[Susinok]

An update. I bought two used primes, and I'm very pleased with them both.

The first was a DA 35mm/2.8 limited Macro. It takes amazing pictures.
Then I got the FA 100mm/2.8 Macro. The autofocus is a bit like going on a quest for the ring, but other than that it also takes beautiful pictures. The heft and feel of these lenses are so different than my older ones. I am a believer.

Right now I'm in lust with the HD Pentax-DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited. I know that's overkill for my K20D but I'll eventually upgrade the body so the lens won't be overkill.

[DSims]

Right now I'm in lust with the HD Pentax-DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited. I know that's overkill for my K20D but I'll eventually upgrade the body so the lens won't be overkill.

Good (actually, great) lenses are not overkill for your K20D. Otherwise you wouldn't be getting such good results with the DA35 and FA100 macros you just bought (which BTW is possibly the best IQ available in a Pentax 100mm macro). In fact, don't expect such a huge jump when you change cameras. It will make a difference for sure - but not that much in good shooting conditions.


Yes, the DA15's an excellent lens.

[ChristianRock]

I agree, these lenses are not overkill for the K20D. It's not a useless camera by any means. Image-quality wise, as far as the sensor is concerned, it's almost on par with the Canon 60D and 7D. It can take wonderful pictures.
The K20D sensor's two main shortcomings compared to the newer Sony sensors in the current Pentax cameras are:
1. The dynamic range (it's easy to blow out highlights, so shooting for underexposure when there's white type colors is a good idea).
2. The lack of detail in shadows. The newer cameras are a lot better, especially the K-5 and K-3 with their added bit resolution compared to K-30,K-50 and K-500.
There's others but the difference isn't as huge like in those two.

So in short, on a well exposed picture with a controlled dynamic range, there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to take gorgeous pictures with the K20D. I'm going to upgrade mine as well, but as I said in my previous post, lenses are priority as that's where the big IQ differences are. When I'm happy with my lens setup, then I'll work on the body.

[Susinok]

I am pleased with the K-20D, now that I have lenses that do the camera body justice. I tend to underexpose a bit anyway to bring out the color in my flowers and landscapes. I was wondering about the HD designation on the 15mm lens, since I know the 20D does not do anything HD just yet.

But in short, you all have convinced me, it's the lens. Though I'm still wishing for my K-3 now, I'll not be in a huge hurry about it. That 15mm lens may come first.

Maybe it's time to put my unused pottery equipment up on Craig's List. That would let me afford both. Hmm..

[ChristianRock]

I am pleased with the K-20D, now that I have lenses that do the camera body justice. I tend to underexpose a bit anyway to bring out the color in my flowers and landscapes. I was wondering about the HD designation on the 15mm lens, since I know the 20D does not do anything HD just yet.

HD is just a technical term they use for the lens coating. It's HD instead of SMC because they tweaked the coating on the glass. The K20D just records the images that the glass sends through, so it will take full advantage of that HD (limited only by the sensor's characteristics, as I said before).

But in short, you all have convinced me, it's the lens. Though I'm still wishing for my K-3 now, I'll not be in a huge hurry about it. That 15mm lens may come first.

Make sure you look at a lot of DA 15 and DA 21 pictures (and maybe DA 12-24 as well) to make sure that you get the one that is more compatible with your needs. While the DA 15 is a great lens, I for one am not a great fan of the ultra-wide look. I think as an effect it's great, but I don't want an ultra-wide as my main landscape lens. The whole "make the pebble in the front look huge and the mountain in the back look tiny" effect is cool, but I don't want most of my pictures to look like that.
For me I think the 21 would work great. I've actually got my sights on the 16-45 - like the 12-24 it's a great zoom for landscapes. Probably not quite as good as the limiteds, but for my limited budget I'm sure it will work great. DA 21 is my other option right now, as they are not that expensive on the used market.

Maybe it's time to put my unused pottery equipment up on Craig's List. That would let me afford both. Hmm..

Now you know the meaning of LBA
I've done the same thing with my music equipment. I still have some music equipment saved for the time when I will upgrade to a newer body...

By the way - another thing that we haven't really talked about much yet, is Post Processing (PP).
Learning that will also determine how good your pictures will turn out to be. Even a K-3 won't give you pictures that are as good SOOC (straight out of camera) as pictures edited by someone with good PP skills from a K20D or even a K10D.
Shoot RAW and learn to PP, should be your next assignment after you are happy with your basic lens setup

[Susinok]

HD is just a technical term they use for the lens coating. It's HD instead of SMC because they tweaked the coating on the glass. The K20D just records the images that the glass sends through, so it will take full advantage of that HD (limited only by the sensor's characteristics, as I said before).

Make sure you look at a lot of DA 15 and DA 21 pictures (and maybe DA 12-24 as well) to make sure that you get the one that is more compatible with your needs. While the DA 15 is a great lens, I for one am not a great fan of the ultra-wide look. I think as an effect it's great, but I don't want an ultra-wide as my main landscape lens. The whole "make the pebble in the front look huge and the mountain in the back look tiny" effect is cool, but I don't want most of my pictures to look like that.
For me I think the 21 would work great. I've actually got my sights on the 16-45 - like the 12-24 it's a great zoom for landscapes. Probably not quite as good as the limiteds, but for my limited budget I'm sure it will work great. DA 21 is my other option right now, as they are not that expensive on the used market.

Now you know the meaning of LBA
I've done the same thing with my music equipment. I still have some music equipment saved for the time when I will upgrade to a newer body...

By the way - another thing that we haven't really talked about much yet, is Post Processing (PP).
Learning that will also determine how good your pictures will turn out to be. Even a K-3 won't give you pictures that are as good SOOC (straight out of camera) as pictures edited by someone with good PP skills from a K20D or even a K10D.
Shoot RAW and learn to PP, should be your next assignment after you are happy with your basic lens setup

Ok good to know about what HD means. I was thinking High Definition for video. However, I do like the panoramic wide angle view that the 15mm will give me. My 35mm just doesn't get me enough when I'm in wide open spaces (I'm in Oklahoma, the Great Plains State... )

I have been doing Post Processing in Lightroom. I am happily watching tutorials and then going back through many years of vacation photo files and "saving" images that just didn't look good at first. I kept them all because I figured some day I'd fix them in Photoshop. Now I've been able to upload more to my vacation sets in Flickr.

So what does LBA actually stand for? I get the idea what it means from context. I call it the "I wannas".

[ChristianRock]

If you were in Atlanta, there's a guy on Craigslist trying to sell his DA 15 for a while now... his price is down to 375 including a B+W ND filter!

LBA=lens buying addiction. A common Pentaxian condition

[wtlwdwgn]

Sounds like you're getting some good quality lenses. That is best investment you can make in gear. The K20D is a fine camera and I still use mine. Be careful about underexposing though as it produces a lot of noise in the shadows. It's better to properly expose raw images and use PP to boost the saturation. Underexposing was a good color film technique to get extra saturation that doesn't work well in digital. Just my two cents.

[Susinok]

Sounds like you're getting some good quality lenses. That is best investment you can make in gear. The K20D is a fine camera and I still use mine. Be careful about underexposing though as it produces a lot of noise in the shadows. It's better to properly expose raw images and use PP to boost the saturation. Underexposing was a good color film technique to get extra saturation that doesn't work well in digital. Just my two cents.

Good advice. Most of my knowhow comes from my years using film. I am learning that high quality digital is a whole 'nother world. It's fun learning the new techniques needed.

[ChristianRock]

Sounds like you're getting some good quality lenses. That is best investment you can make in gear. The K20D is a fine camera and I still use mine. Be careful about underexposing though as it produces a lot of noise in the shadows. It's better to properly expose raw images and use PP to boost the saturation. Underexposing was a good color film technique to get extra saturation that doesn't work well in digital. Just my two cents.

I still underexpose when there's a lot of white or almost-white colors in the picture, and it's sunny. But I'm really peeved regarding blown highlights...

In other conditions I agree, it's best to just expose properly.

[DSims]

The HD coating isn't necessarily better than the previous SMC coating. I'm sure it's better technically in some ways, but the overall appearance of images may be slightly better, or even slightly worse, to your eyes.

What's for sure is the prices are higher. And on the HD DA15 in particular, the starbursts aren't as brilliant and pronounced - which some people like better on the new version, but a lot of people prefer the old SMC version here.


The other DA Ltd lenses never had this kind of a starburst, so it's just a matter of which you prefer and how much you want to pay, with them.

[ChristianRock]

The HD coating isn't necessarily better than the previous SMC coating. I'm sure it's better technically in some ways, but the overall appearance of images may be slightly better, or even slightly worse, to your eyes.

What's for sure is the prices are higher. And on the HD DA15 in particular, the starbursts aren't as brilliant and pronounced - which some people like better on the new version, but a lot of people prefer the old SMC version here.


The other DA Ltd lenses never had this kind of a starburst, so it's just a matter of which you prefer and how much you want to pay, with them.

That's not due to the HD coating though, they changed the iris blades and that is why the new HD DA 15 doesn't have the same starbursts that the old SMC DA 15 did.

In general what I've seen people saying, and from Adam's own review, is that SMC and HD are quite similar. HD might prove a little more resistant to flare and CA, in lenses where there was a bit of an issue with that anyway, but SMC in general is already pretty good in those areas. I'm not an expert so I don't know how much is due to optical design and how much is the coating. But in this case - It's the old law of diminishing returns, you pay quite a bit more for a little bit of improvement. I'd be happy with the SMC version, I'm sure.

[wtlwdwgn]

I still underexpose when there's a lot of white or almost-white colors in the picture, and it's sunny. But I'm really peeved regarding blown highlights...

In other conditions I agree, it's best to just expose properly.

In bright white conditions you should bump the EV +1 or more depending on brightness. The reason is the meter assumes an 18% gray for the average exposure. In this case the meter will make the bright white 18% gray and underexpose the image. Most pros will bring an 18% gray card with them to take a meter reading off of because of this. It's often on the reverse side of a white reflector card. Try some test exposures in bright white conditions to see the effect changing the EV makes on your images. Just my ¢¢.

[Susinok]

That's not due to the HD coating though, they changed the iris blades and that is why the new HD DA 15 doesn't have the same starbursts that the old SMC DA 15 did.

But in this case - It's the old law of diminishing returns, you pay quite a bit more for a little bit of improvement. I'd be happy with the SMC version, I'm sure.

Then I'll be looking for the older SMC version used, rather than spring for new in this case. I would probably have to do that in any case.

[ivanvernon]

You have received a lot of excellent advice . . . so here is more!

1. Keep the K-20-D. It is a great camera, so keep it and spend money on lenses.

2. Throw out (give away, sell on ebay, etc.) all the lenses you have except the 50 mm.

3. For a budget approach, spend $1,000 and buy

--used Sigma 30 mm f 1.4, $300-400 -- great for all sorts of low-light situations

--Helios 44-4 58 mm f 2.0 and adapter for about $50-80 -- great for image quality, good portraiture and landscape

--kit lens Pentax 18-55 WR for about $120 -- good with the K-20 or bad weather and offers lot better image quality than anything you have now. It is a kit lens, so some people turn their nose up at it, but it is actually an above average lens.

--Tamron 17-50 f 2.8 for about $350-400 used

-- Auto Sears 135 mm f 2.8 macro for about $25 -- great for wide range of uses such as macro and portraiture.

This is bargain glass all the way, but will be the core of a good collection of lens even when you decide to upgrade the camera. I can never sell my cameras, but can give some of them to friends and relatives. Actually, I have held on to my K-20, equipped it with a Katz-eye split prism focussing screen, and use it as the platform for all my manual focus lenses. Once you have used these lenses for a while, you might want to add longer focal lenth if you want to do bird photography, or more wide angle lenses if you want to do more in landscape photography. As far as cameras are concerned, you can hook up with a used K-5II for around $500, which gives you all the features and image quality and lens support most people will ever need.