[jct us101]

I know people like giving input to these kinds of threads, so I'll give you everything I'm considering.

I have about $700 or so to spend.

Pentax K10D - $350
Pentax *ist DL - $160
Pentax 17-70mm - $450
Pentax DA 40 - $300
Pentax 16-45mm - $250
Pentax 55-300mm - $250?
Pentax 18-55mm - $50
Pentax 55-200mm - $100
Pentax DA 21mm - $350
Pentax flash (suggestions?)

Those are just ideas that I had, so if you'd like to add in other suggestions then please do. I hope you guys come up with some good combinations, and hopefully I'll decide on one that I like!

Thanks everyone.

[felixkh]

Pentax K10D + 16-45mm F4 or K10D + 17-70mm F4. You wouldn't go wrong with either

[jct us101]

And then maybe add in the 50-200 for birding? (the Canon 55-250 IS I have right now works fine).

[jct us101]

I think the main problem I'm having right now is the body selection, and I need to worry about that first in order to know how much I have left for lenses.

I've decided to create a pro and con list for each one:

*ist DL
Pros:
$160
2.5 inch LCD
very small
func menu that I loved on the *ist DS when I had it
ISO 3200
Cons:
No SR
6.1 MP
not weather sealed
no front dial (I'm used to it from Canon)
AA batteries

K10D:
Pros:
SR
Front dial
weather sealed
$350
10 MP
lithium battery
2.5 inch LCD
dedicated buttons

Cons:
ISO 1600
more expensive
much larger
heavier
No real increase in IQ

See the problem is that I could keep coming up with lists like that for each of them, but I'm leaning towards just getting the *ist DL so that I can start investing more in good lenses, and maybe the K10D price will continue to go down when the K-7 is released. If I get the *ist DL it's half the price, and I'm honestly not missing enough for it to matter, and I can add in that DA 40 pancake that I've been wanting to have.

So I guess I kinda decided in my own post, interesting when that happens isn't it? Although I just remembered how big SR is.

Now what lenses should I get?

---

Last edited by jct us101; 05-02-2009 at 02:09 AM.

[simico]

And then maybe add in the 50-200 for birding? (the Canon 55-250 IS I have right now works fine).

The 50-200 is not really long enough for birding in my experience, unless you want to shoot giant birds I'd advise the 55-300 not only for more reach, but also for better IQ.
I was thinking about getting myself into this bird shooting thing, but I couldn't get close enough to the birds with the 50-200 and also found that IQ could be better at 200. Probably 55-300 will be my first lens purchase (only have the 2 kit lens so far) if I ever get enough spare money for it in this economy...

[pingflood]

Yeah, on a crop body 300mm would be MINIMUM for birding. I just got a 400 on full frame and it really isn't long enough (but anything longer would be prohibitively expensive if I want to stick with primes) so looking at adding a 1.4x TC on top of it.

Also, I'd try a zoom first, see if you end up like I did with it racked all the way out the entire time. If so, just get a prime.

[ryan s]

Another thread? Seriously? Do you dress yourself in the morning? Do you go into a restaurant and ask everyone how their food tastes and if they'd recommend it? :ugh:

Even at 300mm, I find myself doing 100% crops for birds to even show up in the frame, unless one lands like right next to me or I can walk up to it...

[Cosmo]

K10D + DA 40mm

[Marc Sabatella]

Based on your pro/con list, the K-m seems a pretty obvious choice (assuming you don't stumble upon a K200D). No way would I be buying a body without SR at this point. But I wouldn't give up the K200D. The world's a big place.

BTW, the ISO 3200 on the DL is nothing to write home about. All it does is shoot underexposed at ISO 1600 and then push the results a stop in the in-camera processing. My K200D looks at least as good, and probably a little better, if I do the same thing myself.

As for AA batteries being a con, there's no accounting for taste, I suppose. But know that the Pentax cameras that use them get as many if not more shots per charge using Eneloops or similar modern hybrid rechargeables than the K10D or K20D do using their proprietary batteries - plus they'll probably last longer, are cheaper to replace if/when they do die, and will always be readily available (unlike the no-longer-available proprietary batteries for a dozen or so fully functional but now-useless electronic devices I have in my closet with dead batteries).

[Jewelltrail]

jct us101: .......but I'm leaning towards just getting the *ist DL so that I can start investing more in good lenses, and maybe the K10D price will continue to go down when the K-7 is released. If I get the *ist DL it's half the price, and I'm honestly not missing enough for it to matter, and I can add in that DA 40 pancake that I've been wanting to have.

This sounds like a sound decision to me and one that maximizes IQ for the $$. After all, it is all about the glass!

I like Shake Reduction, but millions of great pictures were gotten long before it arrived. The best SR tool still has 3 legs.

Also, a $160 investment in the body minimizes the $$ lost when you do upgrade someday. That Da 40 is a well-loved piece of glass. You have $700 for a budget--I think you have prioritized your needs accordingly.

You could also pick up the Tamron 28-75mm f 2.8 for in the $380 range--new

[KungPOW]

if you get the *istDL, it is only because it looks like a "good deal". The DL is a much older camera, and is not nearly as good as the K10d, 30D, K100D, or the XSi.

Get the K10D and stop worrying about camera to camera features and finding great deals.

Get the 18-55 kit zoom and the FA 50 1.4 and go out and push the camera to its limits.

Then when you know where the camera or lens falls short, upgrade.

Do yourself a favour, and stop reading camera reviews.

[jct us101]

Yeah that's what I'm leaning more towards. And I really loved my *ist DS when I had it in the first place...the only thing that bothered me with it was the small LCD (even though I know we're not supposed to think of these things)...so I think I'm going to go with the two kits and the DA 40.

Oh, and birding isn't possible with 200mm?

[jct us101]

if you get the *istDL, it is only because it looks like a "good deal". The DL is a much older camera, and is not nearly as good as the K10d, 30D, K100D, or the XSi.

Get the K10D and stop worrying about camera to camera features and finding great deals.

Get the 18-55 kit zoom and the FA 50 1.4 and go out and push the camera to its limits.

Then when you know where the camera or lens falls short, upgrade.

Do yourself a favour, and stop reading camera reviews.

So you're saying that the K1000 isn't good because it's old?

[65535]

For that price the DL is an incredible camera. the only thing wrong with is is the slower af in low light than the slightly improved, more recent cameras. its photos remain top notch however. Wish i'd kept mine.

Buy an old k-mount 50mm/1.4

The m42 and k-mount versions are much, much better than the FA version, though AF is nice to have.

[KungPOW]

So you're saying that the K1000 isn't good because it's old?

No, thats not the logical conclusion you should take from my advice.

I'm saying the K10D is a better camera then the *istDL.

Better viewfinder, controls, AF, image processor, screen, build, hyper program, iso control, flash control, and SR.

The *istDL was an entry level body. The K10D was the top level body.

After all the cameras you have gone through, why do you think you will be happy with the DL?

Do you have a K1000?