[fototix]

Hello All,

I've been scrubbing all the Pentax forums since the beginning of the year. So I'm a newbie here. I'm from the Olynpus E20 and itching now to get a new camera after 10 years. I have to admit, I thought I was going to go by way of Nikon and Canon after my Olympus experience but after looking at it all, Pentax gets my vote. Mosyly because of the build quality, compact size, SR built-in, etc. Most especially are the awesome photos you guys post is wonderful and beyond belief. I only get inspired to do the same.

So here's my question. I really want to get a K5. But in looking at all the photos that get posted I am noticing the clarity and 3d like image quality posted when super high quality lenses that are used (i.e. DA*, Ltd lenses, etc.) If I get a K5, I can only afford the 18-55 kit lens at just about $1500. But frankly I would really like to go for the gusto and get a K5 body and a DA* 16-50 which will put me about $2100 and I just can't go at that price for now. What would be a no brainer for me is if Pentax came up w/ a kit option w/ the 18-135 WR for near the $1500 price. But for now, no can do. My other real option is to go for a KR w/ a 35mm F2.4 lens kit for $760 and then add a DA 16-45 for about $320 both for under $1100. Both those lens look like they deliver divine IQ.

What do you guys think? So should I stretch another $400 and get in on the K5 w/ 18-55 kit lens or go for the KR as described ?

Thanks for your comments,
FotoTix

[AOShep]

Buying the Kr would allow you to get more good lenses now, but if it were me, I would get the K5 and hope I can manage to purchase the DA*16-50 within a year.

[twitch]

When the shutter opens it's the lens that matters far more than the sensor.

Yeah a K-5 with a kit lens looks a lot cooler and more serious than a K-r with a limited on it, but no prizes for guessing which is going to deliver the better IQ.

[RobG]

Buying the Kr would allow you to get more good lenses now, but if it were me, I would get the K5 and hope I can manage to purchase the DA*16-50 within a year.

I'd second this. I don't have a K5 (yet) but I wish I'd waited a little longer and got the K5 instead of the K7. The K7 is a great camera, but the sensor in the K5 is that much better, it would have been worth the wait. In your case, I'd say that the K5 will last you longer than the Kr and open up a lot more photographic possibilities. My two most used lenses are the DA 16-45 and DA 55-300, but YMMV depending on what sort of things you want to photograph.

I made a similar choice - I bought a K200 and a DA16-45, justifying the choice on the basis that the better glass would result in better images - and it did! But I found that I really wanted the features on the K7 that were missing from the K200, and the extra sensor resolution allows for a bit more cropping. So in retrospect I would have been better off waiting a bit longer and getting the K7 with the DA 16-45, or as luck would have it - the K5. The problem is that there will always be a new model to weigh up so you have to make a choice if you want to take pictures.

[Rupert]

I think I differ somewhat from the herd here......it largely depends on what you want to shoot most often. The kit lens, while not a Ltd for sure, turns out some very decent images, and the DA55-300 is just an outright stunner, that performs way above its price from the many,many shots I have seen from it. These two lenses give you a good range all around, won't break the bank, and should satisfy most anyone until "specialty lenses" are required.

I want to shoot with the best body, best sensor, and best protected from dust and moisture. The feel in you hands is part of the experience, and although I do not have the K5, even some of my Nikon friends that have handled the K5 while in New York last week said that it has the feel of a Pro camera, and none of the feel of a lightweight plastic body. That's just what they told me.......don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger.

K5+ Kit Lens+DA55-300...I guarantee you can shoot the world!
Best Regards!

[v3t0]

body does not matter..lens is more important..sharp pictures and good IQ come from lens..not the body..

[rod_grant]

Welcome to the club.
Both arguments are good: yes, the len is most important, but it is hard to argue against Rupert also, when you have nothing. "K5+ Kit Lens+DA55-300...I guarantee you can shoot the world!" I have an early Pentax dSLR and have spent some time gathering a few nicer lenses than those I brought over from my film days. The K5 is now next (and soon).
If I was in your position, I'd go with the kit you can afford and watch the markets for extra lenses as they become available. The kit lens is a kit lens, but it does take photographs!! As Rupert says "you can shoot the world"

[Rupert]

I guess I'm just a body first guy...but I still say you can shoot the world with the kit lens + DA55-300.......and some people already have!
pentax18-55 - Flickr: Search
pentax 55-300 - Flickr: Search

Didn't take me long to find shots plenty good enough for my skills!

Best Regards!

[fototix]

Thanks Rupert and all that's responded so far.

My E20 still works and still takes not too shabby photos albeit at 5mp. But I agree for value the 55-300 looks like a keeper on the long side.

The impressive and continual postings of really nice quality photos I've taken notice have been w/ DA* lenses, limited and other primes. Not surprisingly these posts are from also high-end body's i.e. K7 or K5. Haven't really seen the hot shots out there who invest in hi quality lenses and be on a KR or even a Kx. Maybe

I'm mumbling to myself but I really don't want to set up myself for disappoinment if I do get the K5 w/ the kit quality 18-55 lens. Will I ? Another thought was a K5 w/ the 35mm F2.4 at about $1600 or a K5 w/ the 40mm limited at $1700? Then just wait till prosperity comes our way again for my zooom !

[northcoastgreg]

I really don't want to set up myself for disappoinment if I do get the K5 w/ the kit quality 18-55 lens. Will I ?

If you're looking for DA* and limited quality in the kit lens, you probably will be disappointed in the kit lens. For my part, I don't see the point of buying a $1,400 and sticking a $50 kit lens in front of it. If you're impressed with DA* and limited glass, you're better off getting a less expensive body and investing in better lenses.

Haven't really seen the hot shots out there who invest in hi quality lenses and be on a KR or even a Kx.

I'm sure there plenty great photos from the Kr and Kx takens with higher end Pentax glass. I've shot with the kit lens and some of Pentax's better lenses (e.g., DA* 300, DA 12-24, DFA 100) on the K200D and the differences, in terms of sharpness, color rendition, micro-contrast, clarity, and beauty of rendering, are immediately noticable.

[Quicksand]

What about the K-5 with something like the DA 16-45mm f/4 or a third-party lens like the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8?

You'll save $3-400 compared to the DA*16-50mm, and still have an excellent wide-to-short-tele zoom that surpasses the kit lens in nearly every way.

[fototix]

I was just looking at the photos of the Pentax KR group in Flickr and then looked at photos in the K5 group.....KR looks ordinary wheras the K5 gives the wow effect. Low light is super ! Just general impressions.

This is not knowing the details of the lens used (is their a way in Flickr?) The exif/tag info isn't that exact in Flickr.

[Quicksand]

I was just looking at the photos of the Pentax KR group in Flickr and then looked at photos in the K5 group.....KR looks ordinary wheras the K5 gives the wow effect. Low light is super ! Just general impressions.

This is not knowing the details of the lens used (is their a way in Flickr?) The exif/tag info isn't that exact in Flickr.

I can't answer your Flickr question, but regardless, make sure you don't overlook the potential systemic bias in those two pools of photos -- people who own a more expensive camera may be more likely to also own more expensive lenses.

[flyinggabe]

I have the K5, It is a great camera, I just purchased Sigma 17-50mm and I use the Pentax 55-300. I get results from those lens. I did have the Pentax 16-45, it also a good choice, excellent picture quality. I since sold the lens for what I paid for it to get the Sigma 17-50mm lens.

[fototix]

I have the K5, It is a great camera, I just purchased Sigma 17-50mm and I use the Pentax 55-300. I get results from those lens. I did have the Pentax 16-45, it also a good choice, excellent picture quality. I since sold the lens for what I paid for it to get the Sigma 17-50mm lens.

Can you tell me how you concluded to getting the Sigma 17-50? Did you look at the DA* 16-50? Tamron 16-50 ? Relative to the 16-45 what improvements do you think you got ?