[zzeitg]

I choose Pentax because I know I don't need to spend my last dollar on the most expensive gear

Indeed, many (me including) think that buying Pentax means buying equipment with the best price/performance ratio.

[photoptimist]

A fool and his money are soon parted.

The vast majority of photographs don't need the latest and greatest and most expensive equipment. The high-ISO performance and IBIS of a something like a used K-5 means anyone can take great pictures in low light even with a "slow" kit lens zoom. And lots of people on this forum get great pictures out of even older 6 and 10 MP bodies with old M42 lenses.

Mastery beats money almost every time and it's a lot more satisfying as a hobby.

[sergysergy]

One of the reasons why I started with Pentax was their competitive prices. Not a cheap hobby, but better than spending all that money on alcohol.

[ramseybuckeye]

l haven't seen much of this here at PF. But on other photography forums, there are some who feel that EVERYONE must buy gear that's as $$$$$$$$$$ as what they have. Someone will ask for advice on what to buy. They state their needs and budget. They get recommendations for gear that cost several times what they want to pay. They ask for advice on APS-C gear, and folks suggest they go full frame. On another site l mentioned that l was looking for a reasonably priced Pentax body and lens that's a good beater setup that's WR. l got scolded and he said l should spend the $$ on Nikon gear. l think it's funny. They just don't get it. My wife and l have incomes that are fairly low. And this is just a hobby for me, so the logical thing for me to do is stick with lower priced gear.

You will find that to some degree here, but usually because someone missed it in the first post, not to put you down. Fortunately Pentax has added several new sealed lenses over the last several years including lower priced lenses, but it all makes more available used also. I'm sure everyone wants to feel good about the gear choices they have made, but some just have that need to feel they are smarted than everyone else and that you should follow their "lead". I think it's actually a little lack of confidence in their abilities.

[DWS1]

...but some just have that need to feel they are smarted than everyone else and that you should follow their "lead". I think it's actually a little lack of confidence in their abilities.

Exactly this! Most people who feel confident with their choices, their abilities, and most importantly who they are as a person do not feel the need to dictate to others what they must do. Nor do they concern themselves much with what others think of them and their choices.

[TaoMaas]

Someone will ask for advice on what to buy. They state their needs and budget. They get recommendations for gear that cost several times what they want to pay.

This happens on a guitar forum I frequent, too. Someone will ask for suggestions for a good beginner guitar for $300 and it won't be long before someone posts, "If you're willing to spend $300, you might as well spend $500". $500 becomes $800, which becomes $1000, which turns into $1500. Inside enthusiast forums, we sometimes forget that not everyone is willing or able to spend as much on their hobby as some of us do.

[gump]

Two years ago when i decided to get quasi-serious about photography, I attended a series of "seminars" (free, we ain't rich either). The instructor was academically trained and had worked professionally with a government agency as well as having his own studios. He showed his work which was excellent and he obviously knew his trade. I was in the process of researching "kit" and asked his advice. He used a Nikon D810 but suggested a Canon, what model I do not remember, that turned out to be about $6000. When I asked about tripods it was a Manfrotto with a Gitzo head well above $1000. I was leaning toward Pentax because of in-body stabilization. He believed that it did not hold up and seemingly beginning to understand there were financial limits suggest the D810. Great, only $3000. After going through the research again it was a K-70 and an Oben tripod/head (about.$150) recommended by B&H. Works for me.

[Just1MoreDave]

Just scroll down a ways in this subforum to the post about Flickr's best 2019 photos. One of the winners used very inexpensive equipment to take a great shot.

It may require some discipline to research equipment and more effort to ignore the pull of high end stuff. I really want a K-new, completely unreasonable because it has no release date, specs or price. I know it won't make me a better photographer. It is almost worse because I could probably afford it - previously I would see the price, out of the question, I'm done.

[StarTroop]

Even if I were rich, I'd still be using Pentax and affordable vintage lenses. I just don't see the point of paying twice the cost for things that are only 50% better in certain conditions (hyperbole, but you get the idea.) In any case, part of the fun of photography, IMO, is researching and collecting interesting things, not just owning the latest and greatest. So, if I went out and spent top dollar on the highest rated pro gear, I'd be robbing myself of half the experience, and I certainly wouldn't be any better of a photographer if I couldn't ever complain about the technical limitations of my gear (not that I complain about my cheap gear either.)

If I were rich, I'd probably get myself any Leica with a a small range of primes, and some sort of medium format system (maybe Pentax 67 or 645), and maybe some obscure collectible compacts and dead systems, but my daily driver will always continue to be the most affordable, highest value-to-cost gear I can possibly find, which will likely remain enthusiast-level K-mount stuff for quite some time.

[stevebrot]

They state their needs and budget.

...and often enough their needs outstrip their budget, hence the suggestions of solutions at a bit higher price point. As for those suggesting much higher price points, chances are they did not read the original post; that is not unusual for online forums.

That aside, you are in good company in not having a lot an excess of funds to devote to your hobby. I am in that boat too. I have a lot of lenses on my shelf with the 2nd most expensive having set me back $449 USD, if memory serves me correct. That lens, a Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.0 | C fairly well lives on my K-3 and was worth the price; ditto for the K-3, which I purchased new six years ago. The 17-70 is also one of three lenses I own that is not compatible with 24x36mm FF. My most expensive lens, a Pentax-FA 77/1.8 Limited, I paid $500 brand new from a dealer in Canada (eBay, make offer). One more factoid, with the exception of the K-3, none of my gear is WR or AW and only a few are support auto-focus.

I felt a little sheepish shooting my 1984-vintage Tamron 70-210/3.5 on the K-3 supported by a $320 tripod/head setup on a gusty evening last spring at Steptoe Butte. There were probably 75 other photographers at gravel pull-out near the summit and most were sporting amazing kit. The guy next to me was had a Nikon with a lens that I found out later retails for over $12,000. I figure his tripod and head probably cost about $1500. He was a very nice guy, but suggested that my tripod was inadequate given the wind. Turns out that of all those folk, I was the only one that published that late-afternoon's work to Flickr. The results were "painterly", but due to haze, not gear.

Back on topic, if presented with the following...

• Sharp, well-corrected prime 20mm to 24mm range (must be coma-free)
• F/2.0 or wider
• Preferably sealed
• Manual focus, OK
• Sub-$250

...my recommendations will have to waffle on at least three of the requirements.


Steve

[WorksAsIntended]

Actually, despite the nature of comparison, where something slightly more expensive sometimes is better and you keep comparing to something again slightly more expensive and end way more expensive (I have been there too), it is in the nature of humans to think out of their perspective.
There is not a single general reason (lots of good personals one of course) why spending $300 is more right than spending $1000 or $50.000 on photo equipment as a hobbyist. No matter if a beginner or advanced hobbyist.
We should never judge decissions others made, and if a beginner is spending the money to buy a D1XM3 with all the top lenses it is as insane as a beginner buying a k10d with kit lense when he could use his smartphone instead and learn photographic basics, it just depends on his pockets.

We should however all try to respect the prices people ask for advice name.

[aslyfox]

pointing out that a budget of $100 for a DSLR and several lenses might result in getting old lenses and cameras that have been " surpassed " by other equipment is most likely just being truthful

options to such choices can be made politely

but ultimately suggesting the purchase of the " latest " and " brightest " equipment is, most,likely, not too helpful

[stevebrot]

Just scroll down a ways in this subforum to the post about Flickr's best 2019 photos. One of the winners used very inexpensive equipment to take a great shot.

I saw that...Pentax K-x with Pentax-A 70-210/4.0. I own a copy of that lens and it lives in my bag.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/rjs68/48772320552/lightbox/

It may require some discipline to research equipment and more effort to ignore the pull of high end stuff.

This ^ ^ ^
I cannot overemphasize the importance of research. The lens clubs on this site are an amazing resource as is the example section and the lens discussions in general. Several of my favorite lenses were purchased due to examples seen here with most a few destined to become cult classics within a few months after my purchase.

I really want a K-new, completely unreasonable because it has no release date, specs or price.

Me too. The K-3 is still doing very well, but starting to show some wear and I keep thinking of about the new camera smell...


Steve

[ChristianRock]

l haven't seen much of this here at PF. But on other photography forums, there are some who feel that EVERYONE must buy gear that's as $$$$$$$$$$ as what they have. Someone will ask for advice on what to buy. They state their needs and budget. They get recommendations for gear that cost several times what they want to pay. They ask for advice on APS-C gear, and folks suggest they go full frame. On another site l mentioned that l was looking for a reasonably priced Pentax body and lens that's a good beater setup that's WR. l got scolded and he said l should spend the $$ on Nikon gear. l think it's funny. They just don't get it. My wife and l have incomes that are fairly low. And this is just a hobby for me, so the logical thing for me to do is stick with lower priced gear.

Well aren't you glad you found this place

Anyone saying "up your budget or I don't want to talk to you" should be just ignored.

I also started my photography journey with Pentax in 2013 because like you I had very little disposable income. If my then 10-year old Sony DSC-P200 point and shoot hadn't died, in fact, I probably wouldn't even have bought another camera.

My wife really wanted a Nikon D7000 but we couldn't afford it, so instead of buying a D3000 like my brother did (and interestingly, he's a doctor who could have bought something much more expensive) I went with a then 5-year old K20D with a nice bag, kit lens and a few manual lenses for a good price.

Through buying old film lenses through Craigslist and Facebook and then in turn selling those to upgrade equipment, I have what I consider a capable APS-C setup, in terms of image quality. Not in terms of bragging rights - who would brag about the K-S1? But it gives me great pictures. And I have what I consider great lenses to go along with it.

Admittedly the only thing I have at this point that is WR is a K-50 but I've gotten a little bit of water on my equipment every now and then and I just wipe it off and leave it to dry. Never had any issues, thank God.

But if I were starting now with the budget I gave myself back in 2013, which was 350 dollars, and I wanted WR, I would just try to find a K-5IIs with a kit 18-55mm WR lens. From there through the years I'd keep upgrading where I felt the need. Ths first upgrades have to be a Pentax 50mm f/1.7 lens (manual ones go for $30, autofocus starting at $70) and a manual telephoto zoom like the SMC-A 70-210mm f4. I also particularly like the DA 16-45mm f4 lens, an older autofocus APS-C lens that goes for less than $100 these days. Great all-around zoom.

If you could start off with a budget of, say $1000, then you're doing real well in Pentax-land! Tons of options would be available for WR bodies starting with the original K-3 (a full magnesum body pro-style camera with a 24MP sensor) that goes for $300-400 these days, or a new KP that goes for about $750 for the body (the best in image quality that Pentax offers now in APS-C and good enough for Kai to add to his personal staple -

You Tube

You Tube

- or the entry-level but also WR and very nicely featured K-70 that goes for about $600 used with the SMC DA 18-135mm lens - and spend the rest on a couple nice primes.

I shoot sports for my kids including indoor basketball games with old manual lenses. It's more work, but it's doable. My best results in basketball come from my $73 AF SMC-F 50mm f/1.7 lens (which I set at f2) and my SMC-M 100mm f/2.8 (manual focus, was basically free with a film camera). For outdoor soccer, I either use my SMC-A 70-210mm f4 lens (which was already mentioned in this thread and is such a great lens for such little price, you can get it for $30 dollars sometimes - mine was a freebie with another film camera...) and the SMC-M 200mm f4 (free with a film camera... I guess you're starting to get my point... )

[Michail_P]

Low budget is the category of most of us. This “growing budget” suggestions thing is going on everyday in every photography forum. Someone wants to try a new hobby for <500$ and ends up getting suggestions like “wait another half a year and then get some stuff for 1000”. It’s annoyingly easy to get just the wrong information. Imho the best thing to do is first do a research on available equipment for the budget and then ask for suggestions among specific options.
Life’s too short to worry about gear. Especially when it comes to Pentax, there’s something for everyone (I’m a new pentaxian but it’s obvious to me). No matter how much the $ or the experience, or the needs. Spending 2000$ on gear is easy (for some), the hard part is to get better at taking photos. Lots of great photos are being made since 1900’s with nothing more than a body and a prime. Master the use of your favorite (Pentax) gear. It takes effort and time, not money. Do not spend more than you can afford. Let the techies be. Canikon will always depend on them.