Hi from a new K-5 owner looking for help from other on best pack of lenses to buy

Docrwm · 11-30-2012, 05:41 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by richardwong

Interested observer thanks for those hints, I forgot about searching forums and thanks for the hints on night shots, I think my next purchase will be a tripod, good idea about the wired shutter release. For software I'm to using Picassa for its simplicity. I don't know if a lot of other people do but I'm not sure if I'm ready to try adobe photoshop or lightroom as that would be an even bigger investment in time currently and I'd rather be learning more about photo shooting instead

Richard,
On better tripods you buy the tripod and head separately and there are lots of choices in material (alum vs carbon), height (stored, extended, legs only vs central column), how the central column works (striaght up or one that can do different angles), feet (rubber, spike, or convertable), how it can be carried, etc. Heads are even more diverse. When I started out I got a great deal on a Dolica Alum tripod with ball head that had a standard attachment so that later I was able to upgrade the head to a Manfrotto ball head (much stronger). Inital cost on that Alum tripod was $19, and I still use those legs, and the head moved over to my monopod (sometimes). As with many things inexpensive can mean its poorly made, but it does not have to mean that. The reviews here are a great source of guidance.

richardwong · 11-30-2012, 10:11 PM

Originally posted by Docrwm

Richard,
On better tripods you buy the tripod and head separately and there are lots of choices in material (alum vs carbon), height (stored, extended, legs only vs central column), how the central column works (striaght up or one that can do different angles), feet (rubber, spike, or convertable), how it can be carried, etc. Heads are even more diverse. When I started out I got a great deal on a Dolica Alum tripod with ball head that had a standard attachment so that later I was able to upgrade the head to a Manfrotto ball head (much stronger). Inital cost on that Alum tripod was $19, and I still use those legs, and the head moved over to my monopod (sometimes). As with many things inexpensive can mean its poorly made, but it does not have to mean that. The reviews here are a great source of guidance.

Thanks for the information on tripods Doc its good to know about the uses for the different pieces. I'm probably going to buy an aluminum one as its cheaper and I can afford to get more exercise when doing this hobby

`

Docrwm · 12-01-2012, 06:47 AM

Originally posted by richardwong

Thanks for the information on tripods Doc its good to know about the uses for the different pieces. I'm probably going to buy an aluminum one as its cheaper and I can afford to get more exercise when doing this hobby

`

Good starting point. Look for all metal as the one I have with plastic bits are onlybuseful as flash holder IMHO. You can spend hundreds, but take a look at the review section. I recommend the Dolica Alum but its gne up to around $40 since I got mine.

mikeSF · 12-01-2012, 12:12 PM

i bought the Tamron 90 macro (lightly used from a forumite) and the aperture locked up after the very first use. Now it sits here a paperweight. I actually did send it to Tamron and though it is still on warranty, it is a non-transferrable one, and even though the aperture locking issue is widely documented as a design flaw, they still insisted on charging me for the repair, which i declined. Seriously, i don't recommend the lens.

mikeSF · 12-01-2012, 12:21 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by richardwong

Hi everyone,

I'm new here and fairly new to photography as well coming from Vancouver, BC, but love my new hobby just like all of you

I'm looking for help as I just bought a new K-5 with the kits DA 18-135mm WR F3.5-5.6 lens so I'm looking to get your opinions on what other lenses I should get to set me up for a basic kit of taking macros, good all around lens on the camera most of time, and one particularly sharp lens for taking sharp, deep colourful photos.

I am open to manual lenses, non-Pentax as I'm trying to keep to a cheaper budget.

Any suggestions are all welcome.

Cheers,
Richard

i always recommend the Pentax SMC M-50/1.7 as a great all around super sharp lens for low light, landscape, and portraits. it also reverse mounts (with an adapter) for great macros on the cheap. If you like the superzoom, you've got a very wide range already covered. Otherwise if you want a wide zoom that is nice and wont break the bank, look at the DA16-45/4. I used to really like it.
welcome and good luck!

richardwong · 12-01-2012, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by mikeSF

i bought the Tamron 90 macro (lightly used from a forumite) and the aperture locked up after the very first use. Now it sits here a paperweight. I actually did send it to Tamron and though it is still on warranty, it is a non-transferrable one, and even though the aperture locking issue is widely documented as a design flaw, they still insisted on charging me for the repair, which i declined. Seriously, i don't recommend the lens.

Hi Mike - good to know sounds like it would be a new purchase then instead of trying to find a used on.

richardwong · 12-01-2012, 03:26 PM

Originally posted by mikeSF

i always recommend the Pentax SMC M-50/1.7 as a great all around super sharp lens for low light, landscape, and portraits. it also reverse mounts (with an adapter) for great macros on the cheap. If you like the superzoom, you've got a very wide range already covered. Otherwise if you want a wide zoom that is nice and wont break the bank, look at the DA16-45/4. I used to really like it.
welcome and good luck!

Thanks again Mike, so you like the SMC M-50/1.7 better than the Automatic version then?

tibbitts · 12-01-2012, 06:08 PM

Originally posted by richardwong

Thanks again Mike, so you like the SMC M-50/1.7 better than the Automatic version then?

I don't think (almost) anyone thinks there's any difference in the optics, except possible sample variation. It's the mechanical construction that make the Ms appealing to people. The old cameras and lenses did have a nice mechanical feel to them that the newer cameras and lenses just don't have. The A1.7 seems to be know for having a weak aperture ring lock that may break over time, but mine has been ok so far.

Paul

mikeSF · 12-02-2012, 09:20 AM

Originally posted by richardwong

Thanks again Mike, so you like the SMC M-50/1.7 better than the Automatic version then?

I'm strictly a manual shooter, so an A version of this lens is useless to me, but if you need A, i assume it is pretty close to the same optics.

richardwong · 12-04-2012, 09:38 PM

Originally posted by tibbitts

I don't think (almost) anyone thinks there's any difference in the optics, except possible sample variation. It's the mechanical construction that make the Ms appealing to people. The old cameras and lenses did have a nice mechanical feel to them that the newer cameras and lenses just don't have. The A1.7 seems to be know for having a weak aperture ring lock that may break over time, but mine has been ok so far.

Paul

Thanks Paul.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Best method to assure optimum sharpness from K-5 and Limited lenses?	stevelink	Photographic Technique	36	08-27-2011 09:08 PM
Hi From a New Pentax Owner	craftysnapper	Welcomes and Introductions	2	08-18-2011 09:11 PM
Leaping from K-x to K-5 rather than a K-7 – ramblings of a new owner…	HenrikDK	Pentax DSLR Discussion	50	05-13-2011 07:54 AM
Hi from new K-5 Owner in Edmonton, AB	Babbs	Welcomes and Introductions	5	11-02-2010 12:59 PM

11-30-2012, 05:41 AM - 1 Like	#31
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by richardwong Interested observer thanks for those hints, I forgot about searching forums and thanks for the hints on night shots, I think my next purchase will be a tripod, good idea about the wired shutter release. For software I'm to using Picassa for its simplicity. I don't know if a lot of other people do but I'm not sure if I'm ready to try adobe photoshop or lightroom as that would be an even bigger investment in time currently and I'd rather be learning more about photo shooting instead Richard, On better tripods you buy the tripod and head separately and there are lots of choices in material (alum vs carbon), height (stored, extended, legs only vs central column), how the central column works (striaght up or one that can do different angles), feet (rubber, spike, or convertable), how it can be carried, etc. Heads are even more diverse. When I started out I got a great deal on a Dolica Alum tripod with ball head that had a standard attachment so that later I was able to upgrade the head to a Manfrotto ball head (much stronger). Inital cost on that Alum tripod was $19, and I still use those legs, and the head moved over to my monopod (sometimes). As with many things inexpensive can mean its poorly made, but it does not have to mean that. The reviews here are a great source of guidance.

11-30-2012, 10:11 PM	#32
richardwong Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 671 Original Poster	Originally posted by Docrwm Richard, On better tripods you buy the tripod and head separately and there are lots of choices in material (alum vs carbon), height (stored, extended, legs only vs central column), how the central column works (striaght up or one that can do different angles), feet (rubber, spike, or convertable), how it can be carried, etc. Heads are even more diverse. When I started out I got a great deal on a Dolica Alum tripod with ball head that had a standard attachment so that later I was able to upgrade the head to a Manfrotto ball head (much stronger). Inital cost on that Alum tripod was $19, and I still use those legs, and the head moved over to my monopod (sometimes). As with many things inexpensive can mean its poorly made, but it does not have to mean that. The reviews here are a great source of guidance. Thanks for the information on tripods Doc its good to know about the uses for the different pieces. I'm probably going to buy an aluminum one as its cheaper and I can afford to get more exercise when doing this hobby `

12-01-2012, 06:47 AM	#33
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by richardwong Thanks for the information on tripods Doc its good to know about the uses for the different pieces. I'm probably going to buy an aluminum one as its cheaper and I can afford to get more exercise when doing this hobby ` Good starting point. Look for all metal as the one I have with plastic bits are onlybuseful as flash holder IMHO. You can spend hundreds, but take a look at the review section. I recommend the Dolica Alum but its gne up to around $40 since I got mine.

12-01-2012, 12:12 PM	#34
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,622	i bought the Tamron 90 macro (lightly used from a forumite) and the aperture locked up after the very first use. Now it sits here a paperweight. I actually did send it to Tamron and though it is still on warranty, it is a non-transferrable one, and even though the aperture locking issue is widely documented as a design flaw, they still insisted on charging me for the repair, which i declined. Seriously, i don't recommend the lens.

12-01-2012, 12:21 PM - 1 Like	#35
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,622	Originally posted by richardwong Hi everyone, I'm new here and fairly new to photography as well coming from Vancouver, BC, but love my new hobby just like all of you I'm looking for help as I just bought a new K-5 with the kits DA 18-135mm WR F3.5-5.6 lens so I'm looking to get your opinions on what other lenses I should get to set me up for a basic kit of taking macros, good all around lens on the camera most of time, and one particularly sharp lens for taking sharp, deep colourful photos. I am open to manual lenses, non-Pentax as I'm trying to keep to a cheaper budget. Any suggestions are all welcome. Cheers, Richard i always recommend the Pentax SMC M-50/1.7 as a great all around super sharp lens for low light, landscape, and portraits. it also reverse mounts (with an adapter) for great macros on the cheap. If you like the superzoom, you've got a very wide range already covered. Otherwise if you want a wide zoom that is nice and wont break the bank, look at the DA16-45/4. I used to really like it. welcome and good luck!

12-01-2012, 03:25 PM	#36
richardwong Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 671 Original Poster	Originally posted by mikeSF i bought the Tamron 90 macro (lightly used from a forumite) and the aperture locked up after the very first use. Now it sits here a paperweight. I actually did send it to Tamron and though it is still on warranty, it is a non-transferrable one, and even though the aperture locking issue is widely documented as a design flaw, they still insisted on charging me for the repair, which i declined. Seriously, i don't recommend the lens. Hi Mike - good to know sounds like it would be a new purchase then instead of trying to find a used on.

12-01-2012, 03:26 PM	#37
richardwong Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 671 Original Poster	Originally posted by mikeSF i always recommend the Pentax SMC M-50/1.7 as a great all around super sharp lens for low light, landscape, and portraits. it also reverse mounts (with an adapter) for great macros on the cheap. If you like the superzoom, you've got a very wide range already covered. Otherwise if you want a wide zoom that is nice and wont break the bank, look at the DA16-45/4. I used to really like it. welcome and good luck! Thanks again Mike, so you like the SMC M-50/1.7 better than the Automatic version then?

12-01-2012, 06:08 PM	#38
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,196	Originally posted by richardwong Thanks again Mike, so you like the SMC M-50/1.7 better than the Automatic version then? I don't think (almost) anyone thinks there's any difference in the optics, except possible sample variation. It's the mechanical construction that make the Ms appealing to people. The old cameras and lenses did have a nice mechanical feel to them that the newer cameras and lenses just don't have. The A1.7 seems to be know for having a weak aperture ring lock that may break over time, but mine has been ok so far. Paul

12-02-2012, 09:20 AM	#39
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,622	Originally posted by richardwong Thanks again Mike, so you like the SMC M-50/1.7 better than the Automatic version then? I'm strictly a manual shooter, so an A version of this lens is useless to me, but if you need A, i assume it is pretty close to the same optics.

12-04-2012, 09:38 PM	#40
richardwong Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 671 Original Poster	Originally posted by tibbitts I don't think (almost) anyone thinks there's any difference in the optics, except possible sample variation. It's the mechanical construction that make the Ms appealing to people. The old cameras and lenses did have a nice mechanical feel to them that the newer cameras and lenses just don't have. The A1.7 seems to be know for having a weak aperture ring lock that may break over time, but mine has been ok so far. Paul Thanks Paul.