[alipop]

I've been looking for an affordable option for a first dslr for my 16yr old as a xmas present and just took advantage of the pentax webstore sale to get her the white k-50 for $300. I'm now trying to decide which lense to buy for it. I originally planned on getting her the two inexpensive primes - 50mm & 35mm since they are on sale for a good price at the moment and I can get them from amazon (we have about $100 in amazon gift cards we can put towards the purchase). This would only cost us about $180 for both which is why I decided against the kit originally. Another option which would save us a bit of money is to just get one of these lenses to start out - that would be a great thing for our budget, but which one should I go with if I decided on this option. Now I am wondering if we shouldn't go for the 18-135mm wr zoom instead so that she can have a complete wr set up. This option would cost a bit more then both primes though. She is very artistic and has some experience with dslr - my aunt her lent her a camera at her daughters wedding this summer as well as a few other times and she has taken some really great shots. She definitely has a good eye and I think she would appreciate the extra sharpness of the prime lenses vs the zoom, but I like the versatility of the zoom as her first lens. She does have a birthday coming up in april, so we can get her an extra lens or two at that point as well, but I'm afraid the prices will be higher at that point as well. I would love any advice on this.
thanks

[aleonx3]

I think a 18-135WR paired with a 35/f2.4 would be a good starting point....

[paulh]

I think the 18-135 would be a perfect lens to start with, if you can swing it. Versatile and sharp. Later, after she's explored what focal lengths she prefers, you could add a prime or two.

[jatrax]

Primes are great and generally provide a little better image quality. However, the difference is not so large as many think unless you are pushing the limits. In other words if the photographer's skill is the limiting factor then a better lens is not going to help, but as the skill level goes up then the lens might become the limiting factor.

The 35 and 50 DA lenses are great bargains at current prices. However, for a new photographer who likely will not get any additional lenses for awhile I would go with the 18-135 if you can afford it. 35mm is not very wide on APS-C so that is another limiting factor. My wife and my son's girlfriend both use the 18-135 and produce excellent work with it. My wife on a k-5IIs and the girlfriend has a k-50.

[FantasticMrFox]

If you have to decide between the 35 and 50, I'd advise to go for the 35 - it's more versatile. Obviously the 18-135 is even more versatile, but it's slower and the image quality is obviously not on par with any of the primes.

To be honest, it might have been better if you had gone for the 18-55 WR kit in the first place, then add the 35 to it and let her get the 50 or maybe even e telezoom for her birthday, depending on her preferences. That way she would have enjoyed the versatility of a normal zoom (including wide-angle for landscapes and architecture) and the image quality and low-light capabilities of the 35 mm prime.

Edit: I was suggesting the 18-55 WR as it is cheaper than the 18-135, but if you can afford it the latter plus the two primes would be ideal.

[northcoastgreg]

I would go for the 18-135, and then, over time, get legacy primes. You can get an old 50mm f1.7 or the 135 f3.5 for under $50, and fairly good 28mm and 35mm lens for under $100.

[kchamber4]

Go with the 18-135 WR. It is really a nice lens and as others have said before, there isn't that much difference. Check out my smugmug account link here. All of the shots with the whales and the iquana's in Ecuador and the shots from Qatar are with that lens. For primes you might want to consider some of the older K-Mount pentax lenses. The Halloween shots are with the Pentax A-50mm 1:2 and all of the group shots on the Heritage Oaks are with an Albinar M 28mm lens. The others in the Heritage Oaks are with the Pentax DA 50mm f1.8 lens that you are considering.


http://kcs-photography.smugmug.com/

---

Last edited by kchamber4; 12-02-2014 at 09:51 AM. Reason: Forgot the link

[AquaDome]

If just a single inexpensive prime, the DA35 would be my choice. For the first hundred years of photography, cameras only came with one lens. The DA35 would be that lens for the K-50.
If you're sure she will still be using the camera in four months, the DA18-135 zoom might be the only lens she needs for a long time.
If she decides she wants to be a bird-watcher, look out. Those long lenses will cut into the college fund.

[loco]

Just chiming in that the 18-135 would be a great option. You get the WR and lots of versatility. I think the IQ of this lens is much better than most give it credit for. It's a great lens to start out with.

[TaoMaas]

I'm thinking that the 35mm and 50mm are too close in focal length for those to be the only two lenses for someone just starting out. I think the 18-135mm is a better choice, plus it's not really a lens she'll out-grow. Even if she eventually moves into prime lenses, the 18-135mm is a great option for those times when she wants to minimize lens changes and carry just one lens.

[flaviopetrone]

Since the low cost is better for you (this is what I have understood), I would go for the 18-55 Wr. It is not a great lens, but very good for practice and understand which kind of lens she wants. In the future, it will be useful to have a wr lens in the gear and she could buy the 35 or 50 cheap primes choosing the one she prefer.

[TER-OR]

The 18-135 is versatile and pretty good. It goes for around $300+ on the used market.

If that's a bit much, get the 18-55 WR so she has one WR lens for security. The primes are nice, and should give your daughter great opportunities for creativity as well.

[frogoutofwater]

I also would vote for the 18-135. As a second lens (and maybe not now because price but later), I'd recommend a prime macro (the 35, 50 or Tamron 90). If she artistic, she might really enjoy what can be done with a macro (for true macro and just close-up photography) and those focal lengths are very useful for other purposes as well, e.g., street photography with the 35 and portraiture with the 50 or 90.

[edgedemon]

I would just go for the 18-135, you have no idea what sort of shooting style she will develop and what prime would suit her. That lens would cover a large range, is reasonable quality and a year later you can go back using software and see what are the most common focal lengths she has used. There is software that will analyse all the shots taken and report on what were the most common focal lengths used , then you can buy a lens with confidence knowing it will be just what she wants and suits her shooting style.

[robjmitchell]

Start with a zoom, than add a fast prime. I prefer a 50mm lens over the Da 35 because they have a narrower depth of field and are a lovely focal length on Aps-C