Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

SpecialK · 11-10-2010, 09:46 PM

Quote:

If you don't notice a 20mm difference on a crop sensor, something is wrong.

In the old days the general rule of thumb was to double (or halve) the focal lengths. That concept still works :-) But as you get into the ultra wides, a few mm's makes a large difference.

TOUGEFC · 11-10-2010, 10:30 PM

Although i own more than 3 primes and zooms.

My fav combo i take everywhere is my da15/fa43/fa77

NeverSatisfied · 11-10-2010, 11:32 PM

Originally posted by TOUGEFC

Although i own more than 3 primes and zooms.

My fav combo i take everywhere is my da15/fa43/fa77

Ditto! I may have recommended the 16-50 but lately I like:
DA 15, FA 43, D-FA 100 WR. (So then I've got macro covered too.)

whojammyflip · 11-11-2010, 11:51 AM

On digital, I'd use the 17-70 f4 or a kit lens, in combination with a FA 1.8/31 in the middle of the range for speed.

On 35mm film, I'd just use primes. As mentioned above, watching the ratio between FL's so that they are between 1.6x and 2x each other. Classic combo was 35/50/90.

Ira · 11-11-2010, 12:11 PM

Originally posted by Rory

That's ridiculous. If you don't notice a 20mm difference on a crop sensor, something is wrong.

Ditto.

Pablom · 11-11-2010, 12:21 PM

I'll take the primes please. pm me for full address, and be careful when packing

**keithlester** · 11-11-2010, 12:43 PM

Originally posted by SpecialK

In the old days the general rule of thumb was to double (or halve) the focal lengths. That concept still works :-) But as you get into the ultra wides, a few mm's makes a large difference.

As I recall, it was recommended to buy lenses spaced by approximately 1.5 times focal length as in - 28mm, 35mm, 55mm, 85mm, 135mm, 200mm.

That was in the old days, 1970's, YMMV

paperbag846 · 11-11-2010, 01:21 PM

Originally posted by keithlester

As I recall, it was recommended to buy lenses spaced by approximately 1.5 times focal length as in - 28mm, 35mm, 55mm, 85mm, 135mm, 200mm.

That sounds like it would have cost a lot of money in the 1970's. A pro would likely need all of them, I'd bet the average SLR owner world have gotten by with a 28, 50, and 85, or a 70-200 zoom in place of the 85.

wlachan · 11-11-2010, 01:24 PM

I would just pick DA15/21/70. Too many primes in the field is impractical. I have no faith in Pentax zooms, sorry.

**Clarkey** · 11-11-2010, 06:40 PM

15mm, 40mm, 18-135mm is going to be my new rig (somehow!).

audiobomber · 11-11-2010, 07:26 PM

Originally posted by clark

IMO 35 and 55 are too close to warrant the purchase of 2 primes. I'd say the sigma 10-20 and 55mm would be a good combo.

I couldn't get along without a normal lens. I definitely need something between 28 and 40mm.

audiobomber · 11-11-2010, 07:30 PM

Originally posted by SpecialK

12-24 for the wide end, the 35 macro and 70 or 77 so you at least have some telephoto.

That would work for me. Sometimes I carry the 10-17, FA 35 f2 and D FA 100mm macro.

GeneV · 11-11-2010, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer

One lens in South Florida because of the salt air getting in your camera when you change lenses.

That is where I was introduced to dirt on the sensor.

audiobomber · 11-11-2010, 07:58 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

DA15, 16-45 or Tamron 17-50, and DA55.

Originally posted by paperbag846

I really like this suggestion.

There's not much the 15mm can do that the 16-45 can't. There's a 1mm difference in fov and a slight quality difference. I don't see the point of carrying both. There's more difference with the 55mm, speed and IQ, but I'd like more tele in a three lens kit, something from 70-100mm.

audiobomber · 11-11-2010, 08:17 PM

Originally posted by kshapero

14-35-55 or 16-50? You decide.
or any other combo of 3 primes or one zoom?

One zoom, it would have to be the 16-50mm. Three primes, I'd go for 15mm, FA 31mm Ltd or FA 35 and D FA 100mm WR macro.

11-11-2010, 07:58 PM	#29
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Pentaxor DA15, 16-45 or Tamron 17-50, and DA55. Originally posted by paperbag846 I really like this suggestion. There's not much the 15mm can do that the 16-45 can't. There's a 1mm difference in fov and a slight quality difference. I don't see the point of carrying both. There's more difference with the 55mm, speed and IQ, but I'd like more tele in a three lens kit, something from 70-100mm. Last edited by audiobomber; 11-11-2010 at 08:09 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax Primes / Vivitar zoom	JP_Seattle	Sold Items	7	05-10-2010 12:39 PM
working without zoom (primes only)	WMBP	Photographic Technique	39	10-01-2009 10:12 AM
135mm Lens test: Six primes and a zoom	Just1MoreDave	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	27	07-30-2009 09:38 AM
For Sale - Sold: smc Pentax M Primes, S-M-C Primes, THE Series 1 70~210 Zoom, Viv MFTC and more	monochrome	Sold Items	33	02-13-2009 01:29 PM
Fisheye questions: Pentax 10-17 zoom or primes?	troyz	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	23	08-02-2008 05:16 AM

11-10-2010, 09:46 PM	#16
SpecialK Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: So California Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,482	Quote: If you don't notice a 20mm difference on a crop sensor, something is wrong. In the old days the general rule of thumb was to double (or halve) the focal lengths. That concept still works :-) But as you get into the ultra wides, a few mm's makes a large difference.

11-10-2010, 10:30 PM	#17
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Although i own more than 3 primes and zooms. My fav combo i take everywhere is my da15/fa43/fa77

11-10-2010, 11:32 PM	#18
NeverSatisfied Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: S.E. Michigan Photos: Albums Posts: 688	Originally posted by TOUGEFC Although i own more than 3 primes and zooms. My fav combo i take everywhere is my da15/fa43/fa77 Ditto! I may have recommended the 16-50 but lately I like: DA 15, FA 43, D-FA 100 WR. (So then I've got macro covered too.)

11-11-2010, 11:51 AM	#19
whojammyflip Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 417	On digital, I'd use the 17-70 f4 or a kit lens, in combination with a FA 1.8/31 in the middle of the range for speed. On 35mm film, I'd just use primes. As mentioned above, watching the ratio between FL's so that they are between 1.6x and 2x each other. Classic combo was 35/50/90.

11-11-2010, 12:11 PM	#20
Ira Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Coral Springs, FL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,216	Originally posted by Rory That's ridiculous. If you don't notice a 20mm difference on a crop sensor, something is wrong. Ditto.

11-11-2010, 12:21 PM	#21
Pablom Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Usa Posts: 1,940	I'll take the primes please. pm me for full address, and be careful when packing

11-11-2010, 12:43 PM	#22
keithlester Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Carradale, Scotland Posts: 301	Originally posted by SpecialK In the old days the general rule of thumb was to double (or halve) the focal lengths. That concept still works :-) But as you get into the ultra wides, a few mm's makes a large difference. As I recall, it was recommended to buy lenses spaced by approximately 1.5 times focal length as in - 28mm, 35mm, 55mm, 85mm, 135mm, 200mm. That was in the old days, 1970's, YMMV

11-11-2010, 01:21 PM	#23
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by keithlester As I recall, it was recommended to buy lenses spaced by approximately 1.5 times focal length as in - 28mm, 35mm, 55mm, 85mm, 135mm, 200mm. That sounds like it would have cost a lot of money in the 1970's. A pro would likely need all of them, I'd bet the average SLR owner world have gotten by with a 28, 50, and 85, or a 70-200 zoom in place of the 85.

11-11-2010, 01:24 PM	#24
wlachan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Canada Photos: Albums Posts: 2,625	I would just pick DA15/21/70. Too many primes in the field is impractical. I have no faith in Pentax zooms, sorry.

11-11-2010, 06:40 PM	#25
Clarkey Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Brampton, ON, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,456	15mm, 40mm, 18-135mm is going to be my new rig (somehow!).

11-11-2010, 07:26 PM	#26
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by clark IMO 35 and 55 are too close to warrant the purchase of 2 primes. I'd say the sigma 10-20 and 55mm would be a good combo. I couldn't get along without a normal lens. I definitely need something between 28 and 40mm.

11-11-2010, 07:30 PM	#27
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by SpecialK 12-24 for the wide end, the 35 macro and 70 or 77 so you at least have some telephoto. That would work for me. Sometimes I carry the 10-17, FA 35 f2 and D FA 100mm macro.

11-11-2010, 07:42 PM	#28
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by Fl_Gulfer One lens in South Florida because of the salt air getting in your camera when you change lenses. That is where I was introduced to dirt on the sensor.

11-11-2010, 08:17 PM	#30
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by kshapero 14-35-55 or 16-50? You decide. or any other combo of 3 primes or one zoom? One zoom, it would have to be the 16-50mm. Three primes, I'd go for 15mm, FA 31mm Ltd or FA 35 and D FA 100mm WR macro.