[mikesbike]

If you carry say a 15, 20-40 and 70, the weight would be much the same as carrying a 16-85 and the cost would be significantly higher. I'd suggest that you start with a 16-85 and complement it later with a prime or two or another zoom (maybe a wide zoom like the DA 12-24 or Sigma 10-20) when you see what suits you.

For once I disagree with Des. My favorite trio for low-bulk (let us put it that way) getting around is the 15, 20-40, and 70 Limiteds (or the 77mm LTD if facing very low lighting). This even by far beats my very compact DA 18-135mm wide-range zoom lens in this regard, which if I choose using it would easily be more compact than the DA 16-85mm. It is about two factors- the bulk when on-camera, and the carrying aspect. Of course, the advantage of a wide-range zoom is not needing to change lenses.

The way I pack, I use a belt/shoulder strap holster-type of camera case. Using both belt loop and shoulder strap enhances stability while minimizing case wobbling. I can use a mid or smaller size case. I usually choose mid for possibly wanting to switch to the DA 18-135mm for some special reason. There is enough room in the front accessory pocket for a spare SD card and battery, plus the DA 15mm separated by a flap of bubble wrap. This lens lives there. It is so compact I forget it is there. The DA 70 is so compact it fits easily into a pocket. The DA 20-40mm is on camera. Never do I get any sense of bulk or a weighty feel at any time. The total weight and size is distributed. I might go the whole day just using the DA 20-40mm. Or I might at some point or other switch to the 15mm or to the 70mm. I am getting on and off a bicycle, and I can say this is the easiest, lightest setup of lenses I have tried, and I have numerous other lenses. Even better now with the less bulky KP.

Even adding the likewise compact DA 55-300mm WR PLM would be quite doable. Could fit into another jacket pocket or into a small waist pouch or belt case.

At least in my ancient PSE 1 software, I can still adjust exposure, contrast, color, shadow detail, or even sharpening of JPEG images right from the camera without needing to convert and process RAW images.

---

Last edited by mikesbike; 03-16-2020 at 06:43 PM.

[amatula]

Des. thank you so much!

Very helpful (as has been all the information I received on this forum!)

The 20-40 or 16-85 sounds good; honestly, if I am hiking, I like one lens. I have carried an 24 prime, but there were times I wish I had a zoom to capture animals I saw, like a beaver one day.

May I ask: what software do you use for editing/converting raw?
I loved the image!!

Thank you and all the best!
Annie

Interested observer,

I appreciate that information. And the youtube was a joy to watch!

Two things he did not compare though:
Weight differences:

Weight KP: 703 g
Weight 20-40 283 g = 986 g total

Fuji x-t30: 383 g (or 539 g for fuji x-t3 which I was also considering)
18 - 55 F2.8-4 lens: 310 g = 696 g (849 g)

But that is not too bad.. and I think I can work with that

I do wish however, that in the USA at least there were more companies who serviced Pentax. My local store said they couldn't. Of course, nothing could go wrong with the Pentax (great!) and if it does, it could be in the warranty period (i will buy the body new) and that works too. But I don't want to have to spend money and then have to replace the camera if something should go wrong after warranty and I cannot get it fixed by Precision Camera for whatever reason (not in business, etc).

That said - and this may sound silly! - but I feel I would get great support in this community with the camera should I need it (general camera questions) and have a wonderful Pentax "family" to share with. And that's a big plus!

So I am working through that as I type

Thank you, again (and everyone!) -- I definitely am learning alot!
All the best,

Annie

[Des]

For once I disagree with Des. My favorite trio for low-bulk (let us put it that way) getting around is the 15, 20-40, and 70 Limiteds (or the 77mm LTD if facing very low lighting). This even by far beats my very compact DA 18-135mm wide-range zoom lens in this regard, which if I choose using it would easily be more compact than the DA 16-85mm. It is about two factors- the bulk when on-camera, and the carrying aspect. Of course, the advantage of a wide-range zoom is not needing to change lenses.

Good points - in fact these days I do much the same! Generally I carry the 15, 20-40 and 55-300 (or FA 77 or DFA 100) as my light walking kit rather than the 18-135 (with or without 55-300). I can use my smallest camera bag for the camera and two lenses and carry the third (usually the 15) in a jacket or trouser pocket. It's a very compact kit. None of the items is heavy and each balances nicely when mounted on the camera.

The difference is in the total weight and bulk rather than the weight and bulk of individual items. The 15, 20-40 and 100 weigh 189g, 283g and 340g respectively, ie 812g, compared with 405g for the 18-135 or 488g for the 16-85. The question is, how much does that extra 300-400g matter to you? And are you prepared to make frequent lenses changes to get optimal image quality? (Bear in mind that you may need to be changing lenses in windy, dusty, drizzly or snowy conditions with the concomitant risk of getting stuff in the camera.)

My own preferences vary according to the circumstances. I took only the 18-135 with the KP on a forest walk on Friday and did notice the difference in weight and bulk. I was walking with a group of others, so didn't want to cause delays with lens changes. And the image quality was still good. I haven't done that for some time because I have come to like using the Limiteds so much, but clearly it's a matter of individual preference and how much photography is the priority rather than the walking experience.

One thing to note is that the Limited primes are not WR. (The 20-40 Ltd is.) You need to take more care when using them in damp conditions.

At least in my ancient PSE 1 software, I can still adjust exposure, contrast, color, shadow detail, or even sharpening of JPEG images right from the camera without needing to convert and process RAW images.

But the results of editing a jpg aren't nearly as good. As a test I applied the exact same edits from the RAW file processed above to a full-size jpg converted directly from the RAW file. This is what I got.

Yuk!

May I ask: what software do you use for editing/converting raw?I loved the image!!

Thanks Annie. I use DxO PhotoLab 3 and I like it a lot. But there are plenty of other programs that can do much the same thing.

[mikesbike]

Des. thank you so much!

Very helpful (as has been all the information I received on this forum!)

The 20-40 or 16-85 sounds good; honestly, if I am hiking, I like one lens. I have carried an 24 prime, but there were times I wish I had a zoom to capture animals I saw, like a beaver one day.

May I ask: what software do you use for editing/converting raw?
I loved the image!!

Thank you and all the best!
Annie

Interested observer,

I appreciate that information. And the youtube was a joy to watch!

Two things he did not compare though:
Weight differences:

Weight KP: 703 g
Weight 20-40 283 g = 986 g total

Fuji x-t30: 383 g (or 539 g for fuji x-t3 which I was also considering)
18 - 55 F2.8-4 lens: 310 g = 696 g (849 g)

But that is not too bad.. and I think I can work with that

I do wish however, that in the USA at least there were more companies who serviced Pentax. My local store said they couldn't. Of course, nothing could go wrong with the Pentax (great!) and if it does, it could be in the warranty period (i will buy the body new) and that works too. But I don't want to have to spend money and then have to replace the camera if something should go wrong after warranty and I cannot get it fixed by Precision Camera for whatever reason (not in business, etc).

That said - and this may sound silly! - but I feel I would get great support in this community with the camera should I need it (general camera questions) and have a wonderful Pentax "family" to share with. And that's a big plus!

So I am working through that as I type

Thank you, again (and everyone!) -- I definitely am learning alot!
All the best,

Annie

As an all around zoom lens, the more compact DA 18-135mm would be my choice. Even though my preference is for the lighter, very compact DA 20-40mm LTD in general, that wide-range zoom lens is surprisingly good! It can even deliver very good closeups, complete with good bokeh. As to the Fuji, keep in mind the number of shortcomings detailed in the video, and also that part of the weight difference is it does not feature having a built-in flash. I find having one handy for being available for instant use, and not having to carry yet more stuff. I have plenty of flash units for use when the occasion does demand one.

In the SLR section of the forums, take a look at the thread- DA 18-135mm WR Show us what it can do. You will find plenty of good examples.

Of course, if a condition turns up where a JPEG + RAW may prove useful, like higher contrast scenes, it is just a button away. However, it may be also just a tweek in the camera's highlight or shadow detail setting to take care of an issue, and then by shooting both you can decide later. One thing about the KP, it has a very sophisticated set of controls.

As to the video comparing different camera makes for JPEGs, besides the "Fine Sharpening" omission, the guy doing the testing first showed two Pentax models, the K-70 and KP, but only used one, not indicating which, yet each uses a different sensor and metering. My experience has been that each Pentax model is somewhat different in many respects, including color reproduction. He also failed to show that with Pentax, one has numerous color palette choices to set for the camera's JPEG output and can then even adjust color saturation, contrast, sharpening, and more within each palette setting. I would bet the other brands offer no such control.

---

Last edited by mikesbike; 03-16-2020 at 11:06 PM.

[interested_observer]

Interested observer,

I appreciate that information. And the youtube was a joy to watch!

Two things he did not compare though:
Weight differences:

Weight KP: 703 g
Weight 20-40 283 g = 986 g total

Fuji x-t30: 383 g (or 539 g for fuji x-t3 which I was also considering)
18 - 55 F2.8-4 lens: 310 g = 696 g (849 g)

But that is not too bad.. and I think I can work with that

I do wish however, that in the USA at least there were more companies who serviced Pentax. My local store said they couldn't. Of course, nothing could go wrong with the Pentax (great!) and if it does, it could be in the warranty period (i will buy the body new) and that works too. But I don't want to have to spend money and then have to replace the camera if something should go wrong after warranty and I cannot get it fixed by Precision Camera for whatever reason (not in business, etc).

That said - and this may sound silly! - but I feel I would get great support in this community with the camera should I need it (general camera questions) and have a wonderful Pentax "family" to share with. And that's a big plus!

So I am working through that as I type

Thank you, again (and everyone!) -- I definitely am learning alot!
All the best,

Annie

Good Morning, The difference in weight is centered in several areas.

• Mag alloy body - The metal magnesium alloy body does weigh more, no doubt about it,

• Weather Sealing - it does take a bit more physical structure to hold the seals, not a lot - but there is some additional machining around the various parts of the body to seal up the unit.

• Mirror box and Optical viewfinder - The mirror box, mirror and the optical viewfinder's pentaprism together does consume volume and weight. The optical viewfinder consists of a solid hunk of optical ground glass that moves the image up from the mirror, flips it over and turns it around for the user's eye to see. A pentamirror viewfinder is lighter (not solid, just a set of mirrors that perform the same function, but can get dirty, where as no dirt can get into the pentaprism. So that does weight a substantial amount. There is an up side to the pentaprism's weight. Out in the field, you don't have to turn the camera on - consuming battery power, when checking out a shot or composing an image. An electronic viewfinder, is a small TV that you look into. It too takes power, you have to have the camera on for it to work, and it introduces latency (something in the scene moves, and it takes the electronics to register it and displays it on the TV). But, I would still recommend carrying an extra battery.

• IBIS stabilization - The in body stabilization system, does consume a bit of weight, in terms of additional metal structures and coils around the sensor, that allows the sensor to be floated in a magnetic flux so as to move and remove the physical vibration of the camera (stabilizing the image).

Bottom line, there is no perfect camera - so you just have to choose the problems you want to live with.

Here is a comparison of the fuji bodies to the KP. Evaluation and scoring is somewhat subjective in terms of the weighting that is used. A number of capabilities on the KP are not listed - like an intervalometer, and the KP's ability to dial in extremely long exposures - beyond the standard 30 seconds, etc.

• Fujifilm X-T30 vs Pentax KP Detailed Comparison
• Fujifilm X-T3 vs Pentax KP Detailed Comparison

In terms of repair - yes, Pentax uses Precision Camera, however they also service Nikon, Olympus and Sony. I doubt that they will be going anywhere. Also, if they do go out of business, Pentax would just find another repair facility to use. It's not something I would worry about. I would also purchase a Pentax extended warranty. It use to be $20 for an additional two years, but now it's $10 (I thought that they raised the price)? However, included is a sensor cleaning (which is usually $60 - so at 2 years, 9 months or so - just send in the body for your free sensor cleaning).

• https://www.adorama.com/ipxewml.html?

Do camera bodies break - well, yes. All consumer electronics (and a DSLR or mirrorless is essentially a computer with a lens stuck on the front) suffer from infant mortality. Electronic infant mortality is a failure of the electronics early in the products life span. Usually if an electronic item is going to fail, it will fail early in its use curve - hence the warranty. I usually never buy warranties - however for a camera body, I do - for 2 reasons: 1) peace of mind; and 2) the sensor cleaning/system checkout - since that essentially pays for the warranty.

Retail stores - Essentially, Pentax has become a web company. Their products (other than B&H, Adorama, Samy's, etc. and a couple of other brick and mortar places) is available across the web (Amazon, etc.). With Pentax, you are going to be dealing with mail order.

Oh yea - before I forget, I was going to toss in one additional lens to consider. The full frame k1 kit lens - the DFA 28-105. Yes, it's a kit lens, but a very suburb kit lens - fully weather sealed, and its image quality is outstanding. It punches waaaaay above its weight - and it's very light. You seem to be using 24mm and wanting to go longer, so this will get you there in terms of some telephoto. For wide angle, using this lens - I would just go with stitched panoramas.

[mikesbike]

The DFA 28-105 f/3.5-5.6 DC WR is a very fine zoom lens- for the FF K-1, but on APS-C bodies, needing to stitch images together to get wide angle shots is more than a bit inconvenient. If considering zoom lenses any bulkier than the amazingly compact DA 18-135mm DC WR for the svelte body of the KP, might as well include the low-light capabilities of the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM. The f/2.8 is for its entire zoom range. Sharp lens, very fine imaging, very well built with silent, accurate AF, but sorry- no WR. AF speed is very good, and the DC type is much more dependable than the older Pentax SDM in this lens type, which have been infamous for repairs.

[Des]

The 20-40 or 16-85 sounds good; honestly, if I am hiking, I like one lens. I have carried an 24 prime, but there were times I wish I had a zoom to capture animals I saw, like a beaver one day.

The one lens solution that can do everything from wide angle to wildlife would be a superzoom, like the Pentax DA 18-270 (SMC Pentax-DA 18-270mm F3.5-6.3 ED SDM Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database) or the Sigma 18-300 (Sigma 18-300mm F3.5-6.3 DC Macro HSM (Contemporary) Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database). Neither is weather resistant.

However like many of us here, I have been through a superzoom phase but ultimately decided that the compromises were too great. A two lens solution is better, with telephoto duties covered by the Pentax DA 55-300 f4.5-6.3 PLM. It is relatively compact (it retracts to a small size), light (442g), WR and has the fastest autofocus of any Pentax lens. The image quality is very good for a consumer zoom, helped by HD lens coatings (reduces flare and improves contrast) and rounded aperture blades that produce pleasant bokeh. See this thread for real world samples: HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE - Show us what it can do, what it CAN'T! - PentaxForums.com

The 55-300 can be paired with any number of lenses in the wide-normal focal range. The 20-40 Limited, DA 18-135 and DA 16-85 should be on the shortlist, or you could consider a wide zoom like the DA 12-24, or a couple of primes like the DA 15 Limited, DA 21 Limited and DA 35 f2.8 Limited (which is also a macro lens). Each has its advantages and disadvantages and you will find plenty of discussions of these options on this site. There are specific threads devoted to a number of these lenses, which tell you things that the mere specs or test charts don't. Examples are:
DA 16-85 WR,show us what it can do. - PentaxForums.com
DA 18-135 WR, Show us what it can do - PentaxForums.com
DA Limited Zoom Club - PentaxForums.com (this is devoted to the DA 20-40 Limited)
The 15mm Limited controls my mind - club - PentaxForums.com

I would make the comment that some overlap in focal lengths (e.g. 16-85 and 55-300) is not a bad thing, because the lens that is on the camera might be able to do the job without having to change lenses, and because the extra focal range is useful for occasions when you leave the telephoto lens behind. You would have had a much better chance of getting a usable photo of the beaver with the 16-85 or (particularly) the 18-135 than with the 20-40. The extra reach of the 18-135 is quite handy for wildlife at times.




Conversely the 16-85 has a number of advantages for landscapes, such as HD coatings, reduced purple fringing, superior edge and corner performance and an invaluable extra 2mm of focal width. Everything is a trade-off and it depends what matters to you.

That said - and this may sound silly! - but I feel I would get great support in this community with the camera should I need it (general camera questions) and have a wonderful Pentax "family" to share with. And that's a big plus!

You are not the first to have said that. This forum is an invaluable resource, not just for Pentax-specific things but photography generally. It's also a good place to buy and sell gear. If you go the Pentax route, please consider becoming a site supporter to help keep this show on the road.

---

Last edited by Des; 03-17-2020 at 03:03 PM.

[amatula]

Thank you, Mike!
That is very helpful and I appreciate your taking the time to provide it, especially info on the 18 - 135!
My lean is towards KP still
All the best! Annie

---------- Post added 03-17-20 at 08:23 PM ----------

Good Morning, The difference in weight is centered in several areas.

• Mag alloy body - The metal magnesium alloy body does weigh more, no doubt about it,

• Weather Sealing - it does take a bit more physical structure to hold the seals, not a lot - but there is some additional machining around the various parts of the body to seal up the unit.

• Mirror box and Optical viewfinder - The mirror box, mirror and the optical viewfinder's pentaprism together does consume volume and weight. The optical viewfinder consists of a solid hunk of optical ground glass that moves the image up from the mirror, flips it over and turns it around for the user's eye to see. A pentamirror viewfinder is lighter (not solid, just a set of mirrors that perform the same function, but can get dirty, where as no dirt can get into the pentaprism. So that does weight a substantial amount. There is an up side to the pentaprism's weight. Out in the field, you don't have to turn the camera on - consuming battery power, when checking out a shot or composing an image. An electronic viewfinder, is a small TV that you look into. It too takes power, you have to have the camera on for it to work, and it introduces latency (something in the scene moves, and it takes the electronics to register it and displays it on the TV). But, I would still recommend carrying an extra battery.

• IBIS stabilization - The in body stabilization system, does consume a bit of weight, in terms of additional metal structures and coils around the sensor, that allows the sensor to be floated in a magnetic flux so as to move and remove the physical vibration of the camera (stabilizing the image).

Bottom line, there is no perfect camera - so you just have to choose the problems you want to live with.

Here is a comparison of the fuji bodies to the KP. Evaluation and scoring is somewhat subjective in terms of the weighting that is used. A number of capabilities on the KP are not listed - like an intervalometer, and the KP's ability to dial in extremely long exposures - beyond the standard 30 seconds, etc.

• Fujifilm X-T30 vs Pentax KP Detailed Comparison
• Fujifilm X-T3 vs Pentax KP Detailed Comparison

In terms of repair - yes, Pentax uses Precision Camera, however they also service Nikon, Olympus and Sony. I doubt that they will be going anywhere. Also, if they do go out of business, Pentax would just find another repair facility to use. It's not something I would worry about. I would also purchase a Pentax extended warranty. It use to be $20 for an additional two years, but now it's $10 (I thought that they raised the price)? However, included is a sensor cleaning (which is usually $60 - so at 2 years, 9 months or so - just send in the body for your free sensor cleaning).

• https://www.adorama.com/ipxewml.html?

Do camera bodies break - well, yes. All consumer electronics (and a DSLR or mirrorless is essentially a computer with a lens stuck on the front) suffer from infant mortality. Electronic infant mortality is a failure of the electronics early in the products life span. Usually if an electronic item is going to fail, it will fail early in its use curve - hence the warranty. I usually never buy warranties - however for a camera body, I do - for 2 reasons: 1) peace of mind; and 2) the sensor cleaning/system checkout - since that essentially pays for the warranty.

Retail stores - Essentially, Pentax has become a web company. Their products (other than B&H, Adorama, Samy's, etc. and a couple of other brick and mortar places) is available across the web (Amazon, etc.). With Pentax, you are going to be dealing with mail order.

Oh yea - before I forget, I was going to toss in one additional lens to consider. The full frame k1 kit lens - the DFA 28-105. Yes, it's a kit lens, but a very suburb kit lens - fully weather sealed, and its image quality is outstanding. It punches waaaaay above its weight - and it's very light. You seem to be using 24mm and wanting to go longer, so this will get you there in terms of some telephoto. For wide angle, using this lens - I would just go with stitched panoramas.

Interested Observer,
Thank you!
Checked out the 28-105 and nice images there! And I appreciate the warranty info -- I have needed a sensor cleaning so I you are right on the warranty paying for itself.
I actually broke a Nikon film camera, just from so much use outdoors... in Switzerland of all places! I used duct tape (saves about anything!) to keep it running and it still took great shots.
Thank you, again, and all the best!
Annie

---------- Post added 03-17-20 at 08:26 PM ----------

The one lens solution that can do everything from wide angle to wildlife would be a superzoom, like the Pentax DA 18-270 (SMC Pentax-DA 18-270mm F3.5-6.3 ED SDM Reviews - DA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database) or the Sigma 18-300 (Sigma 18-300mm F3.5-6.3 DC Macro HSM (Contemporary) Lens Reviews - Sigma Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database). Neither is weather resistant.

However like many of us here, I have been through a superzoom phase but ultimately decided that the compromises were too great. A two lens solution is better, with telephoto duties covered by the Pentax DA 55-300 f4.5-6.3 PLM. It is relatively compact (it retracts to a small size), light (442g), WR and has the fastest autofocus of any Pentax lens. The image quality is very good for a consumer zoom, helped by HD lens coatings (reduces flare and improves contrast) and rounded aperture blades that produce pleasant bokeh. See this thread for real world samples: HD Pentax-DA 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE - Show us what it can do, what it CAN'T! - PentaxForums.com

The 55-300 can be paired with any number of lenses in the wide-normal focal range. The 20-40 Limited, DA 18-135 and DA 16-85 should be on the shortlist, or you could consider a wide zoom like the DA 12-24, or a couple of primes like the DA 15 Limited, DA 21 Limited and DA 35 f2.8 Limited (which is also a macro lens). Each has its advantages and disadvantages and you will find plenty of discussions of these options on this site. There are specific threads devoted to a number of these lenses, which tell you things that the mere specs or test charts don't. Examples are:
DA 16-85 WR,show us what it can do. - PentaxForums.com
DA 18-135 WR, Show us what it can do - PentaxForums.com
DA Limited Zoom Club - PentaxForums.com (this is devoted to the DA 20-40 Limited)
The 15mm Limited controls my mind - club - PentaxForums.com

I would make the comment that some overlap in focal lengths (e.g. 16-85 and 55-300) is not a bad thing, because the lens that is on the camera might be able to do the job without having to change lenses, and because the extra focal range is useful for occasions when you leave the telephoto lens behind. You would have had a much better chance of getting a usable photo of the beaver with the 16-85 or (particularly) the 18-135 than with the 20-40. The extra reach of the 18-135 is quite handy for wildlife at times.




Conversely the 16-85 has a number of advantages for landscapes, such as HD coatings, reduced purple fringing, superior edge and corner performance and an invaluable extra 2mm of focal width. Everything is a trade-off and it depends what matters to you.


You are not the first to have said that. This forum is an invaluable resource, not just for Pentax-specific things but photography generally. It's also a good place to buy and sell gear. If you go the Pentax route, please consider becoming a site supporter to help keep this show on the road.

Thank you, Des!
And love your bird images, especially the 2nd -- so much sharpness too!
All the best, Annie

[MrB1]

As an all around zoom lens, the more compact DA 18-135mm would be my choice.....In the SLR section of the forums, take a look at the thread- DA 18-135mm WR Show us what it can do. You will find plenty of good examples.

I agree. If I could have only one lens for a compact yet versatile KP setup, it would be the DA 18-135. (The 16-85 is just too bulky for me.)

If I could have only two lenses for the KP, they would be the DA 18-135 and the DA 35 Limited Macro (the best APS-C lens in my experience).

Philip

[MiguelATF]

Hi!
I am so grateful to find this forum and to see so many here!

I "stumbled upon" the KP after considering a number of other brands. I liked the images I saw, especially for low light.
I am upgrading from the Canon Rebel SL1 with 24 mm F2.8 lens.

Can you tell me:

I like to be able to use my cameras for a long time (4+ years) before upgrading. I am selective shooter so don't anticipate even shooting close to 100,000 images. If you own the KP, has it been consistently reliable for you over a long time period?

I am a enthusiast level landscape shooter (acknowledging I have much yet to learn!) and I love the thought of taking photos in woods "lovely, dark and deep" (Robert Frost) so grateful for the camera's low light detail.

But.... I am also a pixel peeper (think sharp, focused images with depth of field I expect) and someone who generally prefers jpegs requiring no to minimal post-editting; I do not like to adjust colors.

Based on that, is this a good camera for me?

Also, in terms of lens, what has been your experience with the 16-50mm f/2.8 ED AL [IF] SDM?
I read reviews and seems good, although not - based on reviews - great.

What do you use/recommend (that won't break my piggy bank savings ? I love the idea of a shorter zoom, such as the above or 24-70 or prime lens in the range of 16-28.

Thank you so much for your time!
And all the best!
Annie

Hey, Annie...there is a lot of good information already in the replies you have gotten, so I will limit myself to a brief answer. FIRST: the KP is a superb camera and I suspect it will last you much longer than 5 years. I have one myself and probably the main reason I would recommend it to any photographer is, simply, the way it feels in one's hands: as though it were designed by photographers, for photographers. It's a beautifully made and thoughtfully designed camera that, the more one uses it, the more one enjoys using it.

Second - in terms of zooms - the one zoom which, if you want quality and a relatively compact size, stands out among many others, in my opinion is the DA 20-40. It doesn't have the wider range of some zooms but in terms of simple quality, it rivals and competes with many prime lenses. It's only downside is that it isn't really cheap - but in more ways than I can say, it is probably 'worth it'.

With regards to prime lenses, it depends really on how you 'see' the world. When I shot with film (Pentax) cameras back in the analog days, my favorite lens was not the so-called standard 50mm lens - but rather the 35mm - a wider-than-'normal' angle which seemed much more to correspond to the way I look at things. Pentax makes a superb and semi-affordable prime lens - the DA 21 - roughly equivalent to a 32mm field of view on a traditional full-frame camera - which would be a brilliant lens to begin with. There are 2 versions, an SMC version and a more expensive HD version; both are, in a word, superb.

I could go on and on - but that gives you the short form.
And, yes, I'll repeat myself: it's a great camera.

I own the DA 21 prime lens by the way and most of the time it is more or less permanently attached to my KP.

Good luck in making your decisions

Miguel

[amatula]

Thank you, Miguel!
I really appreciate your time and response. Yes, the 20 - 40 is tempting (and not expensive compared to other companies' top lenses!) and the 21 sounds good too (I like a little wide, but not too wide).
All the best to you (and everyone else too!),
Annie