Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Kit lens comparison

  1. #21
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Central Singapore
    Posts
    577

    Default Re: Kit lens comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by woefulwabbit View Post
    Sadly, it's no longer so cheap
    2nd hand market, babe... hahahahaha... i don't have issues with cosmetics but can be totally picky when it comes to glass.
    Panasonic FZ28 Shooter
    flickr

  2. #22
    Senior Member felixcat8888's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    9,105

    Default Re: Kit lens comparison

    Or you can consider the Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 or the Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4.5. The latter is a good lens too. I have owned it and find that it is sharp indoor and outdoor. Even at 70mm F4.5 indoor, the pics are bright and I used ISO400. Sold that and the K10d to finance the K20D body.
    Pentaxian for Life
    K1, KP, FA*28-70/2.8, FA31, 43 & FA77 Limiteds, K85/1.8, FA*200/2.8, A50/1.2



  3. #23

    Default Re: Kit lens comparison

    Quote Originally Posted by sebianos View Post
    Would like your opinion on the various kit lens at the moment especially in the 18-55mm range.

    There's the DAL supplied with KX, and DAL II comes with k200d - are there big differences between the two apart from the metal mount and construction. Just wondering how different is the IQ between the 2.

    Gengh also mentioned tamron 17-50/2.8 which can replace the kit lens. How does it compare with DAL II?

    Ok, not exactly upgrading at the moment but this will be good to know as there are a lot of new pentaxians here. ~ dishing out LBA poison
    i haven't seen DAL, but the kit lens that got released with the k20d / k200d (kit lens II) is definitely better than the first generation that was released with k100d/ k10d. marginally, anyways, that is to be expected - it was designed to meet resolution needs of 14+ megapixel sensor of the k20d.

    pentax kit lens isn't shabby, when stopped down the results are pretty decent if you ask me, and usable for sure. wide open it is fine, but the maximum aperture can be limiting compared to say, tamron 17-50 f/2.8

    i haven't gotten to try tamron 17-50 f/2.8 ever on pentax, but i have seen it on canon, and it is pretty value for money. on aps-c format, it matches 17-40L performance across all borders, resolution, distortion, vignetting.. for a lower price, but of course not so good build. $600+ is a steal, really, considering what you get with the lens. if it wasn't ir-unfriendly (hotspotting problems) i would have gotten it long ago instead of the fisheye 10-17.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •