[IsaacT]

Welcome to the forum. I thought lasers was bad for dslr sensors?

I would hear your thoughts on this. I love my camera and would hate to mess it up with my lasers. I never point my lasers into the camera, but can damage occur from long exposures of the beams pointing elsewhere?


------------------

As for lenses I plan to go down to the shop today and check out all of the budget lenses. I am also going to meet a guy who is selling a Tamron AF75-300mm Macro for 50 bucks which I might take. My objection is definitely not with switching lenses but with my budget haha. Buying two lenses of good optical quality would be impossible for me at the moment. I do like the idea of WR and would like to have atleast one WR lens.

[MarkJerling]

I would hear your thoughts on this. I love my camera and would hate to mess it up with my lasers. I never point my lasers into the camera, but can damage occur from long exposures of the beams pointing elsewhere?

As for lenses I plan to go down to the shop today and check out all of the budget lenses. I am also going to meet a guy who is selling a Tamron AF75-300mm Macro for 50 bucks which I might take. My objection is definitely not with switching lenses but with my budget haha. Buying two lenses of good optical quality would be impossible for me at the moment. I do like the idea of WR and would like to have atleast one WR lens.

See this post: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/190585-cmos-laser-damage.html
And this one: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/157971-caution-y...ned-laser.html

Can't say how accurate this information is.

I only have one WR lens, and I would really like another. (I've only got the 18-55mm in WR) A longer lens would be great in WR, for my usage.

[Des]

As for lenses I plan to go down to the shop today and check out all of the budget lenses. I am also going to meet a guy who is selling a Tamron AF75-300mm Macro for 50 bucks which I might take. My objection is definitely not with switching lenses but with my budget haha. Buying two lenses of good optical quality would be impossible for me at the moment. I do like the idea of WR and would like to have atleast one WR lens.

Did you read the reviews of the Tamron? Tamron 75-300mm F4-5.6 LD Lens Reviews - Tamron Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database
I would strongly suggest that you spend an extra $100 and get a Pentax DA-L 55-300, especially as you are likely to use it at the long end. It is an absolute bargain at about $150. I think many forum members would say that if they made a mistake in buying lenses it was getting inferior ones when a much better option was available for not much more.

[IsaacT]

Ah I see. So the sensor took a direct hit from the laser. Well, I make sure no beams enter my sensor and I have never had a problem with it. A lot of us on the laser forums shoot DSLR's and just make sure to be careful with our cameras. If my laser hit a sensor it would put a burn mark on the sensor so I have to be super careful anyway. I setup the shot with the lens cap on, then I remove the cap, take the exposure, and then turn off the laser.

And I did end up buying that lens today. 50 dollars is a small investment and it gave me an idea of what I will need for a dedicated lens. It is a decent lens from what I can tell during the day, but at night I had to shoot 1/15th f/5.6 ISO-12500 to get anything. So I will abviously need to get a faster zoom if I want to do night shots. Will be trying a long exposure of the moon later tonight though. We will see how that goes.

[IsaacT]

Ah I see. So the sensor took a direct hit from the laser. Well, I make sure no beams enter my sensor and I have never had a problem with it. A lot of us on the laser forums shoot DSLR's and just make sure to be careful with our cameras. If my laser hit a sensor it would put a burn mark on the sensor so I have to be super careful anyway. I setup the shot with the lens cap on, then I remove the cap, take the exposure, and then turn off the laser.

And I did end up buying that lens today. 50 dollars is a small investment and it gave me an idea of what I will need for a dedicated lens. It is a decent lens from what I can tell during the day, but at night I had to shoot 1/15th f/5.6 ISO-12500 to get anything. So I will abviously need to get a faster zoom if I want to do night shots. Will be trying a long exposure of the moon later tonight though. We will see how that goes.

[mee]

Tamron AF70-300mm f/4-5.6 DI LD Macro - This lens is very tempting because it is only 199, and it has macro with telephoto. The downside is no wide angle capabilities.

It is only 199 for a reason.

You are having illusions of finding the perfect lens.. wide angle .. long telephoto reach.. fast aperture.. and affordable.

This lens only exists in our dreams.

It is smarter to get a wide lens with a much shorter reach that is faster. And a separate lens for reach. Maybe a 3rd lens for actual macro.

You will want multiple lenses that each have a purpose. That is the joy and one of the points of an ILC style camera. Otherwise you wouldn't want an SLR.. you would want a bridge camera!

---------- Post added 07-28-14 at 11:06 PM ----------

btw that tamron and any zoom (of which I'm aware) that specifies 'Macro' is not a true full 1:1 ratio macro lens. Here is a link to confuse you -->
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/56396-whats...1-2-macro.html

here is a Canon link that gives a visual representation of what 1:1 vs 1:2 or 1:3 means to you macro 1:2 vs 1:1 - Canon Digital Photography Forums

[Des]

And I did end up buying that lens today. 50 dollars is a small investment and it gave me an idea of what I will need for a dedicated lens. It is a decent lens from what I can tell during the day, but at night I had to shoot 1/15th f/5.6 ISO-12500 to get anything. So I will abviously need to get a faster zoom if I want to do night shots. Will be trying a long exposure of the moon later tonight though. We will see how that goes.

Well good luck with the Tamron. You are already discovering that all lens choices are a compromise. You want a high IQ, fast, long AF telephoto lens that also does macro, doesn't weigh a ton, and doesn't cost much? Don't we all.

[IsaacT]

Lol yeah I want an:

AF 18-1000mm f/1.4-2.8 Macro(1:1) with a metal mount, smooth focusing, and I want to pay 150 bucks. If y'all can make that happen I'll be oh-so-grateful!

I am considering some Astrophotography so I will likely look into getting a dedicated wide angle. Possibly the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.3 EX DC. Will have to save up for a month or so but I am coming to terms with that.

[Des]

Lol yeah I want an:

AF 18-1000mm f/1.4-2.8 Macro(1:1) with a metal mount, smooth focusing, and I want to pay 150 bucks. If y'all can make that happen I'll be oh-so-grateful!

Only starting at 18mm? And variable aperture? Apart from the $150 purchase price, don't forget the cost of the team of sherpas who'll be carrying it around.

I am considering some Astrophotography so I will likely look into getting a dedicated wide angle. Possibly the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.3 EX DC. Will have to save up for a month or so but I am coming to terms with that.

I thought a wide angle would be next!

Plenty of good lenses to choose from:
DA 12-24mm vs Sigma and Tamron 10-24mm Comparison - Introduction - In-Depth Reviews
Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 vs F4.0-5.6 - Introduction - In-Depth Reviews
Samyang 10mm F2.8 ED AS NCS CS - Introduction - In-Depth Reviews

Might take more than a month of saving though - that is if you plan to eat and pay rent for that month.

[MarkJerling]

Ah I see. So the sensor took a direct hit from the laser. Well, I make sure no beams enter my sensor and I have never had a problem with it. A lot of us on the laser forums shoot DSLR's and just make sure to be careful with our cameras. If my laser hit a sensor it would put a burn mark on the sensor so I have to be super careful anyway. I setup the shot with the lens cap on, then I remove the cap, take the exposure, and then turn off the laser.

Well, I think your techniques sounds like a good idea, all things considered.

[TER-OR]

Skip the Tamron 70-300, it will suck on your K5. Go straight for the 55-300 if you want a long zoom.

Another lens to think about indoors is a 16-45, the wide side is very good. The 10-17 fisheye might be extremely fun with the lasers, 170 degree FOV is spectacular. At 17mm, though, the UWA aspect of the lens is hard to beat!

Yellow with these manual lenses is all white balance, which can be fixed in post processing but your camera might have been set up with a WB selection as mentioned earlier. There's no better way to learn a camera than using it manually, and Pentax makes that easier.

[IsaacT]

I think my next lens will be the Sigma 10-20mm but I need to decide which to get. The f/3.5 is faster than the f/4-5.6 but is 260 dollars more. The f/4-5.6 is on sale right now at 399. The f/3.5 has HSM also which is cool/as opposed to the screw AF on the f/4-5.6

[Des]

I think my next lens will be the Sigma 10-20mm but I need to decide which to get. The f/3.5 is faster than the f/4-5.6 but is 260 dollars more. The f/4-5.6 is on sale right now at 399. The f/3.5 has HSM also which is cool/as opposed to the screw AF on the f/4-5.6

I assume you have read the PF staff comparative review of these two lenses? Read it carefully, not just the conclusion.

Here is a case for the f4-5.6 (given the relative prices):
1. HSM might be "cool" but screw drive is simple and reliable. And faster: in the PF forum test the f4-5.6 focused faster than the f3.5. Does it really matter if it is a bit noisier?
2. Most of the time with ultrawide lenses (e.g. for landscapes) you want to maximise depth of field, so it doesn't matter that the lens is slower. The Pentax 12-24 is only f4 and it's a fine fine lens. Also with a wide angle, in low light you can get away with a slower aperture at a wide angle than you could with a telephoto lens. Anyway at 10mm you are only talking about the difference between f3.5 and f4. And the cheaper lens seems to perform well wide open.
3. The f4-5.6 is lighter and less bulky and takes 77mm filters.
4. In the PF test there was little difference in IQ. Certainly not $260 worth.

One thing you might not have considered. All ultrawide lenses produce distortion and are prone to vignetting, falloff and chromatic aberrations. Do you have good software for post processing to correct these things (e.g. Lightroom, DxO Optics Pro)? If not, factor in the cost of that too.

[IsaacT]

Good to know! I am somewhat worried about what sort of software I will need to buy for astrophotography. I am only planning on shooting scenic shots, not necessarily any deep space stuff. I will try my hand at the moon though but that will be a bit as it is a new moon right now.

Trying my 50mm f/1.7 out tonight. Gonna try to drive out to a dark sky site. I bought a wireless remote and I already had a tripod. Is there anything else I would need? Any advice? My plan is to try multiple methods. I will take a number of 4-10 second exposures at wide aperture and ISO-1600-6400 to see what happens and then I will take a ton of short exposure lower ISO shots and try stacking them together with Registax. If I can get away with Registax it will help the budget, otherwise I will need to look into paid programs.

[Des]

I think my next lens will be the Sigma 10-20mm but I need to decide which to get. The f/3.5 is faster than the f/4-5.6 but is 260 dollars more. The f/4-5.6 is on sale right now at 399.

$350: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/94-pentax-price-watch/268889-sigma-specia...5mm-850-a.html
Might help you decide!

With the money saved (compared to the f3.5) you could also replace your Tamron 75-300 with a second-hand Pentax DA-L 55-300 (say $110 changeover) and buy a DA 35. (LBA makes you good at rationalising like this!)