[Dartmoor Dave]

I very definitely do my photography at the "not rich" end of the scale these days, but for the sort of stuff that I enjoy doing I don't consider it a major handicap. It's only on the rare occasions that I need to go longer than 200mm that my limited budget ever feels like an issue, because it's just a law of physics that you can't have long, fast and cheap.

It does sometimes make my teeth grind when a complete photographic beginner posts a question like, "Is it worth getting this *ist DL2 with kit lens that I saw for £50 as my first camera?" And gets replies like, "You really need at least a K5 for decent IQ." One of the things I love best about this forum is the little communities of people who share their experience and knowledge about how to get good results with older and cheaper gear, and personally I think it's a much better idea to steer less well off beginners in the direction of those helpful groups than to try to convince them to spend money they haven't got on things they don't necessarily need.

[pres589]

The reason I would suggest not getting an *ist DL2 for a first camera is that I fear a new person to photography would see and hear the autofocus and low light performance and go right back to their cell phone. I do know what you mean after a discussion very inline with this; I suggested a K200D instead and got told the same "K-5 or nothin" sort of story. I was trying to find that nice sweet spot in the middle between an *ist and the K-5 although maybe I didn't hit it very well. In the end it's about managing expectations and helping people understand what they're going to get and then using that supposedly over-the-hill camera to generate the end product images they really want.

There's still a certain ring to capturing sunsets on a beach with a K200D, a DA 15, and a tripod/remote shutter release.

[normhead]

The reason I would suggest not getting an *ist DL2 for a first camera is that I fear a new person to photography would see and hear the autofocus and low light performance and go right back to their cell phone. I do know what you mean after a discussion very inline with this; I suggested a K200D instead and got told the same "K-5 or nothin" sort of story. I was trying to find that nice sweet spot in the middle between an *ist and the K-5 although maybe I didn't hit it very well. In the end it's about managing expectations and helping people understand what they're going to get and then using that supposedly over-the-hill camera to generate the end product images they really want.

There's still a certain ring to capturing sunsets on a beach with a K200D, a DA 15, and a tripod/remote shutter release.

My *ist and K100D images at 6k (3000 x 2000) do not meet my current display spec (3840x 2160 4k TV).
MY wife's K-5 does... just saying.

Sure I can up scale, but an oversample looks better.

[pres589]

This is where "managing expectations" comes back into it. Is the person with an interest in getting started in photography, spending 50 quid on an *ist and maybe an 18-55, going to expect good display characteristics on a TV like yours? Maybe! Maybe not! Don't know, need to discuss, etc etc.

[Benz3ne]

I'm by no means 'rich' but I am quite good at setting my mind to saving/accruing funds when I need to. Similarly, I've put some money into a couple of hobbies which allows me to sell and purchase interchangeably. Given how many good legacy lenses there are out there for not a lot of money, I'm quite happy to have bought and sold a number of those which give excellent IQ and character without breaking the bank. All that's needed then is a bit of practice with manual focus and you're cooking with gas (and GAS).

[normhead]

This is where "managing expectations" comes back into it. Is the person with an interest in getting started in photography, spending 50 quid on an *ist and maybe an 18-55, going to expect good display characteristics on a TV like yours? Maybe! Maybe not! Don't know, need to discuss, etc etc.

Just saying, the more you plan for the future, the more you're likely to spend now. If you want to learn to do photography a cheaper camera will do. If you want to enjoy your photography a few years down the line, you need to plan a bit further ahead.

But you can learn photography cheap for sure. But you may end up wasting a lot of effort, because when you go to any decent type of display, you don't have enough resolution. I've heard pros say they can get along with 12 MP. I've never heard one say they can get along with 6. In this context something like a K-x at 12 MP should be considered a minimum.

[pres589]

And the flip side of that is, if a photog can get good images in any lighting by learning the secrets/challenges/etc of an *ist, then hand them something like a K-x or K-5, and they'll already know how to make it sing and perhaps better than if they had started with the more capable camera first. I would call that excellent value for money if you can buy that first camera & lens for 50 pounds or 75 bucks or whatever and learn and keep with it. That said, I did a lot of my learning on a K-5 II that I still own, so I sort of lived out exactly what you're describing. I think either path works and the important thing is getting a camera, getting comfortable using it, and use it a lot and often.

[normhead]

And the flip side of that is, if a photog can get good images in any lighting by learning the secrets/challenges/etc of an *ist, then hand them something like a K-x or K-5, and they'll already know how to make it sing and perhaps better than if they had started with the more capable camera first. I would call that excellent value for money if you can buy that first camera & lens for 50 pounds or 75 bucks or whatever and learn and keep with it. That said, I did a lot of my learning on a K-5 II that I still own, so I sort of lived out exactly what you're describing. I think either path works and the important thing is getting a camera, getting comfortable using it, and use it a lot and often.

There are so many 6 MP images I own, that I wish were higher resolution, it's the pain of that scenario that keeps me advocating 12 MP. I still have the 11 8 x10s I took to get into Ryerson Photo Arts all those years ago. In a sense a film image is future proof. And since they were all taken on 120 film they can be reproduced at any size I'd be interested in up to 16x20. On digital, you should be a little more thoughtful.

At 200 DPI, 3000x2000 gets you 15 x 10, not even an 11x14. At 150 DPI, my current minimum for printing, you could get up to 20 inches. You need to think ahead. How you will display should be part of the decision, not just now but in the future. After all, the main purpose of most photography is to display an image on something other than your camera.

If you are the kind of person who never printed film larger than a 4x6, a 6MP camera will be adequate.
My favourite 35mm film print size was 11x14.
I've grown to appreciate much larger prints and displays these days. My average print being 16x20 and my average canvas being 20x30. I understand not being able to afford better, but it's also good to decide whether you want to go cheap now to upgrade later, or wait a bit and start with better.

Of course if you don't even know if you like photography, intentionally temporary gear might be an option.

[Rondec]

The reason I would suggest not getting an *ist DL2 for a first camera is that I fear a new person to photography would see and hear the autofocus and low light performance and go right back to their cell phone. I do know what you mean after a discussion very inline with this; I suggested a K200D instead and got told the same "K-5 or nothin" sort of story. I was trying to find that nice sweet spot in the middle between an *ist and the K-5 although maybe I didn't hit it very well. In the end it's about managing expectations and helping people understand what they're going to get and then using that supposedly over-the-hill camera to generate the end product images they really want.

There's still a certain ring to capturing sunsets on a beach with a K200D, a DA 15, and a tripod/remote shutter release.

It's a tough thing. Your DA 15 limited is way more expensive than the K200 or for that matter a K5 would be.

I looked on ebay and looks like the going price for a K200 is 150 and for a K5 is 210. You might be able to get each for a bit less if you are good at sniping but those are buy it now prices. Having used a K10 (same sensor as the K200) and K5, I would probably prefer to save for the K5, but that's where each person's decisions will vary. At the same time, when you post questions on the internet, you are going to answers. If you've already got your mind made up, probably best not to post the questions.

[barryroad]

My rec for someone on a budget would be: K10d or K20d body, an older, quality zoom lens (select one from the many, many reviewed lenses here on the Forum), a flash (Pentax or Metz), and a bag. Purchase all of the gear used here on the Forum. The bag can be acquired used on the 'bay (tons of them--check out the older Lowepro designs for the best value proposition). You have to do your research and be patient to use the Forum marketplace effectively, but amazing stuff shows up there regularly. The limitations of this recommendation are: no sports/high speed shooting, and no low light shooting. If you stick a half-ways decent lens on a K10d, you can take drop-your-jaw good photos. I know because I do it all the time. For zoom lenses, don't be afraid to go off the Pentax reservation and pick up something like the Tokina ATX 28-70 F2.8. (Again, do your research--there are several models of that lens, and some are much better than others.) I often find myself with that Tokina lens on my K20d and only limitation is my technique.

[normhead]

My rec for someone on a budget would be: K10d or K20d body, an older, quality zoom lens (select one from the many, many reviewed lenses here on the Forum), a flash (Pentax or Metz), and a bag. Purchase all of the gear used here on the Forum. The bag can be acquired used on the 'bay (tons of them--check out the older Lowepro designs for the best value proposition). You have to do your research and be patient to use the Forum marketplace effectively, but amazing stuff shows up there regularly. The limitations of this recommendation are: no sports/high speed shooting, and no low light shooting. If you stick a half-ways decent lens on a K10d, you can take drop-your-jaw good photos. I know because I do it all the time. For zoom lenses, don't be afraid to go off the Pentax reservation and pick up something like the Tokina ATX 28-70 F2.8. (Again, do your research--there are several models of that lens, and some are much better than others.) I often find myself with that Tokina lens on my K20d and only limitation is my technique.

I still have many K20D images on display. It was a fine camera especially for landscape. But I found the colour balance in shadow detail, especially on sunsets, to be a problem. I planed to keep it to use occasionally, because I loved it so much when it was my main camera. But the AF improvement was so great between it and my k-3, it turned out, I couldn't enjoy using it for much of what I now shoot. But there's camera that can easily handle a 30x20 canvas. Well above the cut off line for what I consider to be useful.

[pres589]

It's a tough thing. Your DA 15 limited is way more expensive than the K200 or for that matter a K5 would be.

I looked on ebay and looks like the going price for a K200 is 150 and for a K5 is 210. You might be able to get each for a bit less if you are good at sniping but those are buy it now prices. Having used a K10 (same sensor as the K200) and K5, I would probably prefer to save for the K5, but that's where each person's decisions will vary. At the same time, when you post questions on the internet, you are going to answers. If you've already got your mind made up, probably best not to post the questions.

DA 15's off the bay are $250 or so starting for a decent copy. The colors from CCD's and that lens is why I called that combination out. Colors out of the K-5 are not to be ignored, though. There's a lot of ways to build a "low cost" digital kit around either a K200D or K-5. Honestly the answers are about the same regardless of body with either of these.

[Alex645]

But you can learn photography cheap for sure. But you may end up wasting a lot of effort, because when you go to any decent type of display, you don't have enough resolution. I've heard pros say they can get along with 12 MP. I've never heard one say they can get along with 6. In this context something like a K-x at 12 MP should be considered a minimum.

I have known many students that have yet to touch a DSLR because to their parents $500 is too much. But I've had one experience that has changed my view on 6MP sensors. On a three day, two night photo field trip with 16 students and 3 chaperones. One of the chaperones, an art teacher, had noticed the year before that all the students had better cameras than his point-and-shoot, so he asked me if he could borrow anything better. I had a dormant Nikon D50 (6.1MP) with a 35mm prime that I lent him.

On that trip, that 6MP D50 was easily the lowest MP camera. After the trip I asked for all students and chaperones to contribute photos for a 12x12" photo book. I ask everyone to send me either RAW or dng or psd files. The images taken with that 6MP DSLR were the best both technically and aesthetically and I used one of his images at 12x12" and it was superior to shots taken with FF and 24MP APS-C DSLRs.

Yes, it was shot RAW at 200 ISO (the lowest option on a D50) and with a prime lens, but in the hands of a good photographer with an above average lens in good light, the sensor size, in this one experience of mine, is not a deal breaker.

I am in the camp that says, hold off pulling the trigger until you can get at least a K5, but before I (or my parents) knew that photography was going to be a lifelong passion (and career) for me, getting my first camera plus lens for $150 new (Yashica TL-Electro) was the gateway to better things.

[normhead]

I have known many students that have yet to touch a DSLR because to their parents $500 is too much. But I've had one experience that has changed my view on 6MP sensors. On a three day, two night photo field trip with 16 students and 3 chaperones. One of the chaperones, an art teacher, had noticed the year before that all the students had better cameras than his point-and-shoot, so he asked me if he could borrow anything better. I had a dormant Nikon D50 (6.1MP) with a 35mm prime that I lent him.

On that trip, that 6MP D50 was easily the lowest MP camera. After the trip I asked for all students and chaperones to contribute photos for a 12x12" photo book. I ask everyone to send me either RAW or dng or psd files. The images taken with that 6MP DSLR were the best both technically and aesthetically and I used one of his images at 12x12" and it was superior to shots taken with FF and 24MP APS-C DSLRs.

Yes, it was shot RAW at 200 ISO (the lowest option on a D50) and with a prime lens, but in the hands of a good photographer with an above average lens in good light, the sensor size, in this one experience of mine, is not a deal breaker.

I am in the camp that says, hold off pulling the trigger until you can get at least a K5, but before I (or my parents) knew that photography was going to be a lifelong passion (and career) for me, getting my first camera plus lens for $150 new (Yashica TL-Electro) was the gateway to better things.

Well there we have the competing takes on the subject more than adequately explored. I would think a decision would be possible.

[brewmaster15]

This may be completely unrealistic for this forum but on another forum I visit where new members are looking for advice on getting into the Hobby we have brief questionnaire that the member filled out and cut and pasted into the post. It answered the basic questions that anyone in that hobby needed answered to give a reply that fit the new members needs and wants.

An example might be something like this...


Photo experience ( how many years or none)________________________

If yes , What gear?_________________________

Are you looking for new or Used?_________________________

What do you intent to photography? Family_________ birds________ sports______ etc...

What is your budget?_____________

Where do you see yourself in 1-2 years in the hobby_____________

You can probably see where this can go with additional questions etc. The nice thing about forms like this is they give experienced members the information they need to answer accurately instead of having to draw it out of the new member over a series of posts. Over time they also serve as a resource for future new members

Anyhow, as I said, maynot be a fit for this forum, but on the other forum, it made things so much easier for everyone involved.

al