P.J. Alling wrote: > From what I understand the 18-85 WR is a superior lens of it's type in > every way, except manual focusing, in that respect it takes after the > FA 17-70, which gives all the tactile feedback of a, I was going to say > dead fish, but that actually give tactile feedback, the 17-70 > reportedly gives none at all. > > I did a some research, for a friend, on various manufactures > competitors in the ~17-135mm range, and by all accounts the Pentax was > worst of the lot, not a bad lens, mind you, of it's type, just not > quite as good as anybody else'. > > By all accounts the 55-300mm you already have is one of the better > lenses in it's class, you would have to spend a lot more to get better > results. So I guess I'm saying if you just want to step up just get > the 18-85.
The 16-85 isn't a particularly fast lens, but with the amount of glass in it, that's no real surprise. This does tempt me more for days that I go out with just one body and lens and strikes me as useful for portraiture/street photography. Do I really need it though.....? Hmm. Malcolm -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
