Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-13-2015, 09:57 AM   #16
Pentaxian
bertwert's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Golden, BC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,902
QuoteOriginally posted by fotograffiti Quote
That's a smokin' deal! I have to sell a few legacy lenses first before I can buy anything. Fingers crossed.
I would get that if I were you
Good luck selling.

11-15-2015, 12:42 PM   #17
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Philly
Posts: 117
Original Poster
Hi everyone.

First of all, thanks for the warm welcome. I was first drawn to Pentax because of the features on the camera for a good price. Great Value. But I think the most important thing for me is that this forum feels very mature and my impression is that the Pentax users are unpretentious.

I have never used a dslr. So I was really excited when it arrived yesterday. I spent today walking around snapping random things. I previously used an Olympus XZ-1. I can't believe that dslrs are now at a similar price point as compacts. I guess that's a side effect of mirrorless.

Anyway, I thought my photos would immediately look 10x better than my old camera. But what the k-50 did was exposed (no pun intended) my flaws as a photographer. There is so much for me to learn and I'm really excited to do it with this camera and community. Anyway, here are some pictures that I thought are acceptable for a beginner like me. Already I feel like I need more lenses.






Last edited by nabwong; 11-15-2015 at 03:07 PM.
11-15-2015, 01:57 PM   #18
Pentaxian
bertwert's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Golden, BC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,902
QuoteOriginally posted by nabwong Quote
Already I feel like I need more lenses.
Oh dear... LBA has struck again!
11-15-2015, 02:06 PM   #19
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,786
Your world will never be the same.

QuoteQuote:
Anyway, I thought my photos would immediately look 10x better than my old camera. But what the k-50 did was exposed (no punt intended) my flaws as a photographer.
What no one ever mentions is, every time you increase format size, your DOF gets narrower and narrower. It actually takes more skill to shoot in a larger format, with more possibility of messing up. But, when you nail it, the results are worth it.

The larger the format, the more critical the place you focus is.


Last edited by normhead; 11-17-2015 at 06:53 AM.
11-16-2015, 06:58 AM   #20
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Philly
Posts: 117
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by bertwert Quote
Oh dear... LBA has struck again!
What do you think is more useful at the moment? The 35mm f2.4 for indoor/low light or a longer zoom (18-135 or 55-300).
11-16-2015, 07:39 AM   #21
Pentaxian
bertwert's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Golden, BC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,902
Did you buy any lenses with your K-50? DA-L 18-55?
What do you like to shoot?
11-16-2015, 08:35 AM   #22
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Philly
Posts: 117
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by bertwert Quote
Did you buy any lenses with your K-50? DA-L 18-55?
What do you like to shoot?
I have the 18-55. I like to walk around the city, shooting architecture, plants, cityscape. I also like taking pictures of my kids (3 year old), indoors and outdoors. Every summer, we travel as a family to a foreign city, usually for a conference but add vacation time.
11-16-2015, 08:45 AM   #23
Pentaxian
bertwert's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Golden, BC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,902
I'm not sure.
If you want a more tele lens get the DA 55-300.
If you want a faster prime DA 35 or DA 50.
These are the budget options, what sort of budget do you have for lenses?

11-17-2015, 05:47 AM   #24
mmm
Kerrowdown's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Highlands of Scotland.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 30,701
QuoteOriginally posted by fotograffiti Quote
Do you guys and gals only shoot with digital lenses?
What's a digital lens...

11-17-2015, 04:34 PM   #25
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Philly
Posts: 117
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by bertwert Quote
I'm not sure.
If you want a more tele lens get the DA 55-300.
If you want a faster prime DA 35 or DA 50.
These are the budget options, what sort of budget do you have for lenses?
I guess a few hundred each lens, with an eye on value. I don't see myself being more than just a hobbyist. I definitely just love taking pictures and I'm not into making money or anything.
11-17-2015, 06:58 PM   #26
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,786
Get the 50 1.8 , just because it's 1.8 and it's really cheap. After that, the 35 is my least used lens. It's prime, it's just odd on APS-c. The 21 I use a lot more often, but it's a lot more money. Say a couple hundred on each lens so three lenses, the 50 is about $100 right now. I'd go for the 55-300 if you want long. I went for years with the 18-55, a Sigma 70-300 (the 55-300 is much better, and hadn't been released when I was buying,) My FA 50 1.7 and the DA 10-17 fisheye. Once I retired and could devote more time to photography, I bought more. If memory serves me well the next thing I bought was the 18-135, a lens I still treasure. And it costs now a fraction of what I paid for it. The thing is, I used the 18-55 for years. It's a decent lens. Starting out, I wouldn't buy anything that duplicates what you already have. Extend your range first, that will let you establish what you really like.
11-18-2015, 09:09 AM   #27
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Philly
Posts: 117
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Get the 50 1.8 , just because it's 1.8 and it's really cheap. After that, the 35 is my least used lens. It's prime, it's just odd on APS-c. The 21 I use a lot more often, but it's a lot more money. Say a couple hundred on each lens so three lenses, the 50 is about $100 right now. I'd go for the 55-300 if you want long. I went for years with the 18-55, a Sigma 70-300 (the 55-300 is much better, and hadn't been released when I was buying,) My FA 50 1.7 and the DA 10-17 fisheye. Once I retired and could devote more time to photography, I bought more. If memory serves me well the next thing I bought was the 18-135, a lens I still treasure. And it costs now a fraction of what I paid for it. The thing is, I used the 18-55 for years. It's a decent lens. Starting out, I wouldn't buy anything that duplicates what you already have. Extend your range first, that will let you establish what you really like.
Good advice. Thanks. Yeah, I'm definitely eyeing the 55-300. It would be nice to have on vacation in nature.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
lenses
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Streets Philadelphia, 2014 oculus Post Your Photos! 2 11-30-2014 09:16 AM
Streets Philadelphia, 2014 oculus Post Your Photos! 2 11-12-2014 04:35 PM
New and Near Philadelphia EWST Welcomes and Introductions 9 01-26-2014 01:51 PM
Cityscape Philadelphia @ Night frattofoto Photo Critique 13 11-02-2011 09:08 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:36 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top