Hey everyone,
The high school I'll be attending next year had a fair for extracurricular activities tonight, and I just signed up to shoot for the year book, school paper, and arts magazine. I must say I'm quite excited. I had heard that a lot of high end equipment was available, but the "high end equipment" turns out to be 10 P&S cameras and a few D50s with 18-55s and 55-200s. Too bad the people who shoot sports aren't as well endowed as the guys on the field (or court).
Anyway, this'll be a good justification for me to buy some new lenses! Luckily enough, I just finished a $1,400 webdesign job and may be doing a $1600 project over the next few weeks. Html is a nice thing to know.
I wouldn't be so blunt, but I keep nothing from my fellow Pentaxians.
Now that I know what focal lengths and features make the most sense for my own photography, I can seriously shop around.
Since I posted a similar thread, I've realized that I need a 12-24, fast normal zoom, and something long. Wide aperture, fast and quiet AF, and durability are big selling points. I don't think having great sharpness at a 400% crop will help me tell a visual story, catch a decisive moment in a game, or even show up on newsprint.
I'm going with the DA 12-24 because it has a convenient FL range, is fast enough (my hands are steady enough to shoot at 1/10-1/15 when I'm doing wide angle), and is of "good enough" quality. The lack of SDM is a bit disappointing, but the thick DoF of a wide angle makes a small imperfection in focusing less visible.
The 16-50 and 16-45 both look nice, but the f/2.8 and SDM could help on the long end. As a normal zoom would be my most frequently used lens, having weatherproofing could be a plus.
Finally, on the long end, I could either go with the DA* 50-135 and 200 combo, Sigma 70-200, or DA* 60-250. Other than sports, which I might not end up shooting-or even wanting to shoot-very much of, I can think of no application for which I need much more than 135mm. For other (
rare) occasions, I could always use my Tamron 28-200mm. Still, the 70-200 isn't much more than the 50-135, and it does offer me the ability to not need new glass if I end up doing a lot of sports or wildlife.
I suppose I just essentially talked myself of the 60-250 and 200 prime. So, might I find the 135-200 range or 50-70 range, SDM, and weather sealing more attractive? By the way, that isn't a rhetorical question.
As usual, suggestions are greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Will