[UncleVanya]

Here is another question I am embarrased to be asking .....if there are lenses that are specifically "50mm" or "35mm" and then theres 16-85mm.... can't that 16-85 do what the 50mm can do on its own with just more? What are the reasons to buy a lens that is only "50 or 30mm" ...I am shaking my head too haha im afraid to ask

Good answer above... but I'll give you a tiny taste of the reasons:

1) Some people are biased towards primes.

2) There are compromises in EVERY lens and all lenses zooms and primes have tradeoffs. Some Zooms can exceed primes in their output due to more extensive correction and higher end optics being included.

3) Primes can offer a smaller overall design and sometimes (not always) a faster lens (light gathering ability).

4) Cost - the cost of a very good prime is often a fraction that of a zoom that would be equivalent in quality and output. Conversely if you need a wide range of lens focal lengths a high quality zoom may be cheaper than the multiple primes you would have to have to cover the same range.

5) Workflow - some people prefer a workflow that puts them into a specific frame - a single focal length view of the world can be helpful for this. Others need rapid framing changes (like shooting a wedding) and can't take the time to swap lenses.

I use both and find both compelling. I do think overall flare is typically better controlled in primes than in zooms but this is not always true.

(Careful this is a politics and religion kind of discussion... )

[aslyfox]

And this is where I am at on the Noob status....when looking at LensRental what is the difference between Medium format and K mount capabilities?
Thank you, renting a lens will probably end up being a really great idea, I could get the camera or a kit and start learning on that and then try out one of the more pricier lenses before making a purchase in a couple months!

you want a K mount lens for the K 3

https://www.pentaxforums.com/articles/photo-articles/evolution-of-pentax-k-mount.html

there are many articles which might be of interest

https://www.pentaxforums.com/articles/photo-articles/exposure-basics-beginner-guide.html

[C_Jones]

Welcome to the forums. I use the Pentax 16-85 on a K-3II and it performs very well.

[normhead]

Here is another question I am embarrased to be asking .....if there are lenses that are specifically "50mm" or "35mm" and then theres 16-85mm.... can't that 16-85 do what the 50mm can do on its own with just more? What are the reasons to buy a lens that is only "50 or 30mm" ...I am shaking my head too haha im afraid to ask

There are overlapping thoughts going on here. You can have a 35mm lens, many Pentax lenses were originally designed for 35mm film. That may lead to confusion.

The 16-85 is a zoom lens, the focal lengths covers are from 16-85mm inclusive. So a 16-85 can be shot at 50mm. But the reason we recommend the 50 is because it opens very wide to ƒ1.8. That lets a lot of light in for low light situations, like candids at a party in your living room.

The 16-85 at 50mm is probably ƒ4 at best. That means it's letting in less than a quarter of the light an ƒ1.8 lens would. So though the 16-85 has 50mm in it's range, it doesn't do everything a 50 1.8 does. It's always good to have one lens specifically for low light situations and ƒ2 or less is usually preferable. The advantage to the 50 is, it's the cheapest way to get to sub ƒ2. All other methods are considerably more expensive.

In the old days zoom lenses and even some primes could be awful, there is an inherent bias against zoom lenses by some people. It's largely undeserved these days, you can safely buy based on focal length and aperture.

I wouldn't recommend you buy any primes besides the 50, because the 50 is in-expenive but really good. A great value for the money. For other lenses you might want to wait until you've shot a bit with zooms to find out where your preferences are in terms of how long a lens you'll be comfortable using.

Why would you buy a lens with a single focal length?

For the most part , they are lighter. often they are faster )open to wider apertures) , and sometimes they produce better image quality than corresponding zooms, at least being better in their handling of aberrations (light that doesn't go where it's supposed to) than others.

So what I do is cover the whole range I expect to encounter with zooms, and then a few primes in places where I really like a specific prime lens, more than I like the zoom Down at that focal length.

So those are the issue.
Low light capacity, how wide does it open.
Weight, are you going to get tired using it.
And image quality which includes resolution and rendering.

A lens like the 18-55 is at the bottom of the pile, not that good for low light, good but not excellent IQ, but very light and portable.
Then are the mid zooms, the 17-70, the 18-135, and the 16-85., these have everything but low light capacity.
The you have the high end zooms, most of which are ƒ2.8 zooms good combination of low light ability, good IQ but heavy.
And top of the heap you have primes... less weight, lowest CA if you buy modern ones, usually excellent IQ, but inflexible in that you have less flexibility because it doesn't zoom. You could never carry enough primes to make up for having even one zoom, so in the end you do as much as you can with zooms and primes where you can squeeze them in.

That's my take anyway.

[jatrax]

if there are lenses that are specifically "50mm" or "35mm" and then theres 16-85mm.... can't that 16-85 do what the 50mm can do on its own with just more?

Yes it can. There has traditionally been a bias toward 'prime' or single focal length lenses, particularly on this forum. The belief being that they are 'better' than a zoom, which IMHO is just a carryover from film days. The reality today is that it still might be true for the tiny percentage of photographers who can discern the difference but for the other 99% of us modern zooms like the 16-85 are just as good. And likely better than film era vintage primes which is mostly what you are going to see in Pentax land at affordable pricing.
I feel you are best to invest in good quality modern zooms like the 16-85 or the 60-250 and then if you really see the need for something special buy the prime that fits that. But only buy a prime after you know WHY you are buying that prime lens. A 100mm macro is a good example, it can do things the zoom can't but it is a special purpose lens.

---------- Post added 10-13-17 at 03:53 PM ----------

Oh and this is what happens if you start buying lenses without stopping to think if you really need them:

[aslyfox]

. . . The 16-85 is a zoom lens, the focal lengths covers are from 16-85mm inclusive. So a 16-85 can be shot at 50mm. But the reason we recommend the 50 is because it opens very wide to ƒ1.8. That lets a lot of light in for low light situations, like candids at a party in your living room.

The 16-85 at 50mm is probably ƒ4 at best. That means it's letting in less than a quarter of the light an ƒ1.8 lens would. So though the 16-85 has 50mm in it's range, it doesn't do everything a 50 1.8 does. It's always good to have one lens specifically for low light situations and ƒ2 or less is usually preferable. The advantage to the 50 is, it's the cheapest way to get to sub ƒ2. All other methods are considerably more expensive.. . .

the DA 16 - 85 mm zoom is supposed to be F 4.5 when the focal length is set from about 30 mm to 65 mm

" The maximum available aperture changes with the focal length as shown in the diagram below, which also compares the 18-85mm to other lenses, including the faster Sigma 17-70mm "Contemporary" "

Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/hd-pentax-da-16-85mm-f35-56/constructio...#ixzz4vR4KXjWB

HD Pentax-DA 16-85mm F3.5-5.6 Review - Construction and Handling | PentaxForums.com Reviews

quite a difference from the 50 mm 1.8 prime lens

[Wildbearfeet]

Yes it can. There has traditionally been a bias toward 'prime' or single focal length lenses, particularly on this forum. The belief being that they are 'better' than a zoom, which IMHO is just a carryover from film days. The reality today is that it still might be true for the tiny percentage of photographers who can discern the difference but for the other 99% of us modern zooms like the 16-85 are just as good. And likely better than film era vintage primes which is mostly what you are going to see in Pentax land at affordable pricing.
I feel you are best to invest in good quality modern zooms like the 16-85 or the 60-250 and then if you really see the need for something special buy the prime that fits that. But only buy a prime after you know WHY you are buying that prime lens. A 100mm macro is a good example, it can do things the zoom can't but it is a special purpose lens.

---------- Post added 10-13-17 at 03:53 PM ----------

Oh and this is what happens if you start buying lenses without stopping to think if you really need them:

Oh my goodness!! Bahaha
This makes great sense though!

---------- Post added 10-13-17 at 05:56 PM ----------

There are overlapping thoughts going on here. You can have a 35mm lens, many Pentax lenses were originally designed for 35mm film. That may lead to confusion.

The 16-85 is a zoom lens, the focal lengths covers are from 16-85mm inclusive. So a 16-85 can be shot at 50mm. But the reason we recommend the 50 is because it opens very wide to ƒ1.8. That lets a lot of light in for low light situations, like candids at a party in your living room.

The 16-85 at 50mm is probably ƒ4 at best. That means it's letting in less than a quarter of the light an ƒ1.8 lens would. So though the 16-85 has 50mm in it's range, it doesn't do everything a 50 1.8 does. It's always good to have one lens specifically for low light situations and ƒ2 or less is usually preferable. The advantage to the 50 is, it's the cheapest way to get to sub ƒ2. All other methods are considerably more expensive.

In the old days zoom lenses and even some primes could be awful, there is an inherent bias against zoom lenses by some people. It's largely undeserved these days, you can safely buy based on focal length and aperture.

I wouldn't recommend you buy any primes besides the 50, because the 50 is in-expenive but really good. A great value for the money. For other lenses you might want to wait until you've shot a bit with zooms to find out where your preferences are in terms of how long a lens you'll be comfortable using.

Why would you buy a lens with a single focal length?

For the most part , they are lighter. often they are faster )open to wider apertures) , and sometimes they produce better image quality than corresponding zooms, at least being better in their handling of aberrations (light that doesn't go where it's supposed to) than others.

So what I do is cover the whole range I expect to encounter with zooms, and then a few primes in places where I really like a specific prime lens, more than I like the zoom Down at that focal length.

So those are the issue.
Low light capacity, how wide does it open.
Weight, are you going to get tired using it.
And image quality which includes resolution and rendering.

A lens like the 18-55 is at the bottom of the pile, not that good for low light, good but not excellent IQ, but very light and portable.
Then are the mid zooms, the 17-70, the 18-135, and the 16-85., these have everything but low light capacity.
The you have the high end zooms, most of which are ƒ2.8 zooms good combination of low light ability, good IQ but heavy.
And top of the heap you have primes... less weight, lowest CA if you buy modern ones, usually excellent IQ, but inflexible in that you have less flexibility because it doesn't zoom. You could never carry enough primes to make up for having even one zoom, so in the end you do as much as you can with zooms and primes where you can squeeze them in.

That's my take anyway.

Thank you for this fabulous explaination it's everything I needed haha

---------- Post added 10-13-17 at 06:00 PM ----------

Good answer above... but I'll give you a tiny taste of the reasons:

1) Some people are biased towards primes.

2) There are compromises in EVERY lens and all lenses zooms and primes have tradeoffs. Some Zooms can exceed primes in their output due to more extensive correction and higher end optics being included.

3) Primes can offer a smaller overall design and sometimes (not always) a faster lens (light gathering ability).

4) Cost - the cost of a very good prime is often a fraction that of a zoom that would be equivalent in quality and output. Conversely if you need a wide range of lens focal lengths a high quality zoom may be cheaper than the multiple primes you would have to have to cover the same range.

5) Workflow - some people prefer a workflow that puts them into a specific frame - a single focal length view of the world can be helpful for this. Others need rapid framing changes (like shooting a wedding) and can't take the time to swap lenses.

I use both and find both compelling. I do think overall flare is typically better controlled in primes than in zooms but this is not always true.

(Careful this is a politics and religion kind of discussion... )

Thank you! And I totally understand how it can be like politics and religion but the explainations here are really great and have brought together my understanding on the matter for sure!

Still just need to decide what my choice of lens will be for my first one (and maybe a second)

---------- Post added 10-13-17 at 06:02 PM ----------

I have copyrighted all " stupid questions " so you are technically in violation

but I do not enforce my copyright so you are not in trouble

[ BTW there really isn't any " stupid question " ]

prime lenses vs. zoom lenses is a " discussion " that has been ongoing for years

do the research

ask questions

here is a start

Prime vs Zoom Lenses - Which are Best?

Prime vs Zoom Lenses

Prime Lens Vs Zoom Lens: What?s best for you? - Nature Photography Simplified

Prime and Zoom Lenses

Whew, skated by on that one! Haha thank you!! Can't wait to read up on all these awesome resources!

[Des]

Welcome to Pentax Forums and to the world of Pentax. When you see the great set of answers you've got, aren't you glad you came?

[Kozlok]

On a tight budget, with your intended use, I'd get the K3 used, a used 18-135, and a used 55-300. The 18-135 is better than the 18-55, and much better than the 18-50. The 16-85 is better yet, but is very rare used, so likely much dearer.
K3 used: 600
18-135 used: 225
55-300 WR used: 325

That's 1150, and will get you around just fine, If you want add the DA50/1.8 $150 (used) and D FA 100 WR ($500) for macro/bees, etc., and all-in you have an 1800 kit. Spend the last 200 on a nice bag.

It's basically the same kit Normhead recommended, but get the 18-135 used and the 55-300 WR used. The ones I recommend used are all quite common, and all very durable. I'm surprised this isn't what Norm recommended, he's quite a fan of the 18-135.

More importantly, get the book "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Petersen. It will teach you all the ins and outs of exposure.

[aslyfox]

. . . More importantly, get the book "Understanding Exposure" by Bryan Petersen. It will teach you all the ins and outs of exposure.

"This newly revised edition of Bryan Peterson's most popular book demystifies the complex concepts of exposure in photography, allowing readers to capture the images they want.

Understanding Exposure has taught generations of photographers how to shoot the images they want by demystifying the complex concepts of exposure in photography. In this newly updated edition, veteran photographer Bryan Peterson explains the fundamentals of light, aperture, and shutter speed and how they interact with and influence one another. With an emphasis on finding the right exposure even in tricky situations, Understanding Exposure shows you how to get (or lose) sharpness and contrast in images, freeze action, and take the best meter readings, while also exploring filters, flash, and light.

With all new images, as well as an expanded section on flash, tips for using colored gels, and advice on shooting star trails, this revised edition will clarify exposure for photographers of all levels . . . "

you can buy from many sources, this offers it for free but I have not used this source before, not sure if it is legit or not

[PDF/ePub Download] understanding exposure 4th edition pdf free to eBook
___________________________________________

has the OP looked at any threads depicting what folks have done with the lenses being discussed?

DA 16 - 85

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/301618-da-...ml#post3339964

DA 18 - 135

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/179869-da-...ml#post1877829

various prime lenses

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/291019-pri...ml#post3193912

DA 55 - 300 F4

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/130-lens-sample-photo-archive/153150-pen...ml#post1591882

more at

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/index13.html

[Wildbearfeet]

"This newly revised edition of Bryan Peterson's most popular book demystifies the complex concepts of exposure in photography, allowing readers to capture the images they want.

Understanding Exposure has taught generations of photographers how to shoot the images they want by demystifying the complex concepts of exposure in photography. In this newly updated edition, veteran photographer Bryan Peterson explains the fundamentals of light, aperture, and shutter speed and how they interact with and influence one another. With an emphasis on finding the right exposure even in tricky situations, Understanding Exposure shows you how to get (or lose) sharpness and contrast in images, freeze action, and take the best meter readings, while also exploring filters, flash, and light.

With all new images, as well as an expanded section on flash, tips for using colored gels, and advice on shooting star trails, this revised edition will clarify exposure for photographers of all levels . . . "

you can buy from many sources, this offers it for free but I have not used this source before, not sure if it is legit or not

[PDF/ePub Download] understanding exposure 4th edition pdf free to eBook
___________________________________________

has the OP looked at any threads depicting what folks have done with the lenses being discussed?

DA 16 - 85

DA 16-85 WR,show us what it can do. - Page 47 - PentaxForums.com

DA 18 - 135

DA 18-135 WR, Show us what it can do - Page 141 - PentaxForums.com

various prime lenses

prime, prime, everywhere a prime... - Page 153 - PentaxForums.com

DA 55 - 300 F4

Pentax DA 55-300mm f/4-5.8 ED samples - Page 10 - PentaxForums.com

more at

Pentax SLR Lens Discussion - Page 13 - PentaxForums.com

Thank you!!! I did intend to do this when I had the time to sit back down at my computer! It's such a great idea and will certainly help make my final decisions, seeing it in use is certainly what my brain needs with all this information! Such great help!

[ffking]

DA 55-300mm f/4.5-6.3 ED PLM WR RE Lens for $500

not sure if this has been said, but you'll need the latest firmware to drive the PLM motor - but hey! - you'd want that anyway

[aslyfox]

not sure if this has been said, but you'll need the latest firmware to drive the PLM motor - but hey! - you'd want that anyway

as some one has mentioned before

use the resources of the forum, found under " Lenses " to carefully review any lens you consider

for example, you might find that one of the 3 D A 55 - 300 zoom better than the others for your specific uses

based on price

based on WR

based on " the latest and greatest "

you must decide which is the deciding factor and the info here can help

[Wildbearfeet]

Okay, there is a used K3 on B&H for just under $600, body only

Adorama has none!

Is B&H a trusted site? It comes with a 90day used warranty.

I think I am def going to go with the 55-300.... but im going to read about it more and the brand of lens options. And one more lens yet to be determined haha

Thank you everyone soooo much his has been such a great help, can't wait to find more threads to help in my adventures!

[aslyfox]

Okay, there is a used K3 on B&H for just under $600, body only

Adorama has none!

Is B&H a trusted site? It comes with a 90day used warranty.

I think I am def going to go with the 55-300.... but im going to read about it more and the brand of lens options. And one more lens yet to be determined haha

Thank you everyone soooo much his has been such a great help, can't wait to find more threads to help in my adventures!

it is one of the sponsors of the forum

I have made small purchases from them, I usually find my deals in the Market Place

send a pm to Adam to inquire about any special benefits with dealing with them. I can't tell if the offered deal involves only new items or not

FREE Marketplace Access if you shop at B&H, Adorama, or Topaz Labs - PentaxForums.com