60-250 - 11 points - 21st

I found these two points to be interesting :

The most complex metering modes is Multi-Segment. This is probably the mostly used mode for general photography, particularly when working fast is important. Neither camera is perfect and both occasionally overexpose but the Pentax K-5 does it much less often. The Pentax K-5 has a metering system that preserves highlights better.

AND

While correcting tilt by software is possible, any small rotation is detrimental to image quality and is roughly equivalent to slightly blurring the entire image. Whilst I thought any change would have an adverse effect on IQ, I hadn't realised that effect was so dramatic.

Good comparison, though disappointed there were no comments on the vast array of older lenses available for the K mount and also no comment on the build quality / WR of the K5 body compared to the D7000.

Agree here. Whilst optically amazing value for money the AF on the 55-300 is a dog. If Tamron could make a virtual equivalent of the Nikkor 70-300 AF-s for Pentax then that would become my back-up long lense (to the DA*300) or for greater flexibility and weight saving.

Agree with Peter. The only situation where I think that the *300 could produce better images - cropped to approximate an equivalent FL - is if you haven't stabilised your 150-500 properly. The *300 is substantially lighter, easier to shoot hand-held, and cut-your-throat sharp, but I've seen superb images from the 150-500 hand held too. That said getting it on a tripod will have enormous benefits in terms of number of keepers and sharpness.

For the zoo a 70-200/2.8 is better, or even a 50-135/2.8 or 50-150/2.8. When I go to the Shanghai Zoo - primarily for the wild birds that flock there - on average once a month, I take the K5 & K7 with the *300 (and sometimes AFA x1.7) on one and 50-150 on the other. For exhibits (not that I shoot them much) it's almost always the 50-150 except for birds on lakes.

Oops !

I think that one is all about the pricing. Although the Sigma has 2 degrees on the 12-24, and that's a large difference at these FLs, I still believe the huge price difference puts people off the Pentax and enables the Sigma to easily outsell it - however that said it is still an excellent lense in its own right and produces some wonderful images, although no doubt the 12-24 is superior overall.

Yes I was surprised just a little to see the 16-45 above the Tamron 17-50/2.8 which I thought would easily finish above the Pentaxes by virtue of it's quality, pricing and being faster - but was even more surprised to see not even a single vote for the (one year old ?) Sigma 17-50/2.8, a better lense that those three (there was one vote for the older 18-50).

Obviously though, statistically speaking, this little bit of fun is irrelevant, as the number of people who put up their lists is just not enough for us to glean any accurate, relevant, stats from. Though it may reveal a trend ?

Thank you to everyone else who commented !

I believe I separated the 35s correctly (3 lenses) - but I won't bet my life on it and I can't state with any degree of certainty I didn't make any mistakes, I just totted up the numbers quickly for a bit of fun

Sigmas - although they are different lenses (150-500 & 50-500) they are primarily used for the same function and people usually choose between them so I thought it reasonable (though not completely accurate of course) to group them here.

I was really surprised the DA*300 didn't make more lists (of those that have it) as it's a wonderful lense - though I can understand how it is maybe not used as much as a 16-50 for example. It really is a specialist lense.

OK - bored so I compiled the results from the thread of the same name to find our most used (not necessarily favourite) lenses. If nothing else it may give people some tips on where to start / what to buy next !

5 points for 1st, 4 for 2nd and so on. Lists in no particular order - 3 points per lense. Lenses appearing on just one list were discounted. Lenses with multiple variants were clumped together.

This went down to the wire with a surprise (to me) winner !

1. DA 100mm - 58 points
2. DA *16-50 - 57
3. DA *50-135 - 56
4. Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 - 42
5. DA *12-24 - 30
6. Pentax 50/1.4 variants - 29
7. DA 55-300 - 28
8. DA 18-55 WR - 28
9. DA 16-45 - 27
10. DA 35/2.4 - 23
11. Tamron 90 variants - 20
12. DA 40/2.8 - 18
13. Tamron 17-50/2.8 - 17
13. DA 17-70 - 17
15. Sigma 70-200/2.8 - 16
16. FA 31 Ltd - 15
17. Sigma 105 macro - 14
17. Sigma 150-500/50-500 - 14
19. FA 43 Ltd - 13
20. SMC 28/3.5 - 12

Some surprises too in the lenses that didn't make the top 20 : DA *300 (10), FA *77 (10 pts), DA 21 ( 8 ), FA *55 (5), DA 10-17 (4), DA 70 (1).

Up to and including Frogherder's list.

Sneaky way to get in EIGHT lenses i-Berg !!

Limited Primes : I don't think it's the fact that they are expensive that is keeping them out of the top spots (for most) as quite a few people have them, it's maybe just that, like me, people's favourite lenses are actually used less (because we have to use other lenses more often) than I would like. I wonder if the lenses that occupy the top 2 or 3 spots in most people's lists are actually their favourite lenses too ?

For example two of my favourite lenses are the Sigma 30/1.4 and Voigtlander Colour Ultron 50/1.8 but they are maybe not used as much as the others I listed (though the 30mm is getting there fast).

Might be fun to tabulate these results to find out just which are the top ranking lenses (the Sigma 10-20 looks like a strong contender for #1).

Pwynnej - that is a very impressive list of lenses ! And you live very close to my parents (dad's a member at Denbigh G.C.) so don't be surprised if next time I'm over there I'm knocking on your door ..... want to come out and play and .... err .... bring your lenses !

ha ha - that's funny Tim !