Mix and Match Lens Brands

[UtahManSir]

I have been wondring about this for a long time.

Am I weird? I want to keep my lenses the same brand and not mix and match. Don't know why, I just do. If I end up getting the Sigma 17-70 when I have the money, I will probably end up buying Sigma lenses for the rest of my lenses. I would feel weird getting the Pentax 55-300 to go with it. But if I went Pentax 16-45 then I would feel weird getting the Sigma 10-20 that I covet. Because it would be a different brand.

Does anybody else think like this? Or am I weirder than I think I am?

Tell me what you think?

Lloyd
--
History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme. -Mark Twain

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/

 

[areidjr]

I vote for "weirder than I think I am" )

I just go for the best lens in the price performance range I'm looking for. All of my primes are Pentax while none of my zooms are. Of course, if the 55-300 was available when I bought my Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro, I'd probably have the Pentax.
--
Al

My Photo Gallery: http://photoweb.reid-home.com (Updated 9/8/2008)
Pentax Photo Gallery: http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/albertreid
My Blog: http://areidjr.blogspot.com/

 

[Rupert60]

It's not weird, it is a character flaw and personal defect. (lol) But.... I have it too, which might make you want to get over it? While I would prefer to do as you suggested, it works out that it is not always practical, and sometimes impossible.

'This is more serious than I thought.....but it is still fun!
http://www.pbase.com/rupertdog Take a look- It's Free!
WSSA Pentax Ambassador #125

 

[Cideway]

Get the best lens for the job, regardless of brand. I'm currently shooting with the sigma 10-20, Pentax 16-50 and 50-135, and i'm planning on getting the Tamron 90mm MACRO.

It really depends, i got the sigma because it is the widest lens available, i got the 16-50 and 50-135 because they are the best lenses in the range that i need and i'll most likely get the tamron for the Bang for buck that it offers.

EDIT: Yes you are weird, but who isn't...
--
Chris.

http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/chriside

GMT +9.5

Pentax SLR talk FAQ
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=23161072

 

[Marc Sabatella]

I have been wondring about this for a long time.

Am I weird? I want to keep my lenses the same brand and not mix and
match. Don't know why, I just do.

Well, I'd say you're weird - because you're considering the body separately. I want my my lenses and body the same brand - now that's normal. So no Sigma lenses or Samsung bodies for me. No good reason, and I'm sure t some point the lens or body will come along that changes my mind. But for now, I'm sticking with Pentax all the way. For absolutely no good logical reason, and I don't care.

--
Marc Sabatella
http://www.marcsabatella.com/
Blog: http://marcsabatella.blogspot.com/
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/marcsabatella/

 

[SFT007]

I was stupid because I was buying "Pentax only" lenses (not stupid if the Pentax lineup exactly fits your needs of course so varies from person to person of course). Thankfully the DA*16-50 never impressed me and made me open my eyes and realize that there are other excellent lenses out there. My first non-Pentax lens is the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 - I love it - the only weakness I find is that some cases it's bokeh is questionable/harsh - much like the DA*16-50 actually but it's better in every other regard. I then got the Tamron 70-200 and Sigma 10-20 - the 70-200 might be one of the top 2-3 lenses I have ever used and I've used all of the Limiteds! No kidding there. I also own 4 Pentax lenses so I say buy whatever you need and don't get caught up in brand-hype or loyalty. I am so glad the DA*16-50 didn't impress me since I would have done what you're thinking and got the DA*60-250 f/4 - of course 1. I'd still be waiting and 2. I can guarantee the Tamron will kick the DA*'s a** at f/4 and it does f/2.8 to boot - beautifully too, I love the lens - all for $700!!

Cheers,
--
Sinan
http://sinantarlan.zenfolio.com/

 

[leopold]

is that the focusing ring and aperture ring(yes that thing we used to get on the lenses with small numbers!!!) will turn the same way on all your lenses.
When your in the action you will not turn the focusing ring the wrong way ))
--
Leopold
Pentax forever
http://smarcoux.zenfolio.com/

 

[texneus]

That's not weird, that's LOCD (lens obsessive compulsive disorder) . Actually, no, I don't think it's wierd, but there are many great lenses from each make that fill a specific purpose better than others. Consider what it is you want, then buy the lens that best fits instead of settling for a compromise because of brand loyalty. I own lenses from everyone...

Sigma 18-50 f/2.8 EX DC -- I got specifically for indoor shots (wide angle + fast)

Tamron SP 24-135 f/3.5 - 5.6 -- my main "walk around". At 36-200mm equivalent, it is arguably a very good range for this purpose and a decent overall performer.

Pentax 55-300 f/4 - 5.6 -- highly respected "cheap" telezoom for when I need above 135mm

Tamron Adaptall SP 90mm f/2.5 Macro -- Again, a very highly respected macro for closeups.

Fivestar 500mm f/8 -- I got this specifcally for astrophotography despite the slow speed. It was cheap and reputed to be a relatively good performer, but never have done much with it.

My next lens will probably be an UWA, such as the Sigma 10-20.

--

Visit my FLICKR Gallery of fun & interesting photos! http://www.flickr.com/photos/27292201@N08/sets/72157606308172325/

 

[brandrx]

--

'Keep your eyes looking forward. However, glance back now and then to see where you've come from. It will put a smile on your face.' ~ brandrx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_County,_Utah

Ron ~ Retired.

 

[jamesm007]

At one point I was like that. When the DA55-300mm first came out and I bought it, it performed very well, so well I sold my Sigma 70-300mm APO and was going to sell my Sigma 17-70mm and get the Pentax DA17-70mm just to make it a one brand kit. Now that I bought the Sigma 10-20mm and it performs so well to me, it makes my Sigma 17-70mm seem better (lol serious) and I dont want to sell it to get the DA17-70mm anymore. But I do still like my Pentax 55-300mm. So... I am over things having to be one brand. I just like having a versatile kit of lens that enables me to do the photography I want. So...

To be honest I now feel if I own all one brand I am shorting myself and not getting the best kit I could. I did feel as you, but now feel this way, no lie, very serious. Am I saying if I went with all Pentax I would be getting less IQ performance, no I am saying per dollar, max value per dollar to me comes from a mixed bag of lens.

--
jamesm007,
http://s195.photobucket.com/albums/z77/jamesm700/

 

[tellem_esdreamin]

we all have a mortgage on weird ..... we own Pentaxes and participate in Forums.

and have you seen some of the 'signature images'???

maybe you may feel deep down that they (Pentax or Sigma) are the experts had done their homework and confidently offer lenses that provide a complete solution.

Ian

 

[JeffJS]

I'm even stranger than that. I prefer to keep the lens brand matched to the Body brand. It actually saves me a lot of money. Often times I'll see what some people here can do with a certain lens and I'll be off on a chase looking for the lens. Cooler heads prevail though when I come to realize one thing. Those same people could take a photo through an old coke bottle and make it look great. Point being, chasing the glass, regardless of the brand, will never make me a better photographer if I don't learn to use the equipment I have.

Bottom line is, if you want the lens, have a need for it, and can afford it, buy it. It's nice to keep it in the family but In spite of what I say above, brand doesn't always matter.

I have been wondring about this for a long time.

Am I weird? I want to keep my lenses the same brand and not mix and
match. Don't know why, I just do. If I end up getting the Sigma 17-70
when I have the money, I will probably end up buying Sigma lenses for
the rest of my lenses. I would feel weird getting the Pentax 55-300
to go with it. But if I went Pentax 16-45 then I would feel weird
getting the Sigma 10-20 that I covet. Because it would be a different
brand.

Does anybody else think like this? Or am I weirder than I think I am?

Tell me what you think?

Lloyd
--
History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme. -Mark Twain

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/

--
http://s134.photobucket.com/albums/q109/jjkyle/ K10D
Still happy with the K10d (in spite of the pixel peepers)

 

[UtahManSir]

Al,

Thanks for the encouragement! But aren't we all?

Rupert60/Jim,

I have to have character before it can be defective! ;-]

Cideway,

I believe I will be forced by economics to buy the best lens I can afford, brand be darned, but for some reason it just feels kinda strange, like the day I wore socks from two different pairs to work, one thick one thin, one low cut, one mid calf.

Marc,

I have been that way from the beginnning, but the siren call of the 17-70 is truly beguiling, and I can't really afford the Pentax branded stuff I want. Can't really afford the Sigma stuff either for awhile, gotta bail and patch the hull before I can spend on extras. But the way you think is the way I kinda want to think until reality sneaks up and bites me. Oh yeah, Logic is for sissies!!!!!

Sinan,

You are the mix and matcher, do you ever find yourself turning the zoom the wrong way at inopportune times?

Leopold,

That is one worry for me, certainly, but I think I could probably adapt not being an action shooter much.

Texneus,

Your set up is similar to what I eventually envision having, with my existing primes included. Though the Sigma 24-135 at f2.8 on the wide end is a little more lustworthy for me should FF sensors ever make their way into a Pentax DSLR. By the way, the Sigma 10-20 is lovely, I have used NZNHUT's several times and it is truly outstanding at f8ish.

frandrx/Ron,

Takes one to know one!!! How many lenses to you have now?

jamesm007,

I am slowly heading your way, if for no other reason than that a wise man keeps his lovely bride happy in order to have her remain his bride!

Ian,

Yeah I guess I am asking the "Wrong" Audience about weird. But that is OK. Normal people frighten me!!!

JeffJS,

Too true, the equipment doesn't matter that much, but when all you have is 3 primes (with one cheapo duplicate) 28mm 50mm 135mm, you tend to dream about the ease of having a more flexible set-up. Then when you like the feel of owning a quality product and feeling the pride of ownership, you get fussy and want a certain symmetry to your kit......

I dunnno, I just find myself wanting to find all my answers from one place and gain a certain consistency to what I shoot with. But then this is not a perfect world and it can't happen that way. Then I wonder if there are others like me on this benighted planet that really obsess about picky little things like matching lenses. Then I realize that yeah, people do that, who here has the "set" of limiteds, DA for FA doesn't matter really which. How proud of it are they?

Guess I am not any weirder than the rest of you. Whew....

Lloyd

--
History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme. -Mark Twain

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/

 

[brandrx]

frandrx/Ron,

Takes one to know one!!! How many lenses to you have now?

The forum folks used to call me "Mad Ron". So, I guess I was "Mad" besides being weird.

How many lenses? If I started counting now, I would finish tomorrow about this time. Not all of them are Pentax either.

I dunnno, I just find myself wanting to find all my answers from one
place and gain a certain consistency to what I shoot with. But then
this is not a perfect world and it can't happen that way. Then I
wonder if there are others like me on this benighted planet that
really obsess about picky little things like matching lenses. Then I
realize that yeah, people do that, who here has the "set" of
limiteds, DA for FA doesn't matter really which. How proud of it are
they?

Hmmm....I have sets of limiteds. Both sets (FA and DA) as a matter of fact. I want the silver ones too but that will have to wait for awhile. I'm not "proud", just "Mad" and weird (see my writing above).

Guess I am not any weirder than the rest of you. Whew....

Welcome to the Pentax SLR forum.

Cheers.

--

'Keep your eyes looking forward. However, glance back now and then to see where you've come from. It will put a smile on your face.' ~ brandrx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_County,_Utah

Ron ~ Retired.

 

[neil holmes]

I have been wondring about this for a long time.

Am I weird? I want to keep my lenses the same brand and not mix and
match. Don't know why, I just do. If I end up getting the Sigma 17-70
when I have the money, I will probably end up buying Sigma lenses for
the rest of my lenses. I would feel weird getting the Pentax 55-300
to go with it. But if I went Pentax 16-45 then I would feel weird
getting the Sigma 10-20 that I covet. Because it would be a different
brand.

Does anybody else think like this? Or am I weirder than I think I am?

Tell me what you think?

Lloyd
--
History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme. -Mark Twain

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/

Hi

I will use whatever I think will get me what I want at the cheapest possible price.

So I will use Pentax af, Pentax mf, m42 and Nikon lenses....and any other if I thought it would work.

On top of that many stray lenses follow me home and I give them a place to live.

Currently I have 2 Nikon mount lenses, 3 tamron adaptall lenses, 2 Sigma Pentax af lenses, 1 Tamron Pentax af lens, I Pentax K mount 50mm 1.2 lens, 2 Pentax Takumar m42 lenses, 1 vivitar K mount lens (2 actually but the same with one not working), 1 Promura m42 lens, 1 topcon 55mm mf K mount lens, 1 Soligor Pentax Ka mf zoom, 1 Ricoh k mount lens. A Pentax 1.7x afa, a Teleplus 2x 1:1 convertor, A Magnicon 3x 1:1 convertor, 2 bellows from different makers.

I hope to get another Nikon in the next week or so.

I have not long ago humanely destroyed a Soligor K mount mf zoom (IQ was worse than poor). I remounted a Yashica mirror lens to K mount as an experiment (it worked but the lens was worse than the Soligor).

But to answer your question....yes , you are weird! What I do is on the other hand perfectly normal.

Cheers

neil

 

[brandrx]

What I do is on the other hand perfectly normal.

Hi Neil,

I won't consider you perfectly normal until you mount a TV (C-Mount) lens and shoot some crazy macros with the lens set to infinity. Or maybe mount a 400mm lens in series with a 40mm eypiece, in series with a 300mm lens for an equivilent 3000mm lens. Now that is fun and hard to do to do (the image is upside down in the viewfinder). LOL

Cheers.

--

'Keep your eyes looking forward. However, glance back now and then to see where you've come from. It will put a smile on your face.' ~ brandrx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_County,_Utah

Ron ~ Retired.

 

[neil holmes]

What I do is on the other hand perfectly normal.

Hi Neil,

I won't consider you perfectly normal until you mount a TV (C-Mount)
lens and shoot some crazy macros with the lens set to infinity. Or
maybe mount a 400mm lens in series with a 40mm eypiece, in series
with a 300mm lens for an equivilent 3000mm lens. Now that is fun and
hard to do to do (the image is upside down in the viewfinder). LOL

Cheers.

--
'Keep your eyes looking forward. However, glance back now and then to

Ron,

Your more specia....I mean "normal" than me.

I actually put in a few bids on some f1 and f 0.7 lenses for macro a few months ago but was outbid. I have also looked briefly at some TV lenses but gave up because as well as being normal I am basicly lazy too.

neil

 

[brandrx]

What I do is on the other hand perfectly normal.

Hi Neil,

I won't consider you perfectly normal until you mount a TV (C-Mount)
lens and shoot some crazy macros with the lens set to infinity. Or
maybe mount a 400mm lens in series with a 40mm eypiece, in series
with a 300mm lens for an equivilent 3000mm lens. Now that is fun and
hard to do to do (the image is upside down in the viewfinder). LOL

Cheers.

--
'Keep your eyes looking forward. However, glance back now and then to

Ron,

Your more specia....I mean "normal" than me.

I actually put in a few bids on some f1 and f 0.7 lenses for macro a
few months ago but was outbid. I have also looked briefly at some
TV lenses but gave up because as well as being normal I am basicly
lazy too.

Yep, I gave up on the crazy stuff I wrote to you. I am getting lazy also. It was fun while it lasted though

Cheers and keep on having fun.

--

'Keep your eyes looking forward. However, glance back now and then to see where you've come from. It will put a smile on your face.' ~ brandrx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_County,_Utah

Ron ~ Retired.

 

[davex19560]

Seems a bit wierd to me
--
Dave

 

[JeffJS]

JeffJS,

Too true, the equipment doesn't matter that much, but when all you
have is 3 primes (with one cheapo duplicate) 28mm 50mm 135mm, you
tend to dream about the ease of having a more flexible set-up. Then
when you like the feel of owning a quality product and feeling the
pride of ownership, you get fussy and want a certain symmetry to your
kit......

I dunnno, I just find myself wanting to find all my answers from one
place and gain a certain consistency to what I shoot with. But then
this is not a perfect world and it can't happen that way. Then I
wonder if there are others like me on this benighted planet that
really obsess about picky little things like matching lenses. Then I
realize that yeah, people do that, who here has the "set" of
limiteds, DA for FA doesn't matter really which. How proud of it are
they?

I don't know about pride but it certainly doesn't hurt to have them.



Taken with the DA35 f2.8 Limited. I doubt I'll ever complete a DA limited set though. I bought the 35 because it's a dual purpose lens.

Notice one that looks strangely out of place ;-p

Of course it took a lot of buying and selling of those 'cheapo' primes to pay for them and the MS/Ebay cashback program this past fall certainly didn't hurt the prospect. But even with these, some people with the kit lens sometimes do a better job.

Guess I am not any weirder than the rest of you. Whew....

Nope. I'd say you're pretty normal around here (we're all a little weird).

Lloyd

--
History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme. -Mark Twain

http://lloydshell.blogspot.com/

--
http://s134.photobucket.com/albums/q109/jjkyle/