[Klaus]

It just came back from the Pentax service. Within factory specs (of course).

Prepare yourself ...

[Rainer]

With that "opener" ... I would expect something in the

quality of the EFS 18-135 ... a just about satisfying

everyday-lens ... no more ... but no less.



Since you emphasize that it is within factory specs ... I expect

to see abysmal bad corners at some focal length along

with hefty barrel distortion at the wide end plus vignetting.



Just my 2cts ... Rainer

[joachim]

Hi,



Ok, I now expect a performance on the level of the 50-200. Klaus when are you examining the 18-55 WR <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/cool.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='B)' />



The entire thing leaves me wondering about Pentax. Their K-7 and K-5 receive(d) very good reviews on various site, putting them clearly ahead of what I perceive are the key Nikon competirors (D90 / D7000). What these reviews never tell you, is which lenses you should use for theses Pentax bodies. I am under the impression that with the Nikons you have a choice of roughly 3 quality levels. At Pentax you might argue there are also 3 levels, but it seems to me it is 3 levels of "uncompetiviness" regarding price/performance.



Where, in my view Pentax has an edge is low light. Their in-body SR seems to be the worse system on offer, though if you team a Nikon with a f/1.4 lens you have none at all. For a standard zoom in the f/4 to f/5.6 range it seems the Nikon in lens system is superior.



Enough of a rant, here comes a question: Which "standard-zoom" lens would people recommend for a Pentax K-5 for someone who would choose either of the 18-105 or 16-85 in Nikon land. FYI: In my country the Pentax 17-70 is 30% more than the Nikon 16-85.

[dave9t5]

[quote name='joachim' timestamp='1302950992' post='7676']



Where, in my view Pentax has an edge is low light. Their in-body SR seems to be the worse system on offer, though if you team a Nikon with a f/1.4 lens you have none at all.

[/quote]



Pentax' SR doesn't seem to do well in tests, but in real-life it's superb.



[url="http://dave9t5.zenfolio.com/img/s5/v4/p843061584-5.jpg"]Example 1[/url]

Focal length:35 mm

Focal length (35mm):52 mm

Exposure:1/8 at f/2.8

Lens: Pentax DA 35/2.8 Macro Ltd



[url="http://dave9t5.zenfolio.com/img/s4/v3/p349656413-5.jpg"]Example 2[/url]

Focal length:85 mm

Focal length (35mm):127 mm

Exposure:1/10 at f/4

Lens: Voigtlaender APO-Lanthar 90m/3.5 SL



...and like you say, the best stabilization is the one you have with you. With in-body stabilization you always have it, like the Voigtlaender example above.