/ Pentax Lenses- what to go for?

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
sharpie530 - on 24 Jun 2012

Looking for some lens advice. Currently have a Pentax K-5 with 18-135mm and a 55-200mm. Photography is varied, but usually outdoors. Bit of sport, wildlife, and mountains.


Currently thinking of adding a Prime lens to my kit, but I am struggling to decide what to go for focal length wise, but probably between 35-50mm.

Or would going for a wide angle zoom give me something a bit different?

Not a very specific question I know, just wanted to see whether the collective knowledge of UKC had any input!

Sam W - on 24 Jun 2012
In reply to sharpie530:
Not sure how much you were thinking of spending, but I have the 35mm f2.4 DA, since it arrived it's rarely come off my K7. Fast and amazingly sharp for a relatively cheap lens.

The other one I would suggest looking at is the Sigma 10-20, because it allows you to get shots that just aren't possible without it, I find it especially useful for climbing pics where it is often hard to get far enough from the crag/boulder to use something longer.

sharpie530 - on 25 Jun 2012
In reply to Sam W:

Cheers for the reply. The Sigma had caught my eye and is very appealing! I notice that there are two versions of this lens, the f4-5.6 and the f3.5 HSM. Could I be cheeky and as which version you have, or whether you know if the benefits of the f3.5 HSM warrant the extra price.

Paul Evans - on 25 Jun 2012
In reply to sharpie530:
I have 4 pentax primes, 2 newer autofocus lenses and 2 old manual focus. The newer lenses get by far the most use.
I have a DA Limited 35mm f2.8 which is wonderful, "standard" FOV and razor sharp from infinity to 1cm.
I also have a shot tele - the 77mm f1.8 limited - which has bokeh to die for and very useful when you need a bit more reach / portraits.
My standard walkaround kit is the 16-45 zoom plus these two primes.
I also have a 135mm f3.5 M series and a 55mm f1.8 K series, the 55 in particular is great. Lots of good pentax legacy glass if you don't mind manual focus (and TBH when I'm in the mood I often switch the AF lenses to manual).
sharpie530 - on 25 Jun 2012
After having a good think about what I take photo's of I have pretty much decided on the 10-20mm sigma. Just need to make a decision between the F4-f5.6 or the f3.5 Anybody have any experience with either of these?
kevin stephens - on 25 Jun 2012
In reply to sharpie530: I think you may be stifling your brilliant camera with average lenses. You don't get the wide zoom range on your current lenses without some sacrifice of quality. rather than go for the sigma ultra wide zoom I'd choose the Pentax 12-24 f4, ( google the reviews) but you should really treat yourself to a Pentax prime; plenty of secondhand manual examples available.
Sam W - on 25 Jun 2012
In reply to sharpie530:
I've got the 4-5.6, when I bought it reviews mainly showed that the image quality was a little better from the slower lens, I didn't think I would need the extra speed for the photos I would be taking, and the fact that it was cheaper was an added bonus.

This is handy reading if you're trying to decide on an ultra wide for Pentax
comparison of the 2 Sigmas here
climbingsimon - on 26 Jun 2012
In reply to Sam W:
Well, I can't speak for the older 10-20, but I bought the F3.5 a few years ago and have been very happy with it. It was my main lens over quite a few trips and have no complaints over quality. It's also quick and quiet to focus. The downsides I'd give are size (weight) and filter thread diameter as makes even basic filters expensive. I wanted to force better composition so have been using the 15mm f/4 mostly now. The other downside to it is that I've not been able to sell it on as for (what I thought to be a reasonable price) you can buy a new f4-5.6 example. They trade regularly on Pentax Forums (where I bought my prime).
Good luck and happy hunting.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.