I have the Zenitar and the DA 14/2.8. I prefer primes in general, but especially at the focal lengths that would be considered the wide and narrow ranges of a given zoom.
The Zenitar is worth it's money, but tends to be easily susceptible to flare/reduced contrast in the center of the image circle. I much prefer the DA 14 for it's flare resistance, large lens hood, and of course AF. Tom On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Larry Colen <[email protected]> wrote: > I keep finding myself "needing" a lens that is wide, fast and > preferably reasonably sharp. Pretty much all I have wider than 31 are > my 18-55 and my 18-250. I'm thinking of diverting some of the money > from selling my racecar to buying glass. > > I think that the ideal lens would be a 16-50, and I keep bumming that > I never went for the one on craigslist just before I got laid off. > > Poking around on ebay, I've found a few options. > > Pentax 16-50 seems to go for $750-800 > A Zenitar K MC 2.8 16mm for $180 > A couple of Pentax SMC DA 14mm f2.8 ED for around $590 > SIGMA 17-35mm f2.8-4 DG EX $300 > Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-4.5 DC $370 > > How do folks feel about these various lenses? > > -- > The first step is learning to take great photos, > the second step is learning to throw away ones that are merely good. > Larry Colen [email protected] http://www.red4est.com/lrc > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
