[Susinok]

Everyone has given me so much to think about. Thank you for all of your advice and feel free to keep it coming.

I did not know the K-50 was such a big upgrade. B&H has a fire engine red body for $495 which is affordable. There are a few kits there too, but the last thing I need right now is another kit lens.

Sigma and Tamron are fairly good brands from what I've read. Are there any brands to absolutely avoid?

Figuring out my first lens is going to be the hardest part of this. It'll either be a dedicated Macro or a wide-angle zoom of some sort. I'll be looking new and used.

[DSims]

Sigma and Tamron are fairly good brands from what I've read. Are there any brands to absolutely avoid?

Figuring out my first lens is going to be the hardest part of this. It'll either be a dedicated Macro or a wide-angle zoom of some sort. I'll be looking new and used.

Sigma and Tamron are kind of the low end these days. There are a few models you might want to avoid, but many are good.


Wide angle lenses on APS-C are hard enough to make - wide to ultra-wide angle zooms appear to be even harder. Whichever one you get, it's hard to get a bargain here.

The only zoom I'd recommend is the Sigma 8-16. For primes, the DA15 and Samyang 16/2, 14/2.8, and 10/2.8 are all worth looking at.

[rbefly]

Hi Susinok, I see you've gotten some good advice since last we typed, is your head spinning?
Hard to resist someone asking for lens recommendations, obviously. I'll just make it worse. A couple 'bargain' (better than they should be) Pentax zooms that you'll find used, easily. Both will fit a specific use-profile and both have limitations.
Pentax F 35-70mm f/3.5-4.5 Macro; About $50-$75, this is the auto-focus version of a lens you asked about earlier. A real crackerjack short zoom with more personality and quirks per mm than any lens I own. Great for a small (tiny, actually) compact walk-arounder, has a decent macro function at the 70mm end. And the I.Q. (Image quality, you'll be hearing this a lot) is at least as good as any of your zooms, probably better. But, it's not truly razor-sharp, especially at the longer end and/or wide open. Stopping down is a good cure for that. If you supplement the F zoom with a 24mm manual prime and maybe an 85mm or 100mm prime, you'll be carrying a nice light, small kit that will work for 90% of the photo situations you'll likely encounter. Plus, this little gem will make you believe in auto-focus again! You'll see.
Wanna go wider? OK, the DA 16-45mm f/4.0. Constant aperture zoom, which is very handy and they're going for $200-$300 used. Somehow it's still listed as 'available' but try to find a new one. Nope, it's discontinued. This is a great value WA zoom, a real upgrade from any kit wide-zoom, including Pentax. Sharp everywhere, distortion is handled pretty well and usually correctable in processing and it just works.
Downside? There's a lens 'wobble' on some, when fully extended and this can lead to blur or 'shake'. Mine's been fine, through tough treks and weather, but you should be aware, especially if you can actually test the lens and return it. It extends so far in zoom that the on-board flash gets partly blocked. Don't worry, you'll be adding a hot-shoe flash soon, at this rate.
Primes? Don't get me started!
Good luck,
Ron

[Kerrowdown]

What do I have? What do I need?

Is the correct answer, "Not enough and everything", in that order.

I'm gonna save you some money just now and say that you will find that as you photography develops and your own style becomes apparent, you will know what you need to achieve more.

That having been said, taking away the extreme image requirements, I often set my myself the task one "one lens only today" and you'd be surprised how you adapt as to what you still manage to shoot.

At the end of the day enjoy your photography as it is "your photography".

[Susinok]

I am still drooling over the K-3. B&H has a nice K-3 bundled with a DA 50mm 1.8 lens and the DA 18-135 WR lens. The price is steep, but my thoughts on this is that the 23.35 MP CMOS is a huge jump over the 14.1mp I have now, whereas the K-50 is only a 16.3mp. I want my new camera to last a long time, and not need an upgrade for many years. I also want to eventually make prints of a descent size.

Is the DA 18-135 good or just another kit lens? The DA 50/1.8? Or is it better to get the camera body and a different lens. If I do get a new body, I want a good lens to go with it, not another kit that is not up to snuff.

I'm not going to buy it tomorrow. At that amount of money I will think about it a while. But it makes more sense to me to go with the higher MP camera so it lasts longer. That was one thing about print cameras, they didn't go obsolete so quickly. I worry that if I get the K-50, I'll want to upgrade in two years. Even if it DOES come in shiny red.

[tibbitts]

I am still drooling over the K-3. B&H has a nice K-3 bundled with a DA 50mm 1.8 lens and the DA 18-135 WR lens. The price is steep, but my thoughts on this is that the 23.35 MP CMOS is a huge jump over the 14.1mp I have now, whereas the K-50 is only a 16.3mp. I want my new camera to last a long time, and not need an upgrade for many years. I also want to eventually make prints of a descent size.

Is the DA 18-135 good or just another kit lens? The DA 50/1.8? Or is it better to get the camera body and a different lens. If I do get a new body, I want a good lens to go with it, not another kit that is not up to snuff.

I'm not going to buy it tomorrow. At that amount of money I will think about it a while. But it makes more sense to me to go with the higher MP camera so it lasts longer. That was one thing about print cameras, they didn't go obsolete so quickly. I worry that if I get the K-50, I'll want to upgrade in two years. Even if it DOES come in shiny red.

Depending on what you photograph you may be overly fixating on megapixels. For the me the big deal about the 16mp sensor wasn't the increase in mp (for me it was 10 to 16), it was the dynamic range and noise reduction over previous sensors. In that sense I don't think the 24mp is that far ahead, which is why you might be better with a 16mp-generation model and spending the extra money on lenses.

The one feature you have now but might miss on a K50 is a top LCD. You'd need a K5 or K3 if that's an issue for you.

Obviously if you make very large prints or if the last ounce of resolution is important, then you'll not only want a K3, but you'll need very good lenses to go with it. I don't think you're going to get the most advantage out of a K3 with lenses like your Tamron 28-300, but you will see an improvement in dynamic range and noise with any 16 or 24mp-era body vs. what you have now.

I think you have to not concern yourself with not upgrading for many years. Think of it as what you used to pay for disposable film, now you spend for disposable bodies.

But I don't buy into the theory of lenses, even good dones, lasting forever either. Partly because of the whole FD experience, but also because if manufacturers want to keep selling higher resolution bodies, they're going to have to up their game with lenses. Remember that with a number of lenses today you're limiting yourself to APS, and it might be that tomorrow you're going to want FF or even some other size we don't know about yet. And even with Pentax, which has been among the best for backward compatibility, relatively few people really want to use a pre-A lens, much less an M42 that requires an adapter if you want to use it. And it's not hard to imagine a new 50-135 or 60-250 that focuses five or ten times as fast as the current one, for example. So depending on how you use the lens, you might or might not feel compelled to upgrade, just as you feel compelled to upgrade bodies.

---------- Post added 03-30-2014 at 12:23 PM ----------

Sigma and Tamron are kind of the low end these days.

Really? Certainly the Samyang bunch (Rokinon, etc.) would have to be clumped in with the "lower end", so that pretty much limits you to... almost no choices for lenses at all.

[DSims]

Really? Certainly the Samyang bunch (Rokinon, etc.) would have to be clumped in with the "lower end", so that pretty much limits you to... almost no choices for lenses at all.

I don't think I was very clear. I really meant that since the store brands and no-names of the past are now gone (I realize sometimes they were good), the low end is now elevated. And while there are a few Sigma and Tamron models I'd avoid, one is mostly safe buying either of these brands (or for that matter Samyang) these days. I believed it was already generally understood that these brands are pretty good quality, even though they're not up to the level of Zeiss or the DSLR maker's own brands.

---

Last edited by DSims; 03-30-2014 at 07:00 PM.

[Susinok]

I don't think I was very clear. I really meant that since the store brands and no-names of the past are now gone (I realize sometimes they were good), the low end is now elevated. And while there are a few Sigma and Tamron models I'd avoid, one is mostly safe buying either of these brands (or for that matter Samyang) these days. I believed it was already generally understood that these brands are pretty good quality, even though they're not up to the level of Zeiss or the DSLR maker's own brands.

Ok good. I'm glad to hear that. I'm pleased with my Tamron zoom. It does well with my extension tubes for macro and close up photos. I have not had the opportunity to take it out anywhere for distance shooting.

[Nick Siebers]

Relatively inexpensive wide angle zoom with great IQ - Pentax - DA 16-45 f/4. Autofocus, but you can always turn that off.
Inexpensive dedicated macro lens - Pentax-M 50 f/4 macro. Only goes to 1:2, but can be found for under $100 at times, which is amazing for the IQ it delivers.

[ChristianRock]

You have quite a bit of things you want... newer body, better lenses, better macro.

I would work on these one at a time, otherwise it's too much stuff to learn at once. This is how I would do it - the items with the most gains first.

1. Better lenses - a shorter and a longer zoom like the 16-45 and the 55-300 (both Pentax). If you like manual primes get an M 50 1.7, if you prefer autofocus get the DA 50 1.8. These will be a lot better than your 50 f2 lenses you have now, or your kit quality zooms.
You should see a significant improvement over your Tamron with these lenses, even while still shooting with the K20D.

2. Better macro - the Sigma 50 2.8 macro is particularly inexpensive usually, but by all accounts the Pentax DFA 100 2.8 is as one of the best you can get in Pentax K mount. So consider that investment... Also, the DA 35 2.8 Limited is a great macro lens and will also be very useful as a walkaround lens - but being 35 focal length, you will need to get real close to your subjects when doing macro. 100mm will be a lot better in that regard. So weigh what you need - the 100 will give you macro plus a great portrait lens, the 35 will give you macro plus a superb prime "normal" lens (which means a similar view that the 50mm gave on your K1000).

3. Better body. See this for reference (humourous but I guess you will get the point): Millions of Photographers Disappointed in Their New Cameras | New Camera News

[Susinok]

You have quite a bit of things you want... newer body, better lenses, better macro.

Also, the DA 35 2.8 Limited is a great macro lens and will also be very useful as a walkaround lens - but being 35 focal length, you will need to get real close to your subjects when doing macro. 100mm will be a lot better in that regard. So weigh what you need - the 100 will give you macro plus a great portrait lens, the 35 will give you macro plus a superb prime "normal" lens (which means a similar view that the 50mm gave on your K1000).

Ya'll have convinced me. Lenses first.

I am in the process of getting the DA 35/2.8 Limited Macro. I figure it can work as a wide angle and double duty as a macro. I like some of the effects you can get with a wide angle macro.

I'll be looking around for a 100mm or even a 200mm macro as well. I am not ever likely to do portraits; most of my photography is nature based or travel based.

And boy wouldn't I love a fisheye... But what my second lens will be depends on what's available when I have saved up for my second lens.

[wtlwdwgn]

Good choice to go with lenses first. Good glass lasts forever while bodies come and go. The DA 35 Macro Limited is a nice lens that gives a 'normal' view on APS-C. It's small, light, well made, and very sharp. I like it for a walk around lens because of its nonthreatening size on a Pentax body.

When you're ready for a bigger macro the Sigma 105 f/2.8 is really good. Check out eaglem's macros.

[Susinok]

Good choice to go with lenses first. Good glass lasts forever while bodies come and go. The DA 35 Macro Limited is a nice lens that gives a 'normal' view on APS-C. It's small, light, well made, and very sharp. I like it for a walk around lens because of its nonthreatening size on a Pentax body.

When you're ready for a bigger macro the Sigma 105 f/2.8 is really good. Check out eaglem's macros.

Great! I thought the 35mm would be a good all-round lens. It will definitely work for my trip to Vegas. Also it being small and light is a definite plus. I don't like to schlep a lot of gear with me when I travel.

Macro pictures: Gorgeous! I'll put that lens on my watch list. I need to find lenses that are tagged in Flickr and see what I find and pay attention to lenses here on our sharing thread...

I feel like this is the first time I've found guidance in photography (other than books). I'm so glad I found this group.

[DSims]

I am in the process of getting the DA 35/2.8 Limited Macro. I figure it can work as a wide angle and double duty as a macro. I like some of the effects you can get with a wide angle macro.

That sounds like a good place to move forward from. I imagine you've already seen what that lens can do on a K20D:

PENTAX : Select a PENTAX interchangeable lens camera or a lens model


So you can look forward to some good stuff!

[Susinok]

Those are some gorgeous pictures. Can't wait to play with my new lens!