[Just1MoreDave]

Thanks for this advice. I think I would rather have a fixed lens with better IQ than a zoom lens with a better range but not-so-good IQ. I have read in so many places that the kit lenses are really not at all good /

Well, it is not the best possible lens. Buy it anyway for these reasons:

• It is just about the only wide angle option you'll have within your budget.
• Software or the camera can correct some of its flaws and shortcomings automatically.
• It's compatible with all camera modes and features.
• You can experiment with focal lengths in its range to see what prime lenses would look like.
• It's useful for snapshots or shots where lens quality is secondary.
• The WR version has WR.

I still use mine all the time for some of those reasons.

I would consider getting the DA 18-55 WR, a Pentax-A 50mm f2, and a Pentax-M 135mm f3.5, probably a little too much for your budget all together. A DA-L version of the 18-55 would be cheap enough, but put you in a bind later if you want WR - either spending a lot on an 18-135 or DA* lens, or getting a nearly identical lens.

[pacerr]

so many problems with noise and blur and distortion that I cant really base my decisions about lenses on it.

Dave's points are right on. And remember, the useful advice will come from those that already 'have the T-shirt'.

Don't concern yourself with pure IQ (yet). First find the FL/perspective(s) that appeal to you -- the one's you'll actually enjoy using -- then confidence in choosing the expensive quality lenses will come in good time and with hands-on experience.

[Mirrie Dancer]

OK Guys and gals, fInd my favourite focal lengths using cheaper zoom lenses first! Right on! It's still good to know of some good old lenses to try out so cheers for that info too. I think the WR is going to have to wait until after I choose my favourite focal lengths, I will just keep out the rain.

[tibbitts]

OK Guys and gals, fInd my favourite focal lengths using cheaper zoom lenses first! Right on! It's still good to know of some good old lenses to try out so cheers for that info too. I think the WR is going to have to wait until after I choose my favourite focal lengths, I will just keep out the rain.

I think you don't really have to keep out of the rain. If you're reasonably careful, you can shield any lens sufficiently with a plastic bag or similar cover. Remember that when you have real downpour, particularly if you don't have shelter (umbrella, at least), you'll be somewhat limited in outdoor photo opportunities - for example, visibility might drop to just a few feet from where the rain starts. Drizzle or very light rain is completely different - you can keep on photographing, so long as you can keep the front of lens clear. I'd suggest a UV or clear filter, so you can easily wipe the drops off between pictures (and a hood, of course, but I often manage to get drops on the filter anyway, despite always using one.)

[micromacro]

Since you are short in funds (and I do know the feeling - especially when starting out), I would suggest the kit lens - the 18-55. Why? Well, it is pretty inexpensive, you get a wide variety of focal lengths - wide angle to short telephoto. For what you want to do, it seems to fit the bill. Also, if you are going for a single lens (at least initially), it gives you some latitude. Here are some samples...

Used (often very little used) DA 18-55mm can be around 30-40 dollars on ebay.

---------- Post added 06-02-14 at 04:07 PM ----------

OK Guys and gals, fInd my favourite focal lengths using cheaper zoom lenses first! Right on! It's still good to know of some good old lenses to try out so cheers for that info too. I think the WR is going to have to wait until after I choose my favourite focal lengths, I will just keep out the rain.

You have no idea what you're getting into... There are so many old great lenses, and new lenses, and you have not discovered the beauty of prime lenses...
You are in trouble! Welcome to the club!

[GateCityRadio]

Look into the super takumar 50mm f1.4. I love mine and it was less than $100. Also look into the FA 28-70 f4, its a great normal-ish to portrait range lens on APS-C and can be had for about $60.

[Mirrie Dancer]

OK Tibbitts, I will take heed that!

Micromacro, I think considering how excited I am about having my very first dslr and having saved up for so long to get better quality that Ive got already, it would be nice to aim a little higher than kit lens, so I can really enjoy the first few weeks of it and be all like, 'whoah!". And I think I have already go tmyself into a bit of a obsessive state over these old lenses and i havent even got the camera yet, lol. GOd only knows what I will spend on lenses over the coming months. Lets just say, my cupboards may be a little bare.

Gate City, thanks for those recommendations.

[Lowell Goudge]

Racer x 69, I did not know that! That's made things even more confusing / Thanks for that info.

Tibbitts, I forgot to mention that that 24-720mm lens I've been using is just a non interchangeable lens that is on my fuji SLR. There is nothing I dont like about it as it's all I've known. I don't own my Pentax yet, Im almost saved up for it. Im researching what equipments I'd need ;o)

Most of these lenses are getting really great reviews guys, so I will be keeping an eye out for some of them on ebay. Particularly the F 35-70 f/3.5-4.5.

Even if I did do a u-turn at the last minute and decide to go for a newer lens, I would probably still want to get some of these old lenses as I really like the retro colour they produce in portraits.

PPPPPP42 thanks for that advice about the focus screen. I will need to start writing these tips down.

Yes the WR issue, now that I think about it, I don't often shoot in crazy weather. As long as I dont fall into the sea on the beach with my camera like I did last time then I should be ok. Lol

It might be interesting to take your photos and use a free program that can do analysis on your exif data stored in each photo to see what your shooting habits were like with your super zoom. The one I use is called exposure plot.

It can do analysis and report, by percentage of shots, what focal length, aperture, ISO, etc you shoot most commonly.

This would be a good way to help decide what you might want to use.

Remember though your Fuji camera gives focal length in 35mm film / full frame, equivalent values, so comparing to pentax DSLRs this means you need to compensate for the 1.5 crop factor of the pentax camera


Also don't worry about WR at the onset. Many older lenses are simply not WR, so if you want to save by getting older lenses this is not an option. In my opinion WR is over rated. I consider it as additional insurance for the case where my protection fails. I have shot for over 30 years , been caught in downpours, shot in the rain, fog and snow, even had my kayak swamped and not lost a camera or lens yet.

[Mirrie Dancer]

Also don't worry about WR at the onset. Many older lenses are simply not WR, so if you want to save by getting older lenses this is not an option. In my opinion WR is over rated. I consider it as additional insurance for the case where my protection fails. I have shot for over 30 years , been caught in downpours, shot in the rain, fog and snow, even had my kayak swamped and not lost a camera or lens yet.

But does having a non WR lens not nullify the WR of the camera as the water could get into the camera via the lens? (obviously this would only concern me in serious situations like dropping it in the water)

p.s I will get that exposure plot program, sounds very handy ;o)

[micromacro]

Micromacro, I think considering how excited I am about having my very first dslr and having saved up for so long to get better quality that Ive got already, it would be nice to aim a little higher than kit lens, so I can really enjoy the first few weeks of it and be all like, 'whoah!". And I think I have already go tmyself into a bit of a obsessive state over these old lenses and i havent even got the camera yet, lol. GOd only knows what I will spend on lenses over the coming months. Lets just say, my cupboards may be a little bare.

I totally understand your excitement. To get my very first DSLR I sold out my another hobby gear to get my very first canon. After playing with it at the store, I could not wait to get that camera. It came with a kit lens, and also it was special sale for 40mm prime pancake lens which I got for $100 only. You know, I really appreciated kit lens for learning, but soon wanted something more than 55mm because I took my camera to the cruise a week later. Something like 18-135 (or 200) would be an ideal range for cruising.

My point is, if you are really tight with money now, but want DA lens for your camera, you can learn with kit lens for a budget. Old lenses are awesome, but why not to explore all the camera features with the modern lens?

As for your enjoyment and "whoah" if it's your very first DSLR, I need to warn you now: don't give up when your pictures will not be what you dream about Of course, I don't know your level in general photography, mine was zero. After first excitement I got into the period of time when I hated all my pictures.
And only after 6 month of having my first DSLR I realized that finally I'm taking control over cameras. I mean, understanding what I want from lenses and cameras.

I still believe that having a kit lens in the beginning is not a bad idea. You can check pictures taken with kit lenses here in Lens Club. And lens reviews here are very helpful as well. Especially if you don't have any lenses yet and your budget is tight. Because after a while you will realize what lenses you personally need. You, and no one else.

---------- Post added 06-03-14 at 05:24 AM ----------

Here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/45425-kit-lens-club.html

[Lowell Goudge]

But does having a non WR lens not nullify the WR of the camera as the water could get into the camera via the lens? (obviously this would only concern me in serious situations like dropping it in the water)

p.s I will get that exposure plot program, sounds very handy ;o)

For me, WR equipment is somewhat of a double edged sword.

Yes, having a non WR lens means that there is a path for water to enter the body, because the lens seals are not present, BUT, WR lenses, specifically those that change length when either focusing or zooming, actually add risk because they cause differential pressure on the seals. differential pressure is one of the biggest ways to get water or dust either in or out of the camera. So while sitting statically WR might be a great bonus, when parts are moving there is still risk. Note WR is NOT water proof. Yes you can withstand a lot more abuse, but people shot for almost 100 years without WR equipment, so the knowledge of how to work in hostile environments is quite well known, and actually very simple.

my main point for raising the WR discussion at all is that if you are going to limit yourself to WR lenses only, you have restricted your purchase decision to a very limited number of relatively new and expensive lenses,

You indicated you would likely look at some used and or legacy lenses, and i can tell you these will NOT be WR

[kh1234567890]

Start with the kit DA18-55. Considering where you live, go for the WR. Second-hand, if need be. Since you are in the UK (if only just), check out the Pentax User forum classifieds. Then look around eBay for something a bit longer - the M135/f3.5 is a great little lens, or the M75-150/f4 zoom. Don't rush it, set yourself a maximum price and let go if it goes over. There will always be another one. The DA50-200 is also not a bad lens, even though many people dislike it. And it is WR.

[Mirrie Dancer]

I totally understand your excitement. To get my very first DSLR I sold out my another hobby gear to get my very first canon. After playing with it at the store, I could not wait to get that camera. It came with a kit lens, and also it was special sale for 40mm prime pancake lens which I got for $100 only. You know, I really appreciated kit lens for learning, but soon wanted something more than 55mm because I took my camera to the cruise a week later. Something like 18-135 (or 200) would be an ideal range for cruising.

My point is, if you are really tight with money now, but want DA lens for your camera, you can learn with kit lens for a budget. Old lenses are awesome, but why not to explore all the camera features with the modern lens?

As for your enjoyment and "whoah" if it's your very first DSLR, I need to warn you now: don't give up when your pictures will not be what you dream about Of course, I don't know your level in general photography, mine was zero. After first excitement I got into the period of time when I hated all my pictures.
And only after 6 month of having my first DSLR I realized that finally I'm taking control over cameras. I mean, understanding what I want from lenses and cameras.

I still believe that having a kit lens in the beginning is not a bad idea. You can check pictures taken with kit lenses here in Lens Club. And lens reviews here are very helpful as well. Especially if you don't have any lenses yet and your budget is tight. Because after a while you will realize what lenses you personally need. You, and no one else.

---------- Post added 06-03-14 at 05:24 AM ----------

Here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/45425-kit-lens-club.html

Taken on board sir (or madam)! Thank you! I am selling all my stuff for this camera and lens too. I have been gathering everything in my flat that isn't bolted down and putting in my car to sell at a carboot sale this weekend. Photographers eh?! You gotta do what you gotta do.

I know quite a bit about photography now and can work the settings pretty well to get the best out of a shot, but the limitations of my current camera means that I have probably hit a wall and will have much more to learn from the new camera. If I was a complete beginner like you were back when you got your dslr, I'd without a doubt have bought the camera + kit lens. The snob in me has already decided I don't want the kit lens. It's not like I don't know what focal lengths are like at all, I've tried out my mams 50mm, 300mm and have been into my local camera shop to try their lenses, and my current lens is 24-700! so I have an idea. So yeah I don't really want to buy any lens just for learning about focal lengths.

p.s. thanks for the heads up about having too high expectations about what the photos will look like. But seriously, anything will be whoah-worthy compared to what I get just now. Thank god for lightroom is all I can say, lol.

Bottom line right now is ...I'm enjoying reading all your recommendations for good old (and new) affordable lenses and have already got my eye on a couple of them on ebay.

Taking into consideration some of your advice about not going for primes at first, I have been reading about the Tamron 17-50/2.8. It's seems really popular and would cover most bases except for wildlife. If I do well with my carboot sale this weekend, I might just be able to afford one from Japan or something. Then I might buy a cheap prime or two that you guys have suggested.

I will listen if you disagree ;o)

[micromacro]

I have been reading about the Tamron 17-50/2.8. It's seems really popular and would cover most bases except for wildlife. If I do well with my carboot sale this weekend, I might just be able to afford one from Japan or something. Then I might buy a cheap prime or two that you guys have suggested.I will listen if you disagree ;o)

You are definitely more informed about photography than I was.
As for primes, check Super Takumar 50mm 1.4 SMC/S-M-C/Super Takumar 50mm F1.4 Reviews - M42 Screwmount Normal Primes - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
I'm hunting now for an original Pentax M42 to K adapter for it. Bokeh is awesome, and you can get it inexpensive on ebay. I'm talking about US ebay. I'm sure UK ebay has that lens as well.

And again, congrats on your new addiction!

[boriscleto]

Also look into the FA 28-70 f4, its a great normal-ish to portrait range lens on APS-C and can be had for about $60.

I just bought one on shopgoodwill.com attached to a ZX-5 for less than $50 shipped.