[Rmpjr7]

Hi all!

I have 3 lenses currently (FA 43 LTD; Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5; and M 200 F/4) and like and will keep them all. I shoot with a K10D which I like very much too.

I shoot 99% of the time outdoors in good light. I just sold a Tammy 28-75 and FA 50 F/1.4, not because they weren't very good lenses, but because I wasn't using them. The Sigma gave me wide and virtually the same long end, and the 50mm was not as good as my 43 and I never used it inside.

I have about $650 to spend. I could spend it all on a K20D and have the 17-70 and 43 mounted at all times, or buy another K10D for say $350, leaving about $300 (DA 55-300 perhaps) or spend the $650 on two additional lenses (or 1 expensive lens!).

What do you think?

Bob

[Indianadinos]

Hello,

IMHO, if you buy a K20D you will end by using almost the new camera instead of the K10D ... Another option could be to sell your K10D, and buy a K20D and a new lens.
But now: what kind of pictures are you taking ? What focal length you seem to miss ?
According to what you wrote, you seem to have a gap between 70mm and 200mm, so maybe a 100 or 105mm (and, eventually, a 135 or a 150) could help (but be careful, this will increase he weight of your bag) ...

Cheers

[Rmpjr7]

I have been thinking about a Sigma 105 or Pentax Dfa 100 (both macros too).

Bob

[jeffrey r]

Plenty of options (maybe too many options), but I'd give a suggestion and endorsement of the DA* 50-135/2.8. It would seem to fill a hole you have in your lineup, it fits in your budget (used at least), and it's obviously a great lens.

[ryno]

If you say 99% in good light and 10MP is enough for you, keep the K10. You have to decide if you want primes or zoom for the long end. The 55-300 is reputed to be a great good light lens, but the ~100mm macro fills a gap, and gives macro. Just be carefull your kit doesn't contain too many lenses, I try to limit myself to carrying 3 lenses at a time. Any more and I just get confused
Ryan

[heatherslightbox]

Bob,
If you're getting along fine with one body, then I would say go for the lenses--the DFA100 and the 55-300. If you find that you're really missing a second body, then go for another K10 and the 55-300 and save up for the macro. With that, you'll have a greater FL range covered. In the meantime, if you want macro on the cheap, you could always pick up a Raynox macro attachment and use it on either the 55-300 or 200. Remember also, that the 17-70 has quasi-macro capability (1:2.3), which can get you pretty close.

One thing with either macro lens (Pentax or Sigma) is that they're both FF compatible, which means that you can use them on your film body, as well as your digital body.

As much as I like my K20, PMA is so close (next month) that you might consider holding off on buying another body until we all see what Pentax unveils then.

HTH,
Heather

[Rmpjr7]

Thanks for the comments-any others would be very welcome.

At this point I'm leaning toward picking up a DA 55-300. Still thinking about the rest of the funds!

Any more thoughts from anyone?

Bob

[gnaztee]

Any desire to go wider than 17mm? You could conceivably pick up a used Sigma 10-20mm and a used DA 55-300 for $650. Spend $15 on a reverse adapter and you can use your M 200 as a macro lens.

[Rmpjr7]

The Sigma is not a fisheye correct?

Please tell me about a "reverse adaptor"?

Bob

[gnaztee]

Sigma is not a fisheye. The reverse ring or adapter basically allows you to turn your lens around so the rear element is exposed. This gives you macro focusing distance (I think this would work on your M 200...it works on my M 50, but someone here might be able to correct me on this). It's somewhat primitive, but not too much of a stretch as your 200mm is a manual lens anyway.

[Rmpjr7]

Thank you gnaztee for your suggestion.

Bob