Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-08-2010, 06:06 PM   #16
New Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 22
Original Poster
EDIT: Bah, on second thought, I have no interest in arguing.


Last edited by vegenigma; 12-08-2010 at 06:33 PM.
12-08-2010, 06:09 PM   #17
New Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 22
Original Poster
I think I may have given some of you the wrong idea. While I do want a camera that is capable of capturing slowly-moving subjects in low light, I noticed a problem with the image sharpness of my K-x fairly quickly and then devoted the vast majority of my 1000 or so shots to testing it in decent lighting and with stationary subjects. The sharpness/focus problem I experienced occurred very consistently in even the easiest of shots, with the exception of those with subjects in very close proximity.
12-08-2010, 06:37 PM   #18
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by vegenigma Quote
The sharpness/focus problem I experienced occurred very consistently in even the easiest of shots, with the exception of those with subjects in very close proximity.
Were you shooting those subjects with the lens wide open? The kit lens is not very sharp at it's widest aperture.
12-08-2010, 06:42 PM   #19
New Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 22
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
J
Buy a KX body only, and a Tameron 17-50 2.8, or the 28-70 2.8, which is supposed to be a brighter lens. They are good, fast, and only run you about 500, which is a very good deal for a fast lens.

Welcome to the sinkhole that is lens buying... it's addictive!
Thank you! Just to confirm, is this the one you're referencing? Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical [IF] AF016P-700 B&H

12-08-2010, 06:44 PM   #20
New Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 22
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
Were you shooting those subjects with the lens wide open? The kit lens is not very sharp at it's widest aperture.
For the most part, yes. I'm beginning to think I just have standards that the K-x w/ kit lens doesn't live up to. With all the reviews I perused, I'm surprised I didn't read much about problems w/ sharpness deficiency at wide aperture.
12-08-2010, 06:44 PM   #21
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,484
QuoteOriginally posted by vegenigma Quote
Thank you! Just to confirm, is this the one you're referencing? Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical [IF] AF016P-700 B&H
That would be the one..

Heed this..

QuoteQuote:
Welcome to the sinkhole that is lens buying... it's addictive!
12-08-2010, 07:18 PM   #22
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Glad I could help.

Take a look at the 28-70 as well... it is supposed to be a little better for low light situations, but it's not nearly as wide. It would be better for portraits though. Depends on what you want... really wide angles, or better portraits?
12-08-2010, 07:22 PM   #23
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by vegenigma Quote
With all the reviews I perused, I'm surprised I didn't read much about problems w/ sharpness deficiency at wide aperture.
Well any lens is going to be it's softest wide open. With a 2.8 lens though, you can shoot at f4 and get a much sharper image than the kit at an equivalent aperture.

I think most lens reviews are very realistic about the kit lens. It's not great... but it's great for $100.

12-08-2010, 08:09 PM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: United States
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 392
QuoteOriginally posted by vegenigma Quote
For the most part, yes. I'm beginning to think I just have standards that the K-x w/ kit lens doesn't live up to. With all the reviews I perused, I'm surprised I didn't read much about problems w/ sharpness deficiency at wide aperture.
Couple of things here -
1. Kit lenses are usually not good. Some people say that they are good value for money. But, personally, I never use the kit lens; my advice is to get the camera body only. Lenses make all the difference. A good lens is going to give you good pictures even on a 500$DSLR. But an average lens will give you average pictures even on 2000$ DSLR. If you are buying a DSLR and are thinking of using the kit lens for long, you won't be happy (if you have high standards).

2. Regarding the reviews, reviews will not elaborate on the type of lenses that were used. I usually read three main types of reviews. One - dxomark for sensor test. This is an excellent review site with a very scientific method of testing sensors. There is no subjective test. All accurate scientific data. This is the best site to see how the different camera sensors stack up.
b. For handling, body, features of the camera - I usually goto dprevw.
c. For lenses, I goto photozone.de. dxo mark also has lens tests but they have tested very few lenses so far.


To your original question, k-x is a really nice camera. If you check the sensor charts, it beats a lot of big names from Nikon and Canon. It even beats its bigger brother Pentax k-7 in many areas. K-x with a DA 40ltd, or DA 35 will be sufficiently sharp.
The things I don't like in k-x are - Autofocus, and viewfinder.

k-r will give you some more controls and a better AF. Image quality is the same as k-x (same sensor).

k-5 will give you the best possible APS-C sensor. Weather sealed body. And everything else. But it is outside your limit.

You can also look at Canon and Nikon. I don;t know the prices offhand, but there should be many good models available below 1000$.

If it were me (and I were not to get the k-5), I would get the k-x.

cheers
12-08-2010, 09:52 PM   #25
New Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 22
Original Poster
Thanks for all the help, everyone.Just bought a new K-r w/ 18-55 kit lens for $700 shipped ($620 after applying gift card balance) and a new Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for $360 shipped. Will probably hang onto the kit lens as a backup. I'm sure 'll post some shots in the near future.

In case anyone is wondering, the lens deal is at this link. They still have a few in stock if anyone here wants to pick one up for a decent price.
12-08-2010, 10:52 PM   #26
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,484
Shot the hell out of That grand, Didn't you? Good luck with the new camera.

12-09-2010, 12:43 AM   #27
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Hope the Tamron makes you happy
12-09-2010, 12:46 AM   #28
Veteran Member
FHPhotographer's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,298
Welcome to the Forum.
First, don't let anybody tell you that what you had happen to your camera couldn't happen. There might have been operator error, but there might also have been problems with the body and/or the lens, or the combination. I've owned the 17-50 and the older Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and both are a quantum leap up from the Pentax 18-55s. For my money, the wide end of the 17-50 gave me more flexibility shooting indoors than the 28-75 although there's really nothing to pick between them for image quality. Good luck with the new setup and you got a great deal on the 17-50 because B&H is running about $40 higher after the manufacturer's $45 rebate,
EDIT: oops, looks like the price is the same if SimplyElectronics is keeping the rebate (?). In any case a good price on a good lens,
Brian

Last edited by FHPhotographer; 12-09-2010 at 12:59 AM. Reason: new pricing info
12-09-2010, 02:29 AM   #29
Veteran Member
jolepp's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Finland
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,196
QuoteOriginally posted by JeffJS Quote
Shot the hell out of That grand, Didn't you? Good luck with the new camera.

Ask not what the economy can do to your pocketbook ... ;-)
12-09-2010, 10:38 AM   #30
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Michigan, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,484
QuoteOriginally posted by jolepp Quote
Ask not what the economy can do to your pocketbook ... ;-)


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!
camera, detail, k-x, lens, lenses, pentax help, photography, purchase, results, shots, shutter, tripod
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
$10,000 Dream Lens Collection - What Would You Buy? hangu Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 66 05-18-2010 04:57 PM
Should I be a good Pentax choirboy and buy a DA 15 Limited or buy the Sigma 10-20mm? tokyoso Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 42 03-14-2010 04:54 PM
Canon 7D $3,000 to modify or $5,000 & it's done Samsungian Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 1 02-20-2010 01:34 PM
only $38,000.00 wlank Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 3 01-30-2010 06:12 PM
SIGMA 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM Lens for PENTAX:To buy or not to buy? thelittlecar Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 12-31-2009 06:01 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:32 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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