LENS HEADACHE???

HI ALL
PLEASE CAN YOU HELP ,LOOKING FOR A LENS FOR MY K-R,WOULD LIKE 28-105, BUT THE FORUM ARE NOT THAT HAPPY WITH IT, SO THOUGHT 28-80, SAME RESPONSE,PLEASE WHAT DO YOU RECOMMEND, CANNOT UNDERSTAND IT THERE IS AF*** F*** SMC A ***PZ AND MANY OTHERS,WHAT DOES ALL THIS MEAN PLEASE.sKOULD I STICK TO PENTAX OR GO FOR SIGMA ??.
ALL I WANT IS A REALLY GOOD AF MID RANGE LENS PLEASE, ANY ADVICE MUCH APPRECIATED REGARDS TERRY[78]

With all that shouting I am not surprised you have a headache.

John

The 18-55mm kit lens is a good start, equivalent to a 35mm camera 28-80mm. Or the 18-135mm, equivalent to film 28-200mm.

Pentax make such lenses and very good they are as well.

Hi Terry,
The FA 28-105 pz lens in my opinion a good performer and very good value for money, a bit heavy though.
But if you are looking for a one-lens solution, its problem is that on a KR ( as on all crop factor DSRLs) it is an equivalent of a 42-157 lens in "film" (full frame) format so no wideangle.
A lens that would provide the same coverage on a K-R would be a Pentax DA 17-70 f.4, which has a very good reputation. Or if you want even more reach, there is a Pentax 18-135 (equivalent to 18-200 in full frame format).

I have both the 28-105 and the 18-135, and I am happy with both. The advantage of the 28-105 is that it is available used at a much lower price. It is not in production any longer, so not available new.

All 3 these lenses have been offered on this forum recently, not sure if still available. If you are interested you could put a "wanted" ad and I am sure you will receive some offers.

Many Thanks to John and Giorgio for there help and advice all noted and will look out for what comes up on the classified ,it was much appreciated gentlemen Regards Terry
PS [ Obviously you do not come from Durham ]

There is apparently an 18-135mm lens for sale here.

Hi Terry my FA 28-105 pz is still available if you want it.

Regards,

John

Another option is the very, very good FA 24-90.

As the OP has pointed out, the FA 28-80 f/3.5-4.7 & 28-105 both have poor reputations on this forum (as well as the other forum). Whilst I agree they don't feel well built and the zoom/focus rings aren't the smoothest, I don't think they're that bad.

When released with the Z-1, they both were reasonably well regarded and considered as being above average by both AP & PP lens tests, with the 28-105 being rated slightly better. There's little wrong with my Kodachrome slides shot on the Z-1 at the time.

There were various other FA 28-80s (F/3.5-5.6 & F/3.5-5.6 AL) - which were slower, cheaper and had the silver or black finish. According to this link the F/.5-5.6 AL actually scores lower than the non-AL one:link

Until I bought my DA 17-70, I used the 28-80 F/3.5-4.7 version on my K-5 (apart from the non-standard focal length - which prompted me to buy the 17-70) it was a reasonable performer (I'd be very surprised if the 18-55 kit kens was better).

However, as I found out, unless you're looking for a 42-120+ equivalent zoom, you're better off with an 18-55, 17-70 or 18-135 as your needs and budget dictate.

For example, this was one of the first shots I took on my K-5, ISO 400 with a complete untouched raw (DNG) file exported as a 800x529 **** JPEG, FA 28-80 F/3.5-4.7 - 1/180th, F/8 set to 33mm:



And a 100% crop of same:

Actually the 28-105 power zoom lens has a good reputation on the other Forum. If you check the lens review session it has one of the highest ratings of all non-* FA zooms.
It has its drawbacks, for instance size and rotating front element, which makes use of polarisers difficult.

The F35-70 is a pretty cracking lens that comes in at a pretty reasonable price...