Seven Lenses


mph555l

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 08:02
Thinning my collection to just 7 would be a very painful and traumatic task, but if I had to I would be left with...

DA16-45 (default lens on camera)
DA 55-300.

Then..

A24/2.8
DA35/2.8 macro
A50/1.4
M85/2
A100/2.8 macro

Those particular 5 primes are the ones that get the most use in my collection, which is why they made the cut instead of little used favourites such as the A15/3.5, A20/2.8, M40/2.8, M150/3.5, A300/4 and A400/5.6

As Peter said, very interesting exercise.

Cheers,

/Ian
K10D & Super A user.

johnriley

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 08:03
Frogfish wrote:
Why the 18-55 over the 16-50 John ? WR over a fantastic lens ?

The 18-55mm is good enough, faster lenses are covered in the rest of my lineup. No need to spend extra money on a bulky lens like the 16-50mm unless it's really needed.
Best regards, John

japers45

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 08:10
This is an interesting thread.

I have not really owned many prime lenses, lots appearing on lists here.

There have been lots of debates on the quality of primes vs zooms.

I wonder whether those "in the know" would be able to pick out identical shots taken with both.

If someone posted the same image with no PP, one taken with say a 43mm ltd and the other with a DA*16-50 set to 43mm and removed the EXIF data would we be able to tell which was which.

A bit like a blind wine tasting. I have read about so called wine buffs not being able to tell white from red with a blinfold on!

matwhittington

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 08:12
Gosh it's hard to come up with seven! but I think I would have a core four of:

DA21 Ltd
DA35 Ltd
DA* 50-135
DA* 300

and then to that I would add

DA 10-17
Sigma 100-300 (and sneak in a 1.4x teleconverter as well)
and lastly... DFA100 macro

Mind you, ask me tomorrow and i'll have changed my mind!
Mat W

My Flickr: link

johnriley

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 08:41
Quote:
I wonder whether those "in the know" would be able to pick out identical shots taken with both.

If someone posted the same image with no PP, one taken with say a 43mm ltd and the other with a DA*16-50 set to 43mm and removed the EXIF data would we be able to tell which was which.

A bit like a blind wine tasting. I have read about so called wine buffs not being able to tell white from red with a blinfold on!

That's a good question, but the answer is that it is possible to tell. However, probably not so much on a web image. Stopped down, the differences are sometimes subtle but there are clear advantages to the more expensive lenses when we get to large images for print.

Of course, if there is nothing to compare with, then all Pentax lenses should deliver satisfyingly sharp results. Side by side comparisons make lens differences more visible.
Best regards, John

Snootchies

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 08:42
I like this thread a lot - it really gets you thinking.

My ideal seven would be:

Sigma 8-16
DA* 16-50
DA 18-135
Sigma 30mm f.14
DA* 50-135
DFA 100 macro WR
DA* 300
Bob

My website (Hadfield Photography)

Pentax Gallery Artist page:link

Flickr Photostream: link

sam-joseph

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 08:55
My seven, for what it's worth.

Sigma 17-70
Sigma 70-200 f2.8
Sigma 30mm f1.4
UWA lens, Pentax 12-24, Sigma 10-20 or similar
Pentax-A 100mm f2.8 macro, or new version

That's it. I can't count. Five lenses would be sufficient at this moment in time.
The first two I already have. The others are "on the list".
Regards
Sam-Joseph
Pentax K7, Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5, Sigma 70-200 f2.8 APO EX, Sigma 70-300 APO, Sigma 1.4x TC, Vivitar 2x TC. Takumar 135mm f2.5, SMC Pentax A 50mm 1:1.7, SMC Pentax -M 1:4 200mm, Pentax X70

Stanovich

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 09:19
Well, I have 6 for use with digital and three of them do most of what I want:

A 24 2.8 (very occasional use only)
A 50 1.7 (occasional objects & portraits)
DA 16-45 (city walkabout, gets about 35% of use)
DA 18-55 (largely redundant)
FA 24-90 (country & coast walkabout, about 45%)
DA 55-300 (locations & 2ndry walkabout, about 15%)

Logically I'm missing something in the wider range, but I rarely feel the need to go wider than 16mm - I'm more likely to rationalise the standard zoom range perhaps to a 17-70 which means for trips I can take just that and the 55-300. The 24-90 works well on my ME Super, but I suspect the 16-45 would become redundant - a pity as it's a good lens.
K5IIs & ME Super with FA24-90, DA17-70, DA55-300, misc old primes; Fuji X20.

Stanovich

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 09:23
Oh, I've just graduated to Pentax Master
K5IIs & ME Super with FA24-90, DA17-70, DA55-300, misc old primes; Fuji X20.

womble

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 11:13
Mmmmm... difficult.

Of the lenses I own, probably:

DA 12-24
DA* 50-135
K24/2.8
K28/3.5
K50/1.2
M100/2.8
K135/2.5

Of lenses I'd like to own, I'd probably drop one for a 28mm shift, and maybe one for a longer lens such as the DA* 60-250 or the DA* 300. Although I own a nice K300, it is rather heavy and really needs a tripod mount to make the most of it.

K.
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.

My website

SteveEveritt

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 11:33
Sigma 10-20
DA* 16-50 check
Sigma 70-200 macro II check
Sigma 150-500 (next)
Sigma 180 macro check
Pentax A 50mm f1.7 (and tubes) check
DA35 f2.4

I'd be happy then, but then I would probaably want to close the gap between 50 and 70 .... a nice DA*50-135 would fit nicely in there
My Flickr link

"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" (John Lennon)

robbiec

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 11:53
DrOrloff wrote:
Two years down the line as a dslr photographer (well at least someone with a dslr) and a Pentaxian I have decided that I need to commit to a seven lens lineup. This is to cover jack of all trades master of none photography. This collection will fit in one large bag, should ensure that all lenses are used and seven is a nice number. The lineup I aspire to is:

DA12-24 f4
K35 f3.5
FA43 f1.9 Ltd
FA77 f1.8 Ltd
DFA 100 f2.8 Macro
DA*50-135 f2.8
DA*300 f4

What do you think?

What would your seven lens kit be?


Some very very nice lens there
Someone suggested swapping the K35 for a DA35, think the K might still be sharper even now.

My 7 would be:
DA15 f/4.0
FA31 f/1.8
FA43 f/1.9
K50 f/1.2
FA77 f/1.8
FA*28-70 f/2.8
DA*50-135 f/2.8

italics are those still on the wanted list So 2 to go
My Gallery
[url=http://pentaxphotogallery.com/Robbie Corrigan]ppg[/url]

DrOrloff

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 13:12
There are a lot of reasons for the K35 to be in that line up. I've already got a macro option and the K focuses quite close anyway. The K is rapier sharp from f5.6 where I will mostly be using it. I'd love to see a side by side comparison of the K35 and FA31 - I can confidently predict that the difference in IQ isn't remotely worth splashing out an extra £900. The K slips in the pocket very nicely to supplement the 12-24 on landscape walkabouts and it's the best lens to use in dodgy areas as it only cost £30. It combines well with a telescope eyepiece due to its very compact glass. It's pretty indispensable.

When I browse Pentax photos certain images have a magical look about them. When I look into the details more often than not I find that the 43 or 77 has been used. So those are in their for their unique character.

The only doubt really is the DA*50-135, especially if I get the 77 (which I could if I sold the D50-135). It's a very useful zoom range but for specific events rather than walkabout as it is too bulky. The 55-300 might make more sense.

Why seven lenses? I could of course find a use for any lens.
But I figure I should be able to make do with seven top class lenses, it gives me a bit of a plan, they fit in a bag, seven is a nice number, it makes me think more about what I actually need and want, plus a more limited choice would result in me using the better lenses more. And it's fun to think about.
You can see some of my photos here if you are so inclined

Chrism8

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 13:29
FWIW, my Seven

DA 10-17 F3.5 / F4.5
SMC 50 F1.7
Sigma 17-70 F2.8 / F3.5
Sigma 70 - 200 F2.8
Sigma 100 - 300 F4
Sigma 105 Macro F2.8
Sigma 600 F8 Mirror

All in the kit bag, don't need any more
Chris

www.chrismillsphotography.co.uk

" A Hangover is something that occupies the Head you neglected to use the night before".

-------------------------------------------------------------
K1 - Sigma 85mm F1.4, Pentax 150 -450 F4.5 / 5.6, Pentax FA 24 - 70 F2.8

Sigma 100-300 F4, Samyang 14mm F2.8, Pentax 70-200 F2.8

K3iii + K3ii + K5iis converted to IR, Sigma 17 - 70 F2.8, Pentax 55 - 300 F4.5 / F5.6 PLM

Tyr

Link Posted 05/11/2011 - 13:37
I recently consolidated my lenses as well. I got rid of the DA18-55, DA50-200 and Tamron 70-300.

Lenses now stand at:

DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 - Main lens 1.
DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 - Main lens 2.
DA 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 - Backup lens should anything happen to the two above.
DA* 300mm f/4 - Hardly ever part of my kit unless I am going wildlife shooting.
Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro - Want to replace with DA 100mm f/2.8 WR Macro to have a fully WR lens selection.

I rarely carry more than 4 lenses and don't really use my A series lenses other than with film.

I would like a DA10-17 or DA12-24 as I am finding that I do occasionally need something wider than 16mm. It is only for a very small number of shots and would probably get about as much use as the 300. The only thing I don't like about those two lenses is lack of WR and SDM.
Regards,
Dan

https://www.flickr.com/photos/honourabletyr/
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.