[EchoOscar]

Is there any way I can evade moire in photos without affect the picture clarity and sharpness?

Yes, and that is to get a camera that doesn't have a Bayer-style sensor. In practical terms that would mean buying a camera made by either Sigma or Fuji.


Nevertheless, since we're talking about your very first DSLR, I would suggest that you forget about all the fancy details in the spec sheets, be it Pentax or any other brand, because none of it really matters before you have some actual shooting mileage under your belt.

I'd say forget about the faster than light autofocus speeds, astronomical ISO's etc. at this point. Save your money and go for a nice regular K5 along with a nice lens or two, even a used one at first, and then practise, practise, practise with it. When you've got some first hand experience and enough shooting mileage under your belt, you'll know much better what you really want and what you really need. Then it'll also be easier to tell the difference between the want and the need.

We've all been newbies at some point. It's often not the most practical idea to spend a lot of money on the fanciest and priciest top of the line model as the first ever DSLR. Even though that's how many people do start. But the fact is that, when you're just starting DSLR shooting, both your experience and your taste on camera gear will change. After a while you may even end up wanting a different brand camera altogether. Worst case scenario; One day you might even find yourself lusting after... gasp, a Canon! Horror!

So again, I'd suggest that you go for a nice but not too pricey body, and save money for at least one decent lens, too. Your taste and needs for the camera body may change in time, but good lenses will always be good lenses.

Forget about the fastest multi-point AF, highest ISO, fanciest anti-shake and other spec sheet erotica at this point, and concentrate on finding a DSLR body that feels nice in your hand, has a nice, uncluttered user interface, all the manual modes easily obtainable, and minimal amount of auto-everything modes. A used K5 would be a nice option indeed. Or even a K-30. Both will work just fine for landscapes and portraits.

Then, when you do get one, ignore all auto-everything crap, and learn how to shoot in plain old M mode, as well as in aperture and shutter priority, too. Don't forget to at least try manual focusing once in a while, too. It's there for a reason. Even put the ISO setting to manual, don't let the camera set it for you. That way you'll learn and become a better (D)SLR photographer sooner, and you'll know what actually makes a good photo.
(hint: it's not the fancy spec sheets)

Yes guys, this will be my first Dslr, but i intend to keep it a long period of time, so this is the reason i want to invest in something better. I know i am newbie at this point, i have to read the manual to understand how the camera works, but i know that the manual is not sufficient, can you commend me others sources?

I will buy the k5 ii, or k 5 iis with a kit 18-55. I don't have right now money to spend on prime lens, after i learn how to use it i wil buy the DA 15 limited and FA 50 1.7 used and then i start print some photos, but for now the k5 iis/k5 ii with 18-55 is enough good for me.

The only reason i would choose k5 iis is the because pictures are much sharper, many say that are sharper then canon mark ii. I am not scarry about the moire effect, because i am not willing to shoot textile, just landscape and portrets, and if the moire effect can be easly remove in Lightroom, i don't get where is the problem in not to choose the k 5 iis?

[Dynamo]

I guess that you’ve decided on K5-IIs go ahead and buy enjoy… may be this link will help you with moire
How to Reduce Moiré in Lightroom 4

beware it is "reduce" not remove!!

[EchoOscar]

Yes guys, this will be my first Dslr, but i intend to keep it a long period of time, so this is the reason i want to invest in something better. I know i am newbie at this point, i have to read the manual to understand how the camera works, but i know that the manual is not sufficient, can you commend me others sources?

You already found one, and you can google for more.

The only reason i would choose k5 iis is the because pictures are much sharper, many say that are sharper then canon mark ii.

It is a bit sharper, but "much" sharper is of course a bit subjective. Whatever you see or hear people saying in YouTube or in the online forums are just opinions, not facts, and should therefore be taken with a grain of salt. "Many" and "Some" have a lot of popular opinions, but I for one have never met either Many or Some in real life.

You should also remember that the better sharpness of the K5 IIs is meaningless without proper glass. It doesn't matter how sharp the sensor is, if your lens is not delivering sharp enough images onto that sensor. Or if the photographer simply messes up the exposure. The end result depends on other variables, too, not just the sensor or the lens.

If you plan on spending all your money on an expensive body and a slow kit lens only, you won't be able to enjoy that extra sharpness that much, unless you take all your shots in bright daylight. Chances are about half of your first shots will be soft, anyway, either because of motion blur or the soft-ish kit lens, probably both.

For great looking landscape shots you should also invest in a proper tripod. Or a faster lens. You can always go for a fancier body later.

I am not scarry about the moire effect, because i am not willing to shoot textile, just landscape and portrets,

Unless you are shooting nude portraits only, your portrait models are likely to have some textiles on them, anyway.

and if the moire effect can be easly remove in Lightroom, i don't get where is the problem in not to choose the k 5 iis?

Are you sure about the easy part? Moiré can be a real PITA to remove thoroughly in post processing at times. Hence the fact that most popular cameras do use an aa-filter, and only a few have left it out, so far.

However, it's not that big of a problem, IMO, for most people and in most shooting cases. It depends on each of our needs and preferences. I've got one aa-filterless Bayer sensor camera as well, and hardly ever have problems with it. But it can be a problem in the rare cases where it actually matters, like in professional fashion and wedding photos, for example. Sometimes even in various styles of portraits, too.

But if you've already made up your mind about the K5 IIs, well, good luck, and enjoy!

[Dynamo]

haha....+1 EchoOscar

[Ash]

Indeed the perceived IQ benefits gained from a K-5 II over a K-5 will be much more lens-dependent, and the kit lens will definitely be your limiting factor. If you have the funds, the K-5 II will be a camera that will last a lifetime, and as long as you're happy with managing moire when it arises, then the K-5 IIs is clearly a fine camera to invest in. Value for money would still be with the K-5 classic but if finances are less of a determinant then the K-5 IIs is a fine choice.

Thank you guys, very nice from you to respond me quickly to my newbie questions. Are DA 15 mm limited and 70 limited good for my needs? I also like the 85 mm which was presented with the new k 5iis, but i saw is about 1200$, isn't to expensive for what it does?woun't be better a 70 limited, or FA 50 1.7 ?

[Ash]

The real question is what focal length(s) do you need - or what do you intend to shoot the most, which will determine the focal lengths you would need. The DA Limited series lens are all awesome. You may find getting a 100mm macro lens would give significantly more reach than an 85mm lens, which itself in not different enough in field of view to the DA 70 to say it is worth it in your case. But 70mm is quite different to a fast fifty, so you have to go with your own judgement as to what focal length you want.

Want to shoot portraits mod of time, street shooting and sometimes landscapes, so which is good for my needs?85 mm is very pricey, but is really worth, over a DA 70 limited, or an used FA 50 1.7? Regarding landscape, is DA 15 mm better then smc DA 12-24 ?

[Ash]

The DA 70 and 15 are both excellent lenses for portraiture and landscape imaging respectively. Their size and lightweight yet sturdy metallic designs make them more expensive than other lenses made by Sigma or Tamron, but I think they're worth it.

So, the 85 mm isn't better then DA 70?

[snake]

Also, no one has really asked the OP what level thy are at, besides them being a beginner. Are they going to get the cam, which is a prosumer dSLR and just shoot in auto, or will they learn the various modes and settings?

[Dark_Mist]

If you want to keep your gear for a long time spend more money on lenses and less on a body to start. You will be disappointed with the results of expensive body and cheap lens while the combo of cheaper body like the K30 and DA* lens will make you happy. The K30 has the same sensor as the K5 and K5ii.

Then as you develop as a photographer and know what you really want to do with the camera you will be in a position to judge whether the body is stopping you from taking the shots you want. If it is that's the time to trade up. If it's not buy more good lenses.

As a rule of thumb half your budget should be put aside for your main lens. I started with the *istD and moved up to the K10D and wasn't happy with the results from it till I upgraded my lenses too. There is no point having a camera that out resolves your lenses.

[snake]

If you want to keep your gear for a long time spend more money on lenses and less on a body to start. You will be disappointed with the results of expensive body and cheap lens while the combo of cheaper body like the K30 and DA* lens will make you happy. The K30 has the same sensor as the K5 and K5ii.

Then as you develop as a photographer and know what you really want to do with the camera you will be in a position to judge whether the body is stopping you from taking the shots you want. If it is that's the time to trade up. If it's not buy more good lenses.

As a rule of thumb half your budget should be put aside for your main lens. I started with the *istD and moved up to the K10D and wasn't happy with the results from it till I upgraded my lenses too. There is no point having a camera that out resolves your lenses.

This is my advice. Only if the OP is dead-set on a dSLR.

Otherwise, I'd recommend the OP start from LOWER, believe it or not, as it will force him/her to develop skills, such as composition, as well as working within technical limitations and knowing where they need more "power", so to speak. I actually did this, after having an slr for years and not really knowing what to do with it. I went down to a prosumer compact, got really in touch with it,did lots of low-light concerts, learned post processing, then learned its limitations and how to compose. Then from there, ONLY when I started spending most ofmy time bumping its limitations did I decide I needed to move up.

However, that was a fantastic year of development.

If you're going to set it in auto and go with kit lenses, then forget about it. You will often come up with worse pics when you overcam yourself. And now there are some great prosumers out there, some for absolute steals, like the LX7 is already going, at times, for under 300 EUR. The RX100 and Canon G1x are also superb for IQ and low light, though expensive.

[Jean Poitiers]

Some good advice here ... and here's my 2 cents worth ... Get A K-5 and buy better glass ... I wish that I had a bigger hobby budget which would allow me to get some limiteds ... J