I choose bodies for the ergonomics and what's available in the mount, not what's available in 1st party form.
Note that most of the currently available FF primes in K mount are not from Pentax, and most of the best of them aren't either (the Zeiss ZK and Voigtlander SLII lines are both at least as good as the equivalent pentax's). I've found that 3rd party lenses can offer superior performance to the 1st party options. And thus I use a mix of 1st and 3rd party lenses (Right now, Sigma, Voigtlander, Kiron and Nikon) -Adam On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 9:21 PM, David Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I see no point in using Pentax bodies if you are just going to buy 3rd > party lenses. > > I have both the DA 16-45mm & the DA* 16-50mm. I was never a big fan of > the 16-45 & when the 16-50 became available I got one. I've never > regretted the decision. > > My other advice is quit reading lens review sites. They fuck with your > head & find faults that 99% of the time you will never notice. > > Cheers, > > Dave > > 2008/11/16 Boris Liberman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Hi! >> >> So here is the list of some lenses that I thought about recently and the >> considerations that may prevent me from buying them. >> >> 1. SMCP DA* 16-50/2.8 - serious distortions at wide end, quality control >> issues still there >> 2. SMCP DA 17-70/4 SDM - some say it is a sibling of SMCP DA 10-17 fish eye >> wide end distortion-wise. Perfect otherwise. >> 3. SMCP DA 16-45/4 - slightly less distortions at wide end, basically ok, >> though the CAs could be a problem. >> 4. Tamron 17-50/2.8 - suffers from curvature of field, rather good otherwise >> 5. Sigma 18-50/2.8 - well, I just don't quite like Sigma, and certain people >> call Sigma really nasty names >> 6. SMCP DA 21/3.2 AL Limited - excellent lens, just not wide enough >> 7. Tamron 17-35/2.8-4 - covers full frame, but also suffers from curvature >> of field >> 8. Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 - well, another Sigma >> 9. SMCP FA 20-35/4 - said to be excellent, but expensive and starting to >> become quite rare these days. >> >> No matter how strange this sounds, but it seems that there is no decidedly >> good lens in 16(17,18)-45(50, 70) range for modern Pentax DSLR. Each lens >> has some serious drawbacks. >> >> So here you have it - a short summary. Please don't kill the scribe. >> >> Boris >> >> P.S. I already have 21 ltd, it is listed here just for sake of completeness. >> >> P.P.S. I should watch for reviews of DA 17-70/4 and some sample shots as >> well. >> >> P.P.P.S. The price on (even brand new) DA 16-45/4 has gone down considerably >> now... >> >> 4P.1S. I have placed an order for Tamron 17-50/2.8 and I may still buy one >> for lack of better alternative due to its speed and sharpness. Having >> excellent sample of Tamron 28-75/2.8 has its impact on my reasoning... > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
