K-30...Bother with the Kit lens at all?

fantasysage · 09-12-2012, 09:50 AM

So I am looking about getting into Pentax. Right now I own no Pentax lenses or kit at all. This would be my 3rd DSLR and 5th SLR at all. (Nikon F2, F4, So I am experienced with photography in general .

I was looking at the K-30 a month or so ago, and seeing as how it looks like there will be no more relevant announcements, I am looking to pull the trigger. So...K-30. I can get the Body alone for $720 from Amazon. With the 18-55 is $750. So that is a no brainier. But I hear the 18-55 that comes with the K-30 kit is rubbish. I do not need a zoom with such a long end as the 18-135 for 90% of what I do, it is also a huge price jump to $1120. Would you even bother using the kit lens at all? Or would you go straight ahead and geat some primes. I am looking at the 35mm 2.4, and the 50mm 1.8 WR right now.

What are the values of a brand new 18-55AL? Would it be worth selling it off to offset the price?

Thanks a lot for the ideas or thoughts.

subidoc · 09-12-2012, 10:11 AM

You are not foreign to the use of SLRs. If you have a comfort zone as far as FL is concerned, then get the K-30 and whatever lens you want to fulfill that need. If you prefer primes, then get one that meets your inner most fancy. The 18-55 ALII (or, even better, the WR version) from Pentax is amongst the best kit lens offerings in the market compared to Canikons, so don't be in a hurry to run that down. Yes, its good. But is it special? Probably not. Hence my suggestion - get the FL that you know you will use most. If looking for zooms, there are a few to pick from; for primes, there are many more....

Congratulations on getting the K-30. I don't have one, but hear its a joy to use. The higher ISO tolerances of newer cameras allow greater lattitude for the use of slower lenses.

Cheers.

loco · 09-12-2012, 10:13 AM

Do you plan to take advantage of the weather resistance of the K-30? If so, you would want to have at least one WR lens. The 18-135 is a fine choice for that if you only plan to have one WR lens since it has such a nice range. There is also an 18-55 WR lens. The Pentax 18-55 isn't the greatest lens (it is a kit lens, after all) but it's better than most kit lenses.

It's nice to have a walkaround lens and that's what I use the 18-135 for. However, if you don't anticipate the need for that, then the 35/2.4 is a fantastic lens and a great value for the price.

The 50/1.8 is not weather resistant as far as I know.

lytrytyr · 09-12-2012, 11:29 AM

Originally posted by fantasysage

Would you even bother using the kit lens at all? Or would you go straight ahead and geat some primes. I am looking at the 35mm 2.4, and the 50mm 1.8 WR right now.

What are the values of a brand new 18-55AL?

Stopped down to f/8,
the 18-55 will give you fairly decent wide angle coverage (below 28mm)
to tide you over on Pentax until you buy a DA15, DA21, or whatever.

Unless you're shooting bursts or fast action,
you can let the K-30 do the lens correction for you.

vladimiroltean · 09-12-2012, 11:35 AM

Originally posted by fantasysage

Would you even bother using the kit lens at all? Or would you go straight ahead and geat some primes. I am looking at the 35mm 2.4, and the 50mm 1.8 WR right now.

You've got the point.

Originally posted by fantasysage

What are the values of a brand new 18-55AL? Would it be worth selling it off to offset the price?

No.

ChooseAName · 09-12-2012, 11:35 AM

You're not new to photography so I would say just get the body only and save for a lens you actually want, unless you really really want to be able to use the camera out of the box.

For me, I wouldn't want to bother with the hassle of selling the lens, i.e. packaging it up, going to the post office, etc unless I were making a good $50 profit margin on it, which I don't know if I'd be able to do.

msatlas · 09-12-2012, 11:40 AM

When I first started with a Pentax DSLR, I went straight past the kit lens and got a Tamron 17-50/2.8.

The DA 35/2.4 and 50/1.8 are both really nice optically and give a lot of bang for the buck.

fantasysage · 09-12-2012, 11:58 AM

Originally posted by lytrytyr

Stopped down to f/8,
the 18-55 will give you fairly decent wide angle coverage (below 28mm)
to tide you over on Pentax until you buy a DA15, DA21, or whatever.

Unless you're shooting bursts or fast action,
you can let the K-30 do the lens correction for you.

That is a line of thought I didn't really consider. If I want cheap wide, that is about as cheap as they get.

Originally posted by loco

Do you plan to take advantage of the weather resistance of the K-30? If so, you would want to have at least one WR lens. The 18-135 is a fine choice for that if you only plan to have one WR lens since it has such a nice range. There is also an 18-55 WR lens. The Pentax 18-55 isn't the greatest lens (it is a kit lens, after all) but it's better than most kit lenses.

It's nice to have a walkaround lens and that's what I use the 18-135 for. However, if you don't anticipate the need for that, then the 35/2.4 is a fantastic lens and a great value for the price.

The 50/1.8 is not weather resistant as far as I know.

I would like the ability. It is a shame the kit lens isn't the WR version or I would not even ask this question. I want to get back into street in NY so the added durability is nice if I want to grab the camera without a bag and it starts to pour. I was considering getting the body only and the 18-55 wr separately but it is a lot of money that way.

Originally posted by msatlas

When I first started with a Pentax DSLR, I went straight past the kit lens and got a Tamron 17-50/2.8.

The DA 35/2.4 and 50/1.8 are both really nice optically and give a lot of bang for the buck.

I think if (when) I get a fast normal zoom I will go Pentax, unless that MAP Crap doesn't subside.

I think when you buy into a system you need some sort of lens roadmap. A 50mm is cheap and needed, I would like a normal lens which on APS would be the 35 (I one day want to own the 31mm limited but oh boy is that a lot of cheddar). I would probably then save up for the DA* 16-50 if the price stays sane. Then maybe a medium tele. Work my way up from there.

loco · 09-12-2012, 12:04 PM - **1 Like**

Keep an eye on the marketplace here. You can sometimes find the 18-55 WR at a good price. Also, KEH sometimes has them for around $150-ish. That is the most affordable WR lens, I believe.

JinDesu · 09-12-2012, 12:09 PM - **1 Like**

I personally use a DA 35 F2.4 and a Sigma 50 1.4 with my k-x for almost everything I do. So the kit lens isn't necessary. I do miss the wide parts, but I guess a DA 15 would solve that.

On the other hand, having a WR kit lens is definitely helpful at the least. Maybe find a cheap WR kit lens on the forum here instead of getting it with the body. I think the only WR primes are the DA*55 and the 100mm Macro.

fantasysage · 09-12-2012, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by JinDesu

I personally use a DA 35 F2.4 and a Sigma 50 1.4 with my k-x for almost everything I do. So the kit lens isn't necessary. I do miss the wide parts, but I guess a DA 15 would solve that.

On the other hand, having a WR kit lens is definitely helpful at the least. Maybe find a cheap WR kit lens on the forum here instead of getting it with the body. I think the only WR primes are the DA*55 and the 100mm Macro.

That is actually a great idea. Get the body and the 35mm and hunt down a cheap kit WR.

**boriscleto** · 09-12-2012, 12:42 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by loco

Keep an eye on the marketplace here. You can sometimes find the 18-55 WR at a good price. Also, KEH sometimes has them for around $150-ish. That is the most affordable WR lens, I believe.

When I bought the WR from KEH a few months ago it was $115 without caps or hood. I was lucky to find a hood on evilBay for $15. The caps I didn't care about, those I have plenty of. I see they still have one at that price.

**boriscleto** · 09-12-2012, 12:44 PM

Originally posted by JinDesu

On the other hand, having a WR kit lens is definitely helpful at the least. Maybe find a cheap WR kit lens on the forum here instead of getting it with the body. I think the only WR primes are the DA*55 and the 100mm Macro.

You forget the DA* 200 & 300 and the new HD DA 560 AW. AW is the new WR.

fantasysage · 09-12-2012, 12:52 PM

Originally posted by boriscleto

When I bought the WR from KEH a few months ago it was $115 without caps or hood. I was lucky to find a hood on evilBay for $15. The caps I didn't care about, those I have plenty of. I see they still have one at that price.

Game. Set. Match.

westmill · 09-12-2012, 01:05 PM

Kit lenses are very often well underrated. Also any lens bought with any lens is a kit lens ! A bit of a silly term really which is turning into a bit of a stigma. Some of these so called kit lenses are often more than capable of producing image quality at various settings that is higher than a lot of even prime lenses. They are chosen for there given focal range which can in some cases be all the lens a person will ever need. Use the kit lens ! If you find you use a certain focal lengh far more than others etc if you find you need to open up more than can etc etc.... learn from it. kit lenses are genraly better for things like landscape than a fast lens would be. Food for thought...... all lenses perform at there best stopped down a couple of stops. This means that if you have a fast F1.8 then its likely to be at its best around F4. If you have an F5.6 lens its likely to perform great at F11. Which are you likely to shoot at in this situation ? Nothing is ever as simple as first appears !

09-12-2012, 09:50 AM	#1
fantasysage Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 37	K-30...Bother with the Kit lens at all? So I am looking about getting into Pentax. Right now I own no Pentax lenses or kit at all. This would be my 3rd DSLR and 5th SLR at all. (Nikon F2, F4, So I am experienced with photography in general . I was looking at the K-30 a month or so ago, and seeing as how it looks like there will be no more relevant announcements, I am looking to pull the trigger. So...K-30. I can get the Body alone for $720 from Amazon. With the 18-55 is $750. So that is a no brainier. But I hear the 18-55 that comes with the K-30 kit is rubbish. I do not need a zoom with such a long end as the 18-135 for 90% of what I do, it is also a huge price jump to $1120. Would you even bother using the kit lens at all? Or would you go straight ahead and geat some primes. I am looking at the 35mm 2.4, and the 50mm 1.8 WR right now. What are the values of a brand new 18-55AL? Would it be worth selling it off to offset the price? Thanks a lot for the ideas or thoughts.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Buying a K5 - but with 18-135mm lens kit? Or an 18-55 + 50-200mm lens kit?	robinfaz	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	12	06-04-2012 01:44 PM
Nature Don't bother us-napping.	Terdog	Post Your Photos!	2	01-11-2012 10:54 AM
Anyone bother to seal Ricoh pin holes?	ratm4484	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	6	04-08-2011 12:00 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K-r, 18-55mm kit, 50-200mm kit, Tamron 90mm f/2.8 1:1 Macro lens (CONUS	PastorOfMuppets	Sold Items	3	04-02-2011 07:31 PM
could I bother you to test my new website?	devisor	Photographic Technique	11	04-29-2008 02:42 AM

09-12-2012, 10:11 AM	#2
subidoc Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Somewhere near the middle... Posts: 325	You are not foreign to the use of SLRs. If you have a comfort zone as far as FL is concerned, then get the K-30 and whatever lens you want to fulfill that need. If you prefer primes, then get one that meets your inner most fancy. The 18-55 ALII (or, even better, the WR version) from Pentax is amongst the best kit lens offerings in the market compared to Canikons, so don't be in a hurry to run that down. Yes, its good. But is it special? Probably not. Hence my suggestion - get the FL that you know you will use most. If looking for zooms, there are a few to pick from; for primes, there are many more.... Congratulations on getting the K-30. I don't have one, but hear its a joy to use. The higher ISO tolerances of newer cameras allow greater lattitude for the use of slower lenses. Cheers.

09-12-2012, 10:13 AM	#3
loco Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Virginia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,846	Do you plan to take advantage of the weather resistance of the K-30? If so, you would want to have at least one WR lens. The 18-135 is a fine choice for that if you only plan to have one WR lens since it has such a nice range. There is also an 18-55 WR lens. The Pentax 18-55 isn't the greatest lens (it is a kit lens, after all) but it's better than most kit lenses. It's nice to have a walkaround lens and that's what I use the 18-135 for. However, if you don't anticipate the need for that, then the 35/2.4 is a fantastic lens and a great value for the price. The 50/1.8 is not weather resistant as far as I know.

09-12-2012, 11:29 AM	#4
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by fantasysage Would you even bother using the kit lens at all? Or would you go straight ahead and geat some primes. I am looking at the 35mm 2.4, and the 50mm 1.8 WR right now. What are the values of a brand new 18-55AL? Stopped down to f/8, the 18-55 will give you fairly decent wide angle coverage (below 28mm) to tide you over on Pentax until you buy a DA15, DA21, or whatever. Unless you're shooting bursts or fast action, you can let the K-30 do the lens correction for you.

09-12-2012, 11:35 AM	#5
vladimiroltean Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Bucharest, Romania Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,465	Originally posted by fantasysage Would you even bother using the kit lens at all? Or would you go straight ahead and geat some primes. I am looking at the 35mm 2.4, and the 50mm 1.8 WR right now. You've got the point. Originally posted by fantasysage What are the values of a brand new 18-55AL? Would it be worth selling it off to offset the price? No.

09-12-2012, 11:35 AM	#6
ChooseAName Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Southeast USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 390	You're not new to photography so I would say just get the body only and save for a lens you actually want, unless you really really want to be able to use the camera out of the box. For me, I wouldn't want to bother with the hassle of selling the lens, i.e. packaging it up, going to the post office, etc unless I were making a good $50 profit margin on it, which I don't know if I'd be able to do.

09-12-2012, 11:40 AM	#7
msatlas Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 309	When I first started with a Pentax DSLR, I went straight past the kit lens and got a Tamron 17-50/2.8. The DA 35/2.4 and 50/1.8 are both really nice optically and give a lot of bang for the buck.

09-12-2012, 11:58 AM	#8
fantasysage Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 37 Original Poster	Originally posted by lytrytyr Stopped down to f/8, the 18-55 will give you fairly decent wide angle coverage (below 28mm) to tide you over on Pentax until you buy a DA15, DA21, or whatever. Unless you're shooting bursts or fast action, you can let the K-30 do the lens correction for you. That is a line of thought I didn't really consider. If I want cheap wide, that is about as cheap as they get. Originally posted by loco Do you plan to take advantage of the weather resistance of the K-30? If so, you would want to have at least one WR lens. The 18-135 is a fine choice for that if you only plan to have one WR lens since it has such a nice range. There is also an 18-55 WR lens. The Pentax 18-55 isn't the greatest lens (it is a kit lens, after all) but it's better than most kit lenses. It's nice to have a walkaround lens and that's what I use the 18-135 for. However, if you don't anticipate the need for that, then the 35/2.4 is a fantastic lens and a great value for the price. The 50/1.8 is not weather resistant as far as I know. I would like the ability. It is a shame the kit lens isn't the WR version or I would not even ask this question. I want to get back into street in NY so the added durability is nice if I want to grab the camera without a bag and it starts to pour. I was considering getting the body only and the 18-55 wr separately but it is a lot of money that way. Originally posted by msatlas When I first started with a Pentax DSLR, I went straight past the kit lens and got a Tamron 17-50/2.8. The DA 35/2.4 and 50/1.8 are both really nice optically and give a lot of bang for the buck. I think if (when) I get a fast normal zoom I will go Pentax, unless that MAP Crap doesn't subside. I think when you buy into a system you need some sort of lens roadmap. A 50mm is cheap and needed, I would like a normal lens which on APS would be the 35 (I one day want to own the 31mm limited but oh boy is that a lot of cheddar). I would probably then save up for the DA* 16-50 if the price stays sane. Then maybe a medium tele. Work my way up from there.

09-12-2012, 12:04 PM - 1 Like	#9
loco Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Virginia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,846	Keep an eye on the marketplace here. You can sometimes find the 18-55 WR at a good price. Also, KEH sometimes has them for around $150-ish. That is the most affordable WR lens, I believe.

09-12-2012, 12:09 PM - 1 Like	#10
JinDesu Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: New York City Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,638	I personally use a DA 35 F2.4 and a Sigma 50 1.4 with my k-x for almost everything I do. So the kit lens isn't necessary. I do miss the wide parts, but I guess a DA 15 would solve that. On the other hand, having a WR kit lens is definitely helpful at the least. Maybe find a cheap WR kit lens on the forum here instead of getting it with the body. I think the only WR primes are the DA*55 and the 100mm Macro.

09-12-2012, 12:33 PM	#11
fantasysage Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 37 Original Poster	Originally posted by JinDesu I personally use a DA 35 F2.4 and a Sigma 50 1.4 with my k-x for almost everything I do. So the kit lens isn't necessary. I do miss the wide parts, but I guess a DA 15 would solve that. On the other hand, having a WR kit lens is definitely helpful at the least. Maybe find a cheap WR kit lens on the forum here instead of getting it with the body. I think the only WR primes are the DA*55 and the 100mm Macro. That is actually a great idea. Get the body and the 35mm and hunt down a cheap kit WR.

09-12-2012, 12:42 PM - 1 Like	#12
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by loco Keep an eye on the marketplace here. You can sometimes find the 18-55 WR at a good price. Also, KEH sometimes has them for around $150-ish. That is the most affordable WR lens, I believe. When I bought the WR from KEH a few months ago it was $115 without caps or hood. I was lucky to find a hood on evilBay for $15. The caps I didn't care about, those I have plenty of. I see they still have one at that price.

09-12-2012, 12:44 PM	#13
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by JinDesu On the other hand, having a WR kit lens is definitely helpful at the least. Maybe find a cheap WR kit lens on the forum here instead of getting it with the body. I think the only WR primes are the DA55 and the 100mm Macro. You forget the DA 200 & 300 and the new HD DA 560 AW. AW is the new WR.

09-12-2012, 12:52 PM	#14
fantasysage Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 37 Original Poster	Originally posted by boriscleto When I bought the WR from KEH a few months ago it was $115 without caps or hood. I was lucky to find a hood on evilBay for $15. The caps I didn't care about, those I have plenty of. I see they still have one at that price. Game. Set. Match.

09-12-2012, 01:05 PM	#15
westmill Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Stoke on Trent Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,146	Kit lenses are very often well underrated. Also any lens bought with any lens is a kit lens ! A bit of a silly term really which is turning into a bit of a stigma. Some of these so called kit lenses are often more than capable of producing image quality at various settings that is higher than a lot of even prime lenses. They are chosen for there given focal range which can in some cases be all the lens a person will ever need. Use the kit lens ! If you find you use a certain focal lengh far more than others etc if you find you need to open up more than can etc etc.... learn from it. kit lenses are genraly better for things like landscape than a fast lens would be. Food for thought...... all lenses perform at there best stopped down a couple of stops. This means that if you have a fast F1.8 then its likely to be at its best around F4. If you have an F5.6 lens its likely to perform great at F11. Which are you likely to shoot at in this situation ? Nothing is ever as simple as first appears !