If price really is a consideration, I'd consider either the 18-55 kit
lens or the weather sealed 18-55 kit lens.
On 5/12/2015 8:26 PM, Eric Weir wrote:
Thanks, Peter. Two to think about. Didn’t find either at either KEH
or B&H. One review written just after the 16-45 came out compared the
FA 20-35 unfavorably to the 16-45.
On May 12, 2015, at 1:19 PM, P.J. Alling
<[email protected]> wrote:
The 16-45 is supposed to be pretty good, but if you're looking for
the closest analog to the 20-40, I'd reccomend the FA 20-35mm at
least optically, and zoom range, build quality is very good for a
mostly plastic lens, and at this time it's not all that "sexy" when
compared to the DA Limited, so you can probably pick one up for a
relatively low price used. Oddly you might just be happy with the
FAJ 18-35, it's build is supposed to especially crappy, but
optically it's supposed to be very very good, and those seem to go
for a song, an off key one at that.
On 5/12/2015 11:48 AM, Eric Weir wrote:
Well, when isn’t cost a consideration? I’ll put it this way: I’d
like to have a 20-40/2.8-4 limited but that’s beyond my means. A
16-45/4 is much more affordable and I might go up to double KEH’s
price for it if there was something that might be better for me,
e.g., something as wide as the 16-45 but with a longer zoom
range.
It seems that my photography requires either that or a telephoto
and not much in between. So I’m not especially interested in
trying to accommodate all that in one lens. I just want a good
wide-angle zoom.
So, should it be the 16-45 or is there something else I should
consider.
Thanks,
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Weir
Decatur, GA USA [email protected]
--
Science - Questions we may never find answers for.
Religion - Answers we must never question.
--
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.
