[cgilbert]

I would appreciate suggestions for an all around lens and a macro with PRICE a major consideration.
I tend to shoot close-ups and architecture with my K10D.
Lenses I own are from eons ago and not very good in ratings.
Pentax smc A 35-80 1.4-5.6
Pentax smc A 50 1.2
Pentax smc F 100-300 1.4-5.6
Tamron AF 28-105 1.4-5.6 IF

Thanks, I did look through the threads before posting.

[stevebrot]

Ummmm...you can send that stinker A50/1.2 to me. I will find a way to dispose of it.

As for other lens options suitable for the budget-minded photographer, I would direct you to the various lens clubs. The Off-Brand Club might be a good place to start. The Vivitar, Tamron, and Adaptall-2 threads are also rich with low-end treasures.


Steve


(...fellow photographic bottom-feeder...)

[audiobomber]

I would appreciate suggestions for an all around lens and a macro with PRICE a major consideration.
I tend to shoot close-ups and architecture with my K10D.
Lenses I own are from eons ago and not very good in ratings.
Pentax smc A 35-80 1.4-5.6
Pentax smc A 50 1.2
Pentax smc F 100-300 1.4-5.6
Tamron AF 28-105 1.4-5.6 IF

Thanks, I did look through the threads before posting.

I would recommend the DA 16-45 and a Raynox macro adapter to suit your needs. The 16-45 is an exceptional zoom for architecture due to its sharpness across the frame, flat focal plane, extra wide view and low distortion. The Raynox 150 would give you about 1.4:1 macro on your longest lens and a useful magnification boost used on your other lenses. It's a little trickier to handle than a macro lens, but capable of pretty solid results. Have a look at this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/lens-clubs/74221-raynox-macro-club.html
The other inexpensive macro options are a reversing ring or extension tubes.

PS The way you've written the apertures on some of your lenses is incorrect. Should be like this:
Pentax smc A 35-80 f/4.0-5.6
Pentax smc F 100-300 f/4.0-5.6
Tamron AF 28-105 f/4.0-5.6 IF

or like this:
Pentax smc A 35-80 1:4.0-5.6
Pentax smc F 100-300 1:4.0-5.6
Tamron AF 28-105 1:4.0-5.6 IF

This is more commonly used in the forums:
Pentax smc A 35-80 4.0-5.6
Pentax smc F 100-300 4.0-5.6
Tamron AF 28-105 4.0-5.6 IF

[sterretje]

For closeups, I don't think you really need a macro unless you really need 1:1 magnification.

You might get some useful suggestions if you give an indication for a budget. We might advise on a solution for 100 bucks and it might still be too expensive

Is it only quality that bothers you? Or is it also field-of-view?

[cgilbert]

I thank you and take note of the forum lesson.

[Lowell Goudge]

if you want archetecture, you need wide angle, first, and speed second, since shake reduction and the high ISO performance of todays cameras make lens speed less of a necessity.

Then you need to consider, depending on the amount of PP you want to do, whether CA or distortion is more critical.

For me, I have seen many wide angle lenses produce unacceptable CA off axis, including many of the front end adaptors people promote. YOu end up spending about half the cost of a particular lens I think you should look at, for a peice of transparent junk.

I shoot a lot of archetecture, especially when travelling, and until reciently, my main go to lens was a sigma 10-20 F4-5.6. You could also consider, but it is more expensive, the pentax 12-24. Both are good, the pentax has a reputation for slightly less distortion, but the distortion is managable with the sigma as well. The sigma is wider.

If you want to spend even less, you can look at the Samyant 14mmF2.8

It is faster by 1-2 stops over the pentax and sigma lenses, (although the newer, but more expensive still sigma 10-20HSM is F3.5) but has more barrel distortion (but still quite correctible in PP)

There are some sample shots on the forums with that lens. It is manual focus, which is not an issue and is a KA mount so all exposure and flash modes work. It is, as I noted earlier quite fast, and also, if you ever want an even wider look, it is a fill frame lens, and will cover a film frame vbery nicely. I have tested this on my PZ-1 with great results, and 14mm on film is really wide.

[cgilbert]

My budget is around $150. but I am also willing to and save for what I need

[Lowell Goudge]

My budget is around $150. but I am also willing to and save for what I need

for that budget, you need to play in the used market. About the only thing you can get new is a WA adaptor, but as I said, these really are junk.

the samyang 14F2.8 new is about 400 at adorama or B&H, and I forget the prices of the sigma and pentax zooms new, but it will be more.

It may be best to look and see what the origonal sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 sells for in the market place

It is pretty good.

[boriscleto]

With a budget of $150 you are looking at something like the Zenitar 16mm f/2.8 for wide angle.

Zenitar 16mm f2.8 Fisheye Lens Reviews - Pentax Third-Party Lens Review Database

For macro work I would stick with the lenses you have and get a Raynox for about $50.

[dmc]

Sell your SMC A 50 f1.2 and you'll have enough money to buy what you want.

[Quicksand]

Sell your SMC A 50 f1.2 and you'll have enough money to buy what you want.

Yeah, but given how the apertures on the other lenses are listed, I would bet you a buck that it's actually an A 50mm f/2.0 (i.e, "1:2" not "1.2").

So if that lens is sold, the OP will have enough money to buy whatever he or she wants, as long as it is under $40 or so.

[Ryan Trevisol]

Are you looking for AF? If not there's a lot of good quality MF glass to be found in the review section . . . don't be afraid to look at Vivitar or Tamron's older stuff. There's some real gems out there.

If you ARE looking for AF, are we to assume that you don't have the kit 18-55?

The 16-45 f4 is a great lens and is a significant upgrade from the stock 18-55 3.5-5.6 but runs around $250 used. I just bought one and it's in the mail, if you can save for this one I think it'll be the best option for what you want to do. F4 sounds slow but it's about more than just max aperture, plus that F4 is the maximum aperture at both ends of the zoom, the mark of a higher quality lens.

The thing about the kit 18-55 is that (at least the II version supplied with the newer cameras) is really quite decent. And the great thing is that you can get it at KEH or on the marketplace here for around $30 all day long . . . pick one up and if it doesn't deliver enough IQ to tide you over until you can afford something better, you can sell it and try something MF.

Edit: Have you tried looking for any of these used?
https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/Tokina-SL-17-17mm-F3.5-for-Pentax.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/Sigma-16mm-F2.8-Filtermatic-Fisheye-for-Pentax.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/Vivitar-19mm-F3.8-for-Pentax.html

[jlaubza]

I'm referring to the title of this thread - lens for a pauper. I have a suggestion for a great lens for depth of field at macro settings - it can be a bit fuzzy but it has a retro charm that some find appealing - try a pinhole in a piece of foil pulled over the lens mount. Really cant get cheaper or more versatile than that.

[cgilbert]

WOW you all are great, I admit to being a little confused, however if I take each suggestion step-by-step I bet ya' I'm going to find my lenses that work better than the ones I have now, and Quicksand is right about the 50mm, I just copied it wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[audiobomber]

Yeah, but given how the apertures on the other lenses are listed, I would bet you a buck that it's actually an A 50mm f/2.0 (i.e, "1:2" not "1.2").

Good catch, I missed that one.

The thing about the kit 18-55 is that (at least the II version supplied with the newer cameras) is really quite decent. And the great thing is that you can get it at KEH or on the marketplace here for around $30 all day long . . . pick one up and if it doesn't deliver enough IQ to tide you over until you can afford something better, you can sell it and try something MF.

This is good advice given the cost constraint. The 18-55 II is a nice lens for the price and would not be out of place in the OP's kit. Distortion is low for a zoom and it's wide enough to do a decent job on architecture. It has pretty close focussing at 1:3. An 18-55 WR would be even more interesting for its weather-resistance on a K10D. Maybe sell one of the other zooms.

I still recommend a Raynox 150 macro adapter too.