[Ex Finn.]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

K5 with WR kit lens if budget allows. That should keep you entertained for a good while. And you will most likely like the ergonomics.
The K5 is on my "to buy"list. I am holding off because my K7 is fulfilling my shooting needs at the moment.

---

Last edited by Ex Finn.; 11-16-2010 at 04:34 PM.

[paperbag846]

Don't invest in bodies, invest in glass. Buy the KX or something in that price range - you won't regret that. You will save 1000 dollars between the K-5 and the KX - one or two nice lenses. Those lenses will be with you in 20 years... but no matter what body you buy, it will eventually break!

Chasing technology is very expensive. In 3 years, the K-5 will cost as much as a k20d does today, but the DA* 16-50 will likely be the same price. Invest in the glass, and be happy that the KX is a VERY capable body, especially for it's current price tag!

Look at it this way - a KX with a limited prime attached will take much nicer photos than a K-5 with the kit lens attached.

[edgedemon]

Don't invest in bodies, invest in glass. Buy the KX or something in that price range - you won't regret that. You will save 1000 dollars between the K-5 and the KX - one or two nice lenses. Those lenses will be with you in 20 years... but no matter what body you buy, it will eventually break!

Chasing technology is very expensive. In 3 years, the K-5 will cost as much as a k20d does today, but the DA* 16-50 will likely be the same price. Invest in the glass, and be happy that the KX is a VERY capable body, especially for it's current price tag!

Look at it this way - a KX with a limited prime attached will take much nicer photos than a K-5 with the kit lens attached.

Ok, OK, Im convinced

I will either get a k-x or a k-r and invest in a good lens, that seems to be the way to go based on the feedback..
When I go for this, what would be a good lens to get?

If you can suggest something and I will go off and hunt for pricing and have a think on my priorities as I will probably only get one or 2 depending on price..

I love my landscapes when on holiday - food for the soul, and Id love to capture that.

Im forever trying to get decent macro shots from my garden with my P&S, but I cant just get close enough..

I like taking street photography, people, buildings, but my S95 will do for now as it is pocketable so this is probably lower priority..

I would love to go get some of the creamy waterfall shots, I love them

Depth of field - want to play with this..

Lastly, I really want to play with shooting liquid dropping into a bowl of different liquid, or maybe tiny objects falling into liquid. I know I will need a remote and a tripod for this. I have a diffuser I can use and will play around with lighting and see where I go. I just want to play

Lastly - a big thanks to all you guys, I was guided here by someone mentioning all the old manual lenses who suggested getting a Pentax to learn on. I know they are not the most fashionable brand, but this community and its friendliness has helped me to make my mind up over what system to go for.
Please accept my thanks and give yourself a pat on the back/round of applause, as I really appreciate it...

Thanks guys

edit

SRS seem to have a good deal..

PENTAX K-x + 18-55 BLACK MEGABUNDLE - NEW - 2 YR GTEE on eBay (end time 21-Nov-10 19:31:30 GMT)


or this one - says 3 lenses, but they look like add ons to me?

NEW PENTAX K-X 12.4 MP BK DSLR CAMERA 18-55MM~3LENS KIT on eBay (end time 16-Dec-10 08:08:38 GMT)

[bfo]

Without knowing your needs, it's kind of difficult giving any specific advice, but I'll try anyway.

You look set on the K-x, so I'll try to give some advice on lenses/kits.

First: The second offer above does not include 3 lenses. It includes some (probably really crappy) converters wich (extremely simplified) will make the included 18-55 mm lens:
With wide angle converter: 9-28mm
With telecoverter: 36-110mm
this will however come at the cost of seriously shitty image quality.
In short: don't go there.

I think you shold consider something like this:

Pentax K-x Digital SLR with 18-55mm and 55-300mm Zoom 15801 B&H

the 18-55mm lens is the same as in the offers you have already looked into on ebay, wheras the 55-300mm is a really good quality telezoom. Most serious retaliers price this at approx. $ 350. It's quality is generally regarded as better than i.e. the 50-200mm.

Then try to find out what focal lenghts you like, and buy primes according to that. If you are to go seriously into macro, you will need dedicated lenses, like this:
Pentax smc Pentax-D FA 100mm f/2.8 WR Macro Lens 21910 B&H Photo

or this

Pentax SMCP-DA 35mm f/2.8 Macro Limited Series Autofocus 21730

Good luck!

[edgedemon]

Thanks for that

The 2 macro lenses have been added to my list for research and I will check UK offers for a similar one to the B&H deal....

As for needs, Im not sure what you mean, in the post above I was trying to predict what photo's I would want to take, so I could get some suggestions on what lenses would be suitable..

The plan is to then price up the lenses, read the reviews and make a decision over what to buy first, based on what I think Im likely to want to shoot the most to begin with..

[NaClH2O]

Thanks for that

The 2 macro lenses have been added to my list for research and I will check UK offers for a similar one to the B&H deal....

As for needs, Im not sure what you mean, in the post above I was trying to predict what photo's I would want to take, so I could get some suggestions on what lenses would be suitable..

The plan is to then price up the lenses, read the reviews and make a decision over what to buy first, based on what I think Im likely to want to shoot the most to begin with..

Hi edgedemon and welcome to the forums. There are a million ways to go with this. Primes, manual lenses, superzooms, you name it. But what I would suggest is this. As one of the other posters suggested get the kit and the 55-300. That will keep you going for quite a while. In the meantime download the program "exposure plot". What this little beauty does is analyze your photos and gives you a breakdown of how many shots were taken in each focal length. This will give you a very good idea of what to look for in other lenses. For example I thought myself a "long" shooter, using mostly 50mm and above, but exposure plot showe me that most of my shots were actually around 35mm.

Macro: I'm going to go against the grain here and recommend the Raynox 250. This is actually a clipon but a VERY GOOD clipon. It will allow you to get pretty close w/o having to spent the big bucks a dedicated macro costs. This way you get to explore the wonders of macro photography while keeping your committment to a minimum. Macro photography is a particular artform and many who start out on it realize that it's not for them. The Raynox is a popular way to 'test the waters' so to speak. There is even a raynox "club" thread in the Lens forum, can be found here. Check out the shots there before you decide to plunk down 100 pounds or so on a dedicated macro lens.
In any event, welcome to the forums, keep coming back and hopefully we'll see some stunning images from you in no time

NaCl(my two cents, and worth all of that)H2O

[gnaztee]

I won't try to convince you to go any particular direction, but here are a couple of thoughts to add to the discussion:

*You mentioned the K-7 early on, and it has been dismissed since. I use it for paid work with great results. It rates lower than the K-x/K-r/K-5 for high-ISO noise, but is a very capable camera that produces excellent results. You would get most of what is good about the K-5 for almost half the price.

*When looking at old MF primes to use, I'd offer this caveat (personal opinion): anything other that A-series MF primes can be a PITA because it takes more steps to photograph with them. I've had the M135mm twice and just can't grow to like it. I used the A 50mm for a week and really liked it.

*When talking about what lenses to get, if you're stepping up from an S95, even the kit lenses on the larger APS-C sensor will give you better results

[Ratmagiclady]

The way I see it, yes, glass is more important, but it's not really saving you money to spend twice or more trying to save a couple hundred on bodies, especially if major-purchase money doesn't come along often.

Making the camera the weak link for some years isn't really helping you make use of the better glass, necessarily, anyway (Depending what you try to do.) I'd jump for at least either a K-x, K20d, or K-7: as mentioned, glass holds its value better so you won't lose much by trading up as you go. (This is, by the way, in a context where the earlier digital cameras would be making pretty big leaps in capability and such pretty frequently: as the technology matures, the differences between them should matter less and less in more and more situations. 'Good enough' is good enough. )

The K-5 and K-r are impressive... If I were making a ten year commitment I might indeed go all out there, but I've got a K20d (bought at about the lowest point of new prices for these, but still a big investment, ) on the rationale that this fellow's reached a level where I can do just about everything digitally I could with film, so he constitutes a good hold-point. Basically, since cameras depreciate, but lenses more or less don't, the camera's where you want to please yourself, primarily. It's you, not the market, that's going to appreciate the time between. Laying out a few hundred periodically just to upgrade a camera *is* a lens-sized investment, possibly just to be dissatisfied at any given point.

For me, the K-5 looks like a substantial enough upgrade that if I need/can have one, (Being pretty nocturnal, the high-ISO and AF improvements are a big deal to me) they'll be down to a reasonable price soon enough.

Basically, paying the 'brand new model premium' might be something you could balance against what glass you can start with, but starting off with a camera body you can be happy with a long while actually kind of frees you to improve your glass situation. Basically, there's diminishing returns about going cheaper than you have to.

[NaClH2O]

I'm going to have to disagree with gnaztee above. I own a bunch of different fully manual "K" lenses and I have had little problem with shooting with them. Basically the process has only one more step than an "A" or newer lens. You select the aperture you want on the aperture ring on the lens, hit the green button so the mirror flips up momentarily and lets the camera meter the light and you check to see if the speed is appropriate and then hit the shutter. I can shoot almost as fast using manual lenses as I can using fully automatic ones. One caveat, I frequently manually focus, even with the F, FA and DA's lenses, so that might slow me down some.

NaCl(shooting K and M lenses isn't all that hard)H2O

[edgedemon]

Im thinking of the k-r to be honest at the moment, though I hadn't really considered the K7. I will have a look around, but based on the prices I have seen the K100/K200 fetch second hand, Im not sure it would be worth it. Even so, I will keep an eye out..

If I do go with the K-r then I will get the kit lens and the 55-300 zoom, and hopefully a macro lens
If not then just the kit lens and the macro..

With regards to close up photography, where I want to shoot things like water dripping, splashes and maybe smoke - what sort of lens would I need for that...

Will I be able to get half decent depth of field with the kit lens...

Edit

With the prices of the k7, if I was going to go to the 6-700 mark, I'd probably go for the K5 and save for lenses over a period of time especially with the ISO range issues that I have read about....

[eddie1960]

the drops of water and DOF will work better with a prime (and even a mf prime can be pre-focused for this - i got a M 50 f1.7 for 10 pounds on portobello road when i was there in october) I agree with NaCLH2O shooting the k and m primes isn't all that hard one extra step over an A prime at a much lower price now days,
I'd get the KR as you seem to like the selective focus idea ( i tried out and returned a Kx specifically because this was missing) don't discount the idea of a K7 though if you aren't shooting a lot of really low light it will give you a lot of the k5 features at a little more than half the price. in 2 - 3 years you can grab a deeply discounted k 5 and make the k 7 your backup body and have interchangeable accessories (ie grip batteries....)

[Ira]

K-x or K-r, genuine Pentax M42 adapter, and get your M42 Takumar primes NOW while you can.

In 3 to 6 months, the Tak market is going to be bone dry, with ALL prices being sky-high.

[jolepp]

As for macro lenses the 90mm Tamron and the 105 sigma are also highly regarded (and somewhat cheaper than the 100mm Pentax).

[bfo]

Im thinking of the k-r to be honest at the moment, though I hadn't really considered the K7. I will have a look around, but based on the prices I have seen the K100/K200 fetch second hand, Im not sure it would be worth it. Even so, I will keep an eye out..

If I do go with the K-r then I will get the kit lens and the 55-300 zoom, and hopefully a macro lens
If not then just the kit lens and the macro..

With regards to close up photography, where I want to shoot things like water dripping, splashes and maybe smoke - what sort of lens would I need for that...

Will I be able to get half decent depth of field with the kit lens...

Edit

With the prices of the k7, if I was going to go to the 6-700 mark, I'd probably go for the K5 and save for lenses over a period of time especially with the ISO range issues that I have read about....

The K-7 is very capable, and up to ISO 1600-2000, there really isn't much of a problem.
If youre shooting a lot of dripping water, and splashes you really should consider a weather sealed body (k-7/5).

[edgedemon]

the drops of water and DOF will work better with a prime (and even a mf prime can be pre-focused for this - i got a M 50 f1.7 for 10 pounds on portobello road when i was there in october) I agree with NaCLH2O shooting the k and m primes isn't all that hard one extra step over an A prime at a much lower price now days,

Can someone help me with this 1 extra step bit? I have no idea what you are referring to?
A Prime is a high quality lens with a fixed focal length - ie no zoom?

K-x or K-r, genuine Pentax M42 adapter, and get your M42 Takumar primes NOW while you can.
In 3 to 6 months, the Tak market is going to be bone dry, with ALL prices being sky-high.

Why will the market be dry and prices sky high?
Based on NaCLH2O comments can someone give me a couple of K primes that I can keep an eye out for? Ideally for depth of field and shooting close up things such as dripping liquid?
Ira - you have me worried now - one reason for choosing Pentax was the availability of cheapish old MF lenses..

So much to learn