+1 for the 16-50, can't comment on the others. On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 4:07 PM, Stan Halpin <[email protected]> wrote: > All good. I have maybe a slight preference ordering: > - 50-135 > - 16-50 > - 60-250 > but they all feel good, work well, and the 16-50, plus either of the others > depending on the venues you shoot in, is about all the lens anybody really > needs. > > stan > > On Sep 10, 2013, at 8:17 AM, CollinB wrote: > >> I've seen some awfully nice renderings from the DA* 16-50/2.8. Quite >> impressive. >> Just out of my price range at the moment. >> But I wonder ... what's your favorite? >> >> >> -- >> 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.
-- 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.
