What direction to go with my lenses? What's next?

jtkratzer · 07-27-2012, 01:49 PM

Originally posted by lytrytyr

As I mentioned before, you should be able to get at least an A20/2.8 for about the same money as a new DA 21.

The advantage in your situation is that the A20 becomes an ultra-wide on film.

Originally posted by aurele

the FA-J is the only cheap 18mm for FF.

It seem i forgot to say that the only interest of the 18-35 is using it on film. Otherwise the 18-55 is better for digital.

And my primary focus is digital. I have the ZX-30 because it seems it's not worth the effort of selling it. It was a basic model and there are plenty of them around.

**Just1MoreDave** · 07-27-2012, 03:09 PM

Originally posted by jtkratzer

...Why do you suggest selling the A 50 1.4? Other than the 28-80 and 70-300, all the other lenses have been acquired since July 3rd, which was only the 18-55. The rest have shown up somewhere between the 16th-23rd I believe. The few shots I've taken with the F 50 1.7 have been good, but I like the manual focus on the A 50 1.4 for the shallow DOF compared to the slightly more than 1/4 turn the focus ring travels on the F 50.

I'd be shocked if I got more than $175 for the M 50, 28-80, and 35-70. If were to get the 16-45, I would be gaining 2mm on the wide side, losing 10 on the other end, and losing the WR.

It feels much like my own situation. I have the A50/1.4 and the F50/1.7, and some really good reasons to own them. I used the A50/1.4 a lot more with my *ist DS, which had a split-prism focus screen and no SR. With my K-7 and stock screen, it is just enough to make me choose the F50/1.7 all the time. There is just that slight doubt that I have truly nailed focus enough to use f1.4, the times I forgot to enter the right focal length for SR, times when AF is handy, laziness, etc. I think active kids might tip the balance even more. Since you just got them, you can see which one collects more dust for you.

The big reason I get evangelical about the 16-45 is because I'm too cheap to buy alternatives. The DA* 16-50/2.8 is better in a lot of ways but price.

jtkratzer · 07-27-2012, 09:25 PM

Originally posted by Just1MoreDave

It feels much like my own situation. I have the A50/1.4 and the F50/1.7, and some really good reasons to own them. I used the A50/1.4 a lot more with my *ist DS, which had a split-prism focus screen and no SR. With my K-7 and stock screen, it is just enough to make me choose the F50/1.7 all the time. There is just that slight doubt that I have truly nailed focus enough to use f1.4, the times I forgot to enter the right focal length for SR, times when AF is handy, laziness, etc. I think active kids might tip the balance even more. Since you just got them, you can see which one collects more dust for you.

The big reason I get evangelical about the 16-45 is because I'm too cheap to buy alternatives. The DA* 16-50/2.8 is better in a lot of ways but price.

My camera prompts me for focal length every time I turn it on with lenses like the A and M 50. I forget to take the SR off when using a tripod. I need to start remembering to do that. I probably went a bit too fast, too soon with some of these lenses, but none of them were expensive with the F 50 1.7 having the highest price tag. And all of the lenses I bought would barely get me half way to the DA* 16-50.

subidoc · 07-28-2012, 07:15 AM

Have you considered a reliable M35/f2.0? A great walk around lens, and sharp. I use that or my Distagon 35/f2.0 as walk arounds.

jtkratzer · 07-28-2012, 09:37 AM

A couple 20mm lenses on eBay are $430-$500. An A35 f/2.8 is $240 plus $48 in shipping.

Zaphodmonster · 07-28-2012, 02:30 PM

I have noticed some wider angle lenses in the marketplace here that might fit the bill you are loooking for. If full frame/film is not a concern then I very much recommend a DA 21mm limited it is a great lens. It can be had on craigslist occasionally for around 400 to 450.

Also, Im not sure how if it is too wide but the DA 10 - 17mm fisheye is alot of fun and super wide

jtkratzer · 11-04-2012, 07:19 PM

So...a bit of an update. My inlaws gave me their ME Super not long ago...gave me the itch to get back in touch with film. I now have the ME Super, KX, KM, and on Tuesday, an LX will be added to that list along with a pair of viewfinders, flash, and some other goodies. I'm looking to sell the either the KX or KM or even both. Thinking about keeping one as a full manual, but haven't decided. My daughter (yes, she's almost 3 and not ready for something like these) loves running around the house with an old digital P&S. Loves it. Thinking about keeping one of the KM/KX for her to learn with in the future. The ME Super will stay with me until I give it to one of the kids as it was purchased to take baby pictures of my wife. I expect the LX to be my go to camera for film and go everywhere the K-5 goes.

The F35-70 and M50/1.4 are both sold. Keeping the A50/1.4 for video on the K-5 and film. One of the film bodies came with a K55/1.8 and I recently picked up a K28/3.5. I think I'll just stick with those lenses for the time being, maybe I'll look for something in the 85-135mm range with a fast enough aperture.

I'm hesitant to invest in the DA limiteds as I expect Pentax to release a FF at some point and I'll eventually get it.

A flash for the K-5 is probably the highest priority before any new lenses. Thinking about the Metz 58 AF-2.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Need help with project, lacking direction	Franky2step	Pentax DSLR Discussion	9	01-23-2012 05:11 PM
Misc No direction	GabrielFFontes	Post Your Photos!	2	10-04-2011 05:03 AM
looking for some direction	fewing1	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	3	03-08-2011 06:20 PM
Third party lenses that don't focus in the wrong direction?	whojammyflip	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	06-21-2010 05:08 AM
Third party lenses that don't focus in the wrong direction?	LittleSkink	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	09-02-2008 10:14 AM

07-27-2012, 01:49 PM	#16
jtkratzer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Lancaster County, Pa Posts: 963 Original Poster	Originally posted by lytrytyr As I mentioned before, you should be able to get at least an A20/2.8 for about the same money as a new DA 21. The advantage in your situation is that the A20 becomes an ultra-wide on film. Originally posted by aurele the FA-J is the only cheap 18mm for FF. It seem i forgot to say that the only interest of the 18-35 is using it on film. Otherwise the 18-55 is better for digital. And my primary focus is digital. I have the ZX-30 because it seems it's not worth the effort of selling it. It was a basic model and there are plenty of them around.

07-27-2012, 03:09 PM	#17
Just1MoreDave Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Aurora, CO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,340	Originally posted by jtkratzer ...Why do you suggest selling the A 50 1.4? Other than the 28-80 and 70-300, all the other lenses have been acquired since July 3rd, which was only the 18-55. The rest have shown up somewhere between the 16th-23rd I believe. The few shots I've taken with the F 50 1.7 have been good, but I like the manual focus on the A 50 1.4 for the shallow DOF compared to the slightly more than 1/4 turn the focus ring travels on the F 50. I'd be shocked if I got more than $175 for the M 50, 28-80, and 35-70. If were to get the 16-45, I would be gaining 2mm on the wide side, losing 10 on the other end, and losing the WR. It feels much like my own situation. I have the A50/1.4 and the F50/1.7, and some really good reasons to own them. I used the A50/1.4 a lot more with my ist DS, which had a split-prism focus screen and no SR. With my K-7 and stock screen, it is just enough to make me choose the F50/1.7 all the time. There is just that slight doubt that I have truly nailed focus enough to use f1.4, the times I forgot to enter the right focal length for SR, times when AF is handy, laziness, etc. I think active kids might tip the balance even more. Since you just got them, you can see which one collects more dust for you. The big reason I get evangelical about the 16-45 is because I'm too cheap to buy alternatives. The DA 16-50/2.8 is better in a lot of ways but price.

07-27-2012, 09:25 PM	#18
jtkratzer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Lancaster County, Pa Posts: 963 Original Poster	Originally posted by Just1MoreDave It feels much like my own situation. I have the A50/1.4 and the F50/1.7, and some really good reasons to own them. I used the A50/1.4 a lot more with my ist DS, which had a split-prism focus screen and no SR. With my K-7 and stock screen, it is just enough to make me choose the F50/1.7 all the time. There is just that slight doubt that I have truly nailed focus enough to use f1.4, the times I forgot to enter the right focal length for SR, times when AF is handy, laziness, etc. I think active kids might tip the balance even more. Since you just got them, you can see which one collects more dust for you. The big reason I get evangelical about the 16-45 is because I'm too cheap to buy alternatives. The DA 16-50/2.8 is better in a lot of ways but price. My camera prompts me for focal length every time I turn it on with lenses like the A and M 50. I forget to take the SR off when using a tripod. I need to start remembering to do that. I probably went a bit too fast, too soon with some of these lenses, but none of them were expensive with the F 50 1.7 having the highest price tag. And all of the lenses I bought would barely get me half way to the DA* 16-50.

07-28-2012, 07:15 AM	#19
subidoc Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Somewhere near the middle... Posts: 325	Have you considered a reliable M35/f2.0? A great walk around lens, and sharp. I use that or my Distagon 35/f2.0 as walk arounds.

07-28-2012, 09:37 AM	#20
jtkratzer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Lancaster County, Pa Posts: 963 Original Poster	A couple 20mm lenses on eBay are $430-$500. An A35 f/2.8 is $240 plus $48 in shipping.

07-28-2012, 02:30 PM	#21
Zaphodmonster Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 151	I have noticed some wider angle lenses in the marketplace here that might fit the bill you are loooking for. If full frame/film is not a concern then I very much recommend a DA 21mm limited it is a great lens. It can be had on craigslist occasionally for around 400 to 450. Also, Im not sure how if it is too wide but the DA 10 - 17mm fisheye is alot of fun and super wide

11-04-2012, 07:19 PM	#22
jtkratzer Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Lancaster County, Pa Posts: 963 Original Poster	So...a bit of an update. My inlaws gave me their ME Super not long ago...gave me the itch to get back in touch with film. I now have the ME Super, KX, KM, and on Tuesday, an LX will be added to that list along with a pair of viewfinders, flash, and some other goodies. I'm looking to sell the either the KX or KM or even both. Thinking about keeping one as a full manual, but haven't decided. My daughter (yes, she's almost 3 and not ready for something like these) loves running around the house with an old digital P&S. Loves it. Thinking about keeping one of the KM/KX for her to learn with in the future. The ME Super will stay with me until I give it to one of the kids as it was purchased to take baby pictures of my wife. I expect the LX to be my go to camera for film and go everywhere the K-5 goes. The F35-70 and M50/1.4 are both sold. Keeping the A50/1.4 for video on the K-5 and film. One of the film bodies came with a K55/1.8 and I recently picked up a K28/3.5. I think I'll just stick with those lenses for the time being, maybe I'll look for something in the 85-135mm range with a fast enough aperture. I'm hesitant to invest in the DA limiteds as I expect Pentax to release a FF at some point and I'll eventually get it. A flash for the K-5 is probably the highest priority before any new lenses. Thinking about the Metz 58 AF-2.