Aloha from Seattle & question

TrailRunner · 10-28-2014, 02:34 PM

Hi all,
Great to see this resource here. Looking forward to learning from you all.
Would love some guidance in selecting the first lens (or two) for my new K3.
I'm a newbie, but excited to take my photography to the next level (from point and shoot)
Looking for lenses under $300, and plan to take mostly landscape and family portrait pics (of my family, not professionally of course). Wanting something that offers high performance in low light, and a rather wide angle. Thanks much!

**Kerrowdown** · 10-28-2014, 03:04 PM

Welcome to the forum, have a look at the lens review section here, it may well help you decide.

Jean Poitiers · 10-28-2014, 03:08 PM

Bonjour from France and welcome to PF, TrailRunner ... Hope to see some images soon! Salut, J

Two prime lens suggestions: the DA 35:2.4 and the DA 50:1.8 ... the so-called "Plastic Fantastics" !!! Great bang for the buck, hands down.

TrailRunner · 10-28-2014, 04:01 PM

Thanks for the words of welcome :-)
I've read some of the reviews on the plastic fantastics. Those look like a great starting point. May I inquire, what are the circumstances that would lead to choosing one over the other for a shot?
Thanks again :-)

Undot · 10-28-2014, 04:21 PM

Hello there and welcome to the forums. With the K-3 you picked a very nice piece of gear to step up from point and shoot.

Did you get a kit lens with it? Depending on its range you could try around with the different focal lengths to get a feel for what kind of prime would best suit your needs.

The 50mm 1.8 is, just as advertised, your typical portrait lens. And I think it's way worth its money. So if you're interested in that type of photography this might be the pick. It lets you take very nice close-ups or keep a bit of distance for full body shots (it is a mild tele). Some prefer to use 100mm or such for portraits, even, but you would need that much more space. Not a bad thing for kids, of course, as you get to stay out of the way.

I had to do some upper torso shots in more confined space recently and got the 35mm 2.4 for it, in addition to the 50mm. As I understand the 35mm is typical for for street photography, since it's roughly your normal field of view. I do think they complement each other quite nicely.
In hindsight the 40mm limited may have been the better choice for me, just one lens in the middle of those focal lengths, but it is more expensive, too.

For landscape an extreme-wide angle could be something to look into, but those are probably a tad out of your price range. I think the Tamron 10-24mm ain't too far off, being one of the cheapest options (not sure about primes though).

Oh... I'm still rather a newbie, too. Just some thoughts, they're not backed by too much experience!

Jean Poitiers · 10-29-2014, 12:51 AM

Originally posted by Undot

Hello there and welcome to the forums. With the K-3 you picked a very nice piece of gear to step up from point and shoot.

Did you get a kit lens with it? Depending on its range you could try around with the different focal lengths to get a feel for what kind of prime would best suit your needs.

The 50mm 1.8 is, just as advertised, your typical portrait lens. And I think it's way worth its money. So if you're interested in that type of photography this might be the pick. It lets you take very nice close-ups or keep a bit of distance for full body shots (it is a mild tele). Some prefer to use 100mm or such for portraits, even, but you would need that much more space. Not a bad thing for kids, of course, as you get to stay out of the way.

I had to do some upper torso shots in more confined space recently and got the 35mm 2.4 for it, in addition to the 50mm. As I understand the 35mm is typical for for street photography, since it's roughly your normal field of view. I do think they complement each other quite nicely.
In hindsight the 40mm limited may have been the better choice for me, just one lens in the middle of those focal lengths, but it is more expensive, too.

For landscape an extreme-wide angle could be something to look into, but those are probably a tad out of your price range. I think the Tamron 10-24mm ain't too far off, being one of the cheapest options (not sure about primes though).

Oh... I'm still rather a newbie, too. Just some thoughts, they're not backed by too much experience!

Bonjour,

Good advice and input, Undot. +1

On the (cropped) APS-C sensor, the DA 50 shoots like a "75mm" which is a classic portrait length. (50 x 1.5) and the DA 35 shots like a classic "50 mm" (actually 53.5) length which is what the human eye tends to see. Also, as an extra bonus, both lenses are Full Frame compatible ... in case that FF Pentax body ever sees the light of day in the future. Most other DA lenses will not work on a FF body ...

Salut, J

10-28-2014, 02:34 PM	#1
TrailRunner Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Sammamish, WA Posts: 46	Aloha from Seattle & question Hi all, Great to see this resource here. Looking forward to learning from you all. Would love some guidance in selecting the first lens (or two) for my new K3. I'm a newbie, but excited to take my photography to the next level (from point and shoot) Looking for lenses under $300, and plan to take mostly landscape and family portrait pics (of my family, not professionally of course). Wanting something that offers high performance in low light, and a rather wide angle. Thanks much!

10-28-2014, 04:21 PM	#5
Undot Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2014 Posts: 176	Hello there and welcome to the forums. With the K-3 you picked a very nice piece of gear to step up from point and shoot. Did you get a kit lens with it? Depending on its range you could try around with the different focal lengths to get a feel for what kind of prime would best suit your needs. The 50mm 1.8 is, just as advertised, your typical portrait lens. And I think it's way worth its money. So if you're interested in that type of photography this might be the pick. It lets you take very nice close-ups or keep a bit of distance for full body shots (it is a mild tele). Some prefer to use 100mm or such for portraits, even, but you would need that much more space. Not a bad thing for kids, of course, as you get to stay out of the way. I had to do some upper torso shots in more confined space recently and got the 35mm 2.4 for it, in addition to the 50mm. As I understand the 35mm is typical for for street photography, since it's roughly your normal field of view. I do think they complement each other quite nicely. In hindsight the 40mm limited may have been the better choice for me, just one lens in the middle of those focal lengths, but it is more expensive, too. For landscape an extreme-wide angle could be something to look into, but those are probably a tad out of your price range. I think the Tamron 10-24mm ain't too far off, being one of the cheapest options (not sure about primes though). Oh... I'm still rather a newbie, too. Just some thoughts, they're not backed by too much experience! Last edited by Undot; 10-28-2014 at 04:41 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Aloha from Australia.	Corbs	Welcomes and Introductions	9	11-05-2013 09:48 AM
Aloha from Maui	jonnyhooks	Welcomes and Introductions	6	03-27-2013 12:01 AM
Aloha from Wahiawa Hawaii	Beach Bum Brian	Welcomes and Introductions	7	03-20-2013 08:39 PM
Aloha from Hawaii!!	aniro	Welcomes and Introductions	2	01-15-2013 02:53 PM
Aloha from Hawaii	HawaiianOnline	Welcomes and Introductions	2	02-07-2007 10:37 AM

10-28-2014, 03:04 PM	#2
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,816	Welcome to the forum, have a look at the lens review section here, it may well help you decide.

10-28-2014, 03:08 PM	#3
Jean Poitiers Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Lost in translation ... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 18,076	*Bonjour* from France and welcome to PF, TrailRunner ... Hope to see some images soon! *Salut*, J Two prime lens suggestions: the DA 35:2.4 and the DA 50:1.8 ... the so-called "Plastic Fantastics" !!! Great bang for the buck, hands down.

10-28-2014, 04:01 PM	#4
TrailRunner Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Sammamish, WA Posts: 46 Original Poster	Thanks for the words of welcome :-) I've read some of the reviews on the plastic fantastics. Those look like a great starting point. May I inquire, what are the circumstances that would lead to choosing one over the other for a shot? Thanks again :-)

10-29-2014, 12:51 AM	#6
Jean Poitiers Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Lost in translation ... Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 18,076	Originally posted by Undot Hello there and welcome to the forums. With the K-3 you picked a very nice piece of gear to step up from point and shoot. Did you get a kit lens with it? Depending on its range you could try around with the different focal lengths to get a feel for what kind of prime would best suit your needs. The 50mm 1.8 is, just as advertised, your typical portrait lens. And I think it's way worth its money. So if you're interested in that type of photography this might be the pick. It lets you take very nice close-ups or keep a bit of distance for full body shots (it is a mild tele). Some prefer to use 100mm or such for portraits, even, but you would need that much more space. Not a bad thing for kids, of course, as you get to stay out of the way. I had to do some upper torso shots in more confined space recently and got the 35mm 2.4 for it, in addition to the 50mm. As I understand the 35mm is typical for for street photography, since it's roughly your normal field of view. I do think they complement each other quite nicely. In hindsight the 40mm limited may have been the better choice for me, just one lens in the middle of those focal lengths, but it is more expensive, too. For landscape an extreme-wide angle could be something to look into, but those are probably a tad out of your price range. I think the Tamron 10-24mm ain't too far off, being one of the cheapest options (not sure about primes though). Oh... I'm still rather a newbie, too. Just some thoughts, they're not backed by too much experience! *Bonjour, Good advice and input, Undot. +1 On the (cropped) APS-C sensor, the DA 50 shoots like a "75mm" which is a classic portrait length. (50 x 1.5) and the DA 35 shots like a classic "50 mm" (actually 53.5) length which is what the human eye tends to see. Also, as an extra bonus, both lenses are Full Frame compatible ... in case that FF Pentax body ever sees the light of day in the future. Most other DA lenses will not work on a FF body ... Salut*, J