Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 14, 2010, 4:27 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
hercules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
Default Lens Choices.

Hi all, I am thinking of buying 2 lenses and the choices are the 18-55 WR 50-200 WR,, or the *16-50 2.8 and the *60-250 I know the 16-50 is 2.8 throughout the zoom and the 60-250 f4, but would the WR lenses be as good in the IQ department? probably not but doesn't hurt to ask
hercules is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 14, 2010, 5:58 AM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Member banned, all links to the site being promoted are now blocked, regardless of the member posting the link to it (so nobody joining under a new member name can post links to it either).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2010, 6:07 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
hercules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimC View Post
Member banned, all links to the site being promoted are now blocked, regardless of the member posting the link to it (so nobody joining under a new member name can post links to it either).
Sorry Jim I should of just reported like I did and not Quoted, Thanks
hercules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2010, 7:10 AM   #4
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

No big deal (if you click on the link in your post where you quoted it, you'll see the main web site address is being filtered now).

I could have removed your quote. But, wanted to make sure you knew we'd taken care of it (and made sure we wouldn't get the same spam again, since if anyone tries, the forums software will replace that site name with asteriks). That also serves as an example to the poster (so they'll know it's fruitless to try and post links to that site here again).

P.S.

I removed it (the poster has probably noticed what happened to their spam by now).
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2010, 11:49 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

Jim looks like he did a good job of doing away with the spam - I have no idea what you both are talking about (but can imagine, since I've seen such things before - sigh!).

As far an answer to your original question - I think the difference between the 60-250 and the 50-200 WR would be very significant. I've never been crazy about the 50-200 - my copy of the original lens wasn't very good at all and from what I understand, the WR is the same optics as their non-WR counterparts. I checked out the 60-250 at the K-7 tour event. The lens is brilliant, thought the quality really outstanding. I am not at all tempted to buy it as it's huge and heavy and I felt uncomfortable shooting it (you probably wouldn't have the same issue with that as I do). I ended up getting the DA*200 f2.8 to go with the 50-135 I already have, deciding that having two lenses would be a better solution for me, personally. If size and weight isn't an issue, then the DA*60-250 would be significantly better than the 50-200.

I'm not as convinced about the differences between the 18-55WR and the DA*16-50. I'm trying to decide between these two lenses myself, or perhaps skipping the weather sealing and getting something else in this focal range (I'd like something between 24 and 50). I bought the 16-50 last summer, but the first copy was a very poor copy - decentered and fuzzy all over (didn't try shooting focus charts because in the test shots, nothing looked in focus). I returned it for another but it had another problem - I think it was damaged in transit. So I returned that one for a refund, but I could see why some people love theirs - it was really sharp. I also shot the WR 18-55 that a Pentax rep had at a camera store event and it was pretty sharp, at least with the indoor pictures I took. So I'm on the fence (and have tried to convince myself that I could get away without weather sealing and get the FA 35 f1.8 Ltd).

If I could try the DA*16-50 in a store to make sure I don't have to send a defective one back and forth, it would be my preference, but no one around here carries them in-stock. I can't afford another lens until perhaps the summer, so I don't have to make a decision now, luckily.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 14, 2010, 3:58 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
hercules's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sparta, Greece
Posts: 2,649
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mtngal View Post
Jim looks like he did a good job of doing away with the spam - I have no idea what you both are talking about (but can imagine, since I've seen such things before - sigh!).

As far an answer to your original question - I think the difference between the 60-250 and the 50-200 WR would be very significant. I've never been crazy about the 50-200 - my copy of the original lens wasn't very good at all and from what I understand, the WR is the same optics as their non-WR counterparts. I checked out the 60-250 at the K-7 tour event. The lens is brilliant, thought the quality really outstanding. I am not at all tempted to buy it as it's huge and heavy and I felt uncomfortable shooting it (you probably wouldn't have the same issue with that as I do). I ended up getting the DA*200 f2.8 to go with the 50-135 I already have, deciding that having two lenses would be a better solution for me, personally. If size and weight isn't an issue, then the DA*60-250 would be significantly better than the 50-200.

I'm not as convinced about the differences between the 18-55WR and the DA*16-50. I'm trying to decide between these two lenses myself, or perhaps skipping the weather sealing and getting something else in this focal range (I'd like something between 24 and 50). I bought the 16-50 last summer, but the first copy was a very poor copy - decentered and fuzzy all over (didn't try shooting focus charts because in the test shots, nothing looked in focus). I returned it for another but it had another problem - I think it was damaged in transit. So I returned that one for a refund, but I could see why some people love theirs - it was really sharp. I also shot the WR 18-55 that a Pentax rep had at a camera store event and it was pretty sharp, at least with the indoor pictures I took. So I'm on the fence (and have tried to convince myself that I could get away without weather sealing and get the FA 35 f1.8 Ltd).

If I could try the DA*16-50 in a store to make sure I don't have to send a defective one back and forth, it would be my preference, but no one around here carries them in-stock. I can't afford another lens until perhaps the summer, so I don't have to make a decision now, luckily.
Thanks mtngal well just someone trying to infect everyone with viruses,
anyway my story I sold my K7 and bought me a 7D that I really like, but want to wait till pentax announces the K7 update with the new sony sensor, till then I want to get the lenses I would be using with the Pentax, the other thing I am worried about is the SDM failures,
is the 60-250 that much bigger than your 50-135? I used to have the Sigma 70-200 2.8 Macro and sent that back because it was to heavy more so because of no OS (stabilization) I also have heard many problems with the 16-50 and maybe the 18-55 WR might be the better choice
hercules is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:19 AM.