection filter on the front (B+W). In really bad conditions you can get water/muck on the front element and may need to wipe it off to take the picture - risking scratching the front element in the field.

When you get home, make sure you let the lenses dry out thoroughly just in case any dampness has got inside.