Pentax K-70 and 16-85mm Lens are Winners

I just sold my 16 megapixels Fujifilm X-T1 which was a great camera that produced very high resolution images but unfortunately not sharp nor detailed enough for the price paid. I bought the Pentax K70 (body only) and instead of the kit lens I got the Pentax 16-85mm lens. I shoot mostly landscape, macro, architecture (strait lines), the kit lens didn't work for me. The camera and 16-85mm lens combination give me outstanding and consistent results in every shot I take especially in RAW (DNG) format that I open directly in Adobe Lightroom. The only drawback is that the body and lens combination are on the heavy side but the quality of images are very well worth it. I gave it 5 rating because of the price paid compared to the excellent image quality along with the outstanding image details. Take a look at some sample images in my gallery at: https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/7052098846

All you need now is the 60-250 & 50 macro.

Congratulations!

Thanks very much.

Actually I'm good with one lens for now.

When a good camera costs this little it makes it affordable to get a better lens. As cameras getting better manufacturers are over charging for mid-range cameras that are used to be considered a low budget alternatives.

I also keep an eye on 16-85

Not sure yet what prefer this lens or some UW - 10-20 or 12-24.

This lens is incredibly good. You have a great combo. No need to go down the slippery slope of LBA. I used this lens initially with KS2 and now K3II. You can use this combo in any weather conditions.

asmarlak wrote:

Actually I'm good with one lens for now.

WHAAAT!?!?

Beware of this forum then, LBA (lens buying addiction) is contagious, and most of us have it! You will however be a positive influence for all of us, so you're welcome to stay, at your own risk of course!

Yes LBA is a reality. I had it bad until I got the 16-85 then suddenly my photo outings became much simpler all I needed was this lens all along.....

Ulrich

You are right!

The 16-85 is currently the best zoom lens in the Pentax aps-c line up! Very useful range, great image quality, very fast (at least by Pentax standards) silent auto focus and of course weather sealing! It's probably the only Pentax lens that ticks all the right boxes without costing you a fortune...

OlyPent wrote:

miroshi wrote:

I also keep an eye on 16-85

Not sure yet what prefer this lens or some UW - 10-20 or 12-24.

You can actually buy Tamron's decent-quality if somewhat dated ultrawide SP AF 10-24mm for $200-$300 on Ebay used. That might leave you with enough to get the 16-85.

Yes, I know about this lens, but most people (by there opinions) in the net prefer Sigma 10-20, with complains about too soft corners of the Tamron.

miroshi wrote:

OlyPent wrote:

miroshi wrote:

I also keep an eye on 16-85

Not sure yet what prefer this lens or some UW - 10-20 or 12-24.

You can actually buy Tamron's decent-quality if somewhat dated ultrawide SP AF 10-24mm for $200-$300 on Ebay used. That might leave you with enough to get the 16-85.

Yes, I know about this lens, but most people (by there opinions) in the net prefer Sigma 10-20, with complains about too soft corners of the Tamron.

I have the Tamron and the Pentax mentioned but use the Tamron seldom as its pictures have something unpleasant I cannot describe or quantify. Also the Pentax at 16 mm is really quite wide already.

hanhait wrote:

miroshi wrote:

OlyPent wrote:

miroshi wrote:

I also keep an eye on 16-85

Not sure yet what prefer this lens or some UW - 10-20 or 12-24.

You can actually buy Tamron's decent-quality if somewhat dated ultrawide SP AF 10-24mm for $200-$300 on Ebay used. That might leave you with enough to get the 16-85.

Yes, I know about this lens, but most people (by there opinions) in the net prefer Sigma 10-20, with complains about too soft corners of the Tamron.

I have the Tamron and the Pentax mentioned but use the Tamron seldom as its pictures have something unpleasant I cannot describe or quantify. Also the Pentax at 16 mm is really quite wide already.

I don't knoq about the IQ, there was a review in DPR form a travel to Cuba, and the photographer was made all pictures only with Tamron lenses - the WA images were amazing, so 10-24 may be is not so bad.

Well, my nephew own Nikkor 10-24mm and we made a test, here is it:

Wide test - 10, 12, 17 mm

Watching at this, ask again - do you thing 16mm is wide enough?

For me 17mm is not wide, may be 12 or 10mm is really wide.

Any way I would like to get an 16-85, range is good, and the wide end is wider then my current lens. Once I think about 18-135, but all said the IQ of 16-85 is better, and I prefer 16 vs 18mm.