[tvdtvdtvd]

Ah, just wait for the people advocating for the "caveman camera" to show up, saying we can't have anything they don't agree with. Then you might not have wished to stir up the pot

Well, as I've already indicated I could certainly be accused of that mentality to certain extent, specifically in regards
to metal build quality vs plastic fantastic. I would happily take a rugged build over plastic lightness in almost all
respects. And I can easily live with the consequences, for example no auto-focus, if that's the price for that
rugged build. Indeed, I pretty confident such a build wouldn't prevent most advances. Heck, even an auto-focus
Super Tak is possible even if it meant a fairly beefy motor.

[ChristianRock]

Well, as I've already indicated I could certainly be accused of that mentality to certain extent, specifically in regards
to metal build quality vs plastic fantastic. I would happily take a rugged build over plastic lightness in almost all
respects. And I can easily live with the consequences, for example no auto-focus, if that's the price for that
rugged build. Indeed, I pretty confident such a build wouldn't prevent most advances. Heck, even an auto-focus
Super Tak is possible even if it meant a fairly beefy motor.

See, I agree that metal lenses are much better. But I'm thankful that I was able to afford the DA 35 2.4. I couldn't afford the FA 35 f2 so if the DA 35 2.4 with the plastic everywhere didn't exist, I would not have a normal AF prime - for us who chase kids around, it's a God-send

[tvdtvdtvd]

See, I agree that metal lenses are much better. But I'm thankful that I was able to afford the DA 35 2.4. I couldn't afford the FA 35 f2 so if the DA 35 2.4 with the plastic everywhere didn't exist, I would not have a normal AF prime - for us who chase kids around, it's a God-send

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the FA35 f/2 is a plastic barreled lens, right? I know it has a metal mount, but I didn't think it had
a metal body, like the limiteds.

As for the DA 35, I'll admit that I added and removed that lens and the DA 50 from my shopping cart many times while I was
shopping for the K-3. Ultimately I opted NOT to get either lens, with the justification that I would rather save that money
towards one FA limited.

[ChristianRock]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the FA35 f/2 is a plastic barreled lens, right? I know it has a metal mount, but I didn't think it had
a metal body, like the limiteds.

As for the DA 35, I'll admit that I added and removed that lens and the DA 50 from my shopping cart many times while I was
shopping for the K-3. Ultimately I opted NOT to get either lens, with the justification that I would rather save that money
towards one FA limited.

Oh yes, the FA 35 is a plastic barrel lens. The mount is metal. The DA 35 2.4 is a tad slower and even more plastic, including the mount. But I still couldn't afford the FA, just the DA. Let alone a Limited. Though I am contemplating selling a piece of music equipment to get a good lens, and a DA Limited might be worth looking into...

[stubyles]

I have to agree with rugged over AF view, I shoot almost exclusively manual lenses and Samyang seem to be doing ok selling new manual lenses.
I wouldn't want to be without my AV mode (so on-camera metering is a must).
And my 50 year old eyes would really struggle in some situations without Live-View Zoom and Focus-Peaking, if I can keep this I could probably do without instant review.

[MetteHHH]

Still, rugged and AF isn't mutually exclusive today? My DA*300 is my favourite lens, and it is definitely rugged but also has the best AF of any lens I have owned.

[tvdtvdtvd]

Still, rugged and AF isn't mutually exclusive today? My DA*300 is my favourite lens, and it is definitely rugged but also has the best AF of any lens I have owned.

I've never handled the DA*300. Does it really have that silky, dampened feel of a Super Tak when you are focusing manually.
If so, I'll gladly eat my words and put the DA*300 on the top of my want list.

[MetteHHH]

At the risk of speaking about topics that I am not the very least qualified to speak about (because I never owned a Super Tak), "silky" and "dampened" do seem to fit the feel of focusing manually with the DA* 300.

But then, I love it. I can't claim to be objective at all.

[stevebrot]

Must haves?

• Capture media and format appropriate to my needs
• Accurate and precise focus
• Adjustable aperture
• Adjustable shutter speeds
• Ability to use a lens appropriate to my needs

Steve

[woodywesty]

Must haves?

• Capture media and format appropriate to my needs
• Accurate and precise focus
• Adjustable aperture
• Adjustable shutter speeds
• Ability to use a lens appropriate to my needs

Steve

Humm.... makes my Spotmatic look pretty good! Now if it only had digital capture instead of that roll of film

[ppppsssstttt]

focus peaking is a new technology (software?) must have. i might not use it all the time, but the ability to focus precisely and accurately is important to me. focusing aides like split prism screens are nice, but i don't find them easy to use on APS-C. on full frame film cameras, split prism and matted screens are a joy and adequate.

nice things to have, but not a must-have yet:
wifi control of camera
in body stabilization
articulating screen

[qblade]

Must haves?

• Capture media and format appropriate to my needs
• Accurate and precise focus
• Adjustable aperture
• Adjustable shutter speeds
• Ability to use a lens appropriate to my needs

Steve

I think that probably nails it for me as well. I have a Pentax Q and K-01, Nikon Df, Olympus XA, Contax T-VS and a Bronica S2 (all with related lenses) and each has its place in my heart and my photography. Which I use in a given situation is dependent on a number of factors. I enjoy shooting with all of them, auto-focus or not, in-camera metering or not.

[AquaDome]

Sometimes I need the image. Sometimes I just need the challenge of making the image. Maybe I'm the "cave-man".
Right now, my bare minimum cameras take 120 film and don't have meters. That makes shooting slide film in the dark way more fun than auto-everything on a DSLR and chimping to see if I did it right.

So I suppose my bare minimum is "just enough camera to record the image, if I do it right".

Sometimes I see a scene and I want to portray it in a photograph that makes people say WOW. Digital auto-everything and a bag of modern lenses make that a whole lot easier than it used to be, and I still get a second chance when I load it into the computer. For all of that, I am grateful, but not indebted.

[LensBeginner]

focus peaking is a new technology (software?) must have. i might not use it all the time, but the ability to focus precisely and accurately is important to me. focusing aides like split prism screens are nice, but i don't find them easy to use on APS-C. on full frame film cameras, split prism and matted screens are a joy and adequate.

nice things to have, but not a must-have yet:
wifi control of camera
in body stabilization
articulating screen

Well, I wanted focus peaking badly, but now that I have it on my K-01 I never use it. Reason? it's not accurate, it has a way too broad conception of "in focus", so you're taking an unnecessary risk.
Live view magnification is way better.

[ppppsssstttt]

Ah, interesting... I suppose it depends on the lens used, max aperture, etc. I suppose I mean any digital focus aides. Focus peaking came to mind first because it's more "current" to me. I remember live view magnification on cameras ~ 10 years ago. I've never really compared just how accurate or inaccurate focus peaking is, I just know that I have more "keepers" with my K-01 than my K10D with KatzEye.

Well, I wanted focus peaking badly, but now that I have it on my K-01 I never use it. Reason? it's not accurate, it has a way too broad conception of "in focus", so you're taking an unnecessary risk.
Live view magnification is way better.