DSLR Newbie here asking for advice

Retnuhrace · 12-24-2006, 12:59 PM

Well, after a few days of researching different entry-level DSLRs heavily, I have decided to get a K100D (body only) for about $434 after $50 rebate. Now, I have a budget of about $1500 for everything that I need, so that means I have about a grand or so to spend on lenses. This is where I am totally confused despite reading multiple reviews. I'd like to use this camera for taking awesome up-close macro shots (so I guess it'd make sense to get a good macro lens). I also would like to take general scenery shots, and, in time, shots at things like football games. Other than a macro lens, I'm not sure what other 1 or 2 lenses that would suit me and my budget, so I ask for some advice. Thanks in advance!

-=JoN=- · 12-24-2006, 01:11 PM

Pentax D-FA 100mm (1:1 Macro)

21520 Pentax D-FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro Auto Focus Lens with Hood - U.S.A.

and an all around lens for everything in between

777109 Sigma 18mm - 200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Autofocus Aspherical Zoom Lens for Pentax Digital SLR Cameras

leaves u enough money to buy a UV filter, and some other accessories

trog100 · 12-24-2006, 01:11 PM

sigma 17 x 70mm zoom.. sigma 105mm macro.. sigma 70 x 300mm zoom..

that should come close to taking up your 1000 dollars..

trog

slip · 12-24-2006, 02:43 PM

Originally posted by trog100

sigma 17 x 70mm zoom.. sigma 105mm macro.. sigma 70 x 300mm zoom..

that should come close to taking up your 1000 dollars..

trog

you might want to check out the sigma 70mm macro as it can second as a good portriat lens.... about the perfect focal length for this...
the above sounds like good choices...

good luck

randy

Photo Tramp · 12-24-2006, 03:34 PM

For the money I have to second Trog's offerings to your quest.

Good Shooting.
Cheers: David

Retnuhrace · 12-24-2006, 09:06 PM

Thanks for the help guys... the package that Trog offered seems great, however, all 3 lenses are out of stock currently at sigma4less.com, so I guess I'll have to try somewhere else (for more money however).

**NaClH2O** · 12-24-2006, 09:19 PM

For your macro, I'd go with the Tamron 90mm f2.8. Great macro lens, also a good short telephoto and a good portrait lens.
I'd get the Pentax DA 50-200 as a telephoto zoom and if you can find one, an FA 50mm 1.4, if you can't find a new FA 50 1.4 you can sometimes find an A 50 1.4 or 1.7 second hand at KEH or eek bay. You will lose the autofocus capability but still have automatic aperture.
I would actually get the 18-55. It is a very good lens for the money. Much better than the usual run of "kit" lenses. If you really don't want to go with the kit, get the Pentax DA 16-45. That will cover the wider end for you until you find out what your favorite focal lenghts are.

NaCl(the Tamron 90 and the FA 50 are my two most favorite lenses)H2O

trog100 · 12-25-2006, 06:56 AM

the tamron 18 x 200mm plus the tamron 90mm macro would make a nice set up..

the 18 x 200 super zoom is way way better than those who dont have one think it is.. add the super sharp fast shorter primes at a later date if u feel the need..

the cheaper tamron 70 x 300 cant really be faulted for the money either..

trog

stern · 12-25-2006, 07:09 AM

Originally posted by NaClH2O

For your macro, I'd go with the Tamron 90mm f2.8. Great macro lens, also a good short telephoto and a good portrait lens.
I'd get the Pentax DA 50-200 as a telephoto zoom and if you can find one, an FA 50mm 1.4, if you can't find a new FA 50 1.4 you can sometimes find an A 50 1.4 or 1.7 second hand at KEH or eek bay. You will lose the autofocus capability but still have automatic aperture.
I would actually get the 18-55. It is a very good lens for the money. Much better than the usual run of "kit" lenses. If you really don't want to go with the kit, get the Pentax DA 16-45. That will cover the wider end for you until you find out what your favorite focal lenghts are.

NaCl(the Tamron 90 and the FA 50 are my two most favorite lenses)H2O

i have the sigma 18-125 appr. 22-190 in 35mm terms). this lens is very well reputed and it delivered some very fine results..... yet, i'm unhappy since this autumn when i used this otherwise perfect everyday lens (when you want only one lens to carry around) as there is severe pincushoning at the wide end when the motif is near. for documentation purposes i took pictures of a couple of billboards and found this effect on each one of them. i can imagine that the 18-200 will behave similarily. the pentax 18-55mm ("kit") lens doesn't show this effect, so i switched. the sigma 18-125 is otherwise very good also at 18mm for landscapes.
if you can afford it (in the U.S. you have rebates we europeans never get...), try the pentax 16-45mm/f4.0, its one of the best"standard" lenses.

**barondla** · 12-25-2006, 07:20 AM

Buy the Pentax 18-55 kit lens (it focuses really close at 55mm). Good enough that I bought my K10D with it. Even though I already had 16-45. Buy the 50-200 Pentax. Can't be beat for the price. Grab the DFA 100 Pentax macro. This should be close to $1500. Great all around kit. Enjoy.
thanks
barondla

trog100 · 12-25-2006, 09:17 AM

all this lens talk does make one realize just where the money goes thow.. its isnt the entry level dslr body..

trog

Jack Glisson · 12-26-2006, 10:55 AM

Originally posted by Retnuhrace

Well, after a few days of researching different entry-level DSLRs heavily, I have decided to get a K100D (body only) for about $434 after $50 rebate. Now, I have a budget of about $1500 for everything that I need, so that means I have about a grand or so to spend on lenses. This is where I am totally confused despite reading multiple reviews. I'd like to use this camera for taking awesome up-close macro shots (so I guess it'd make sense to get a good macro lens). I also would like to take general scenery shots, and, in time, shots at things like football games. Other than a macro lens, I'm not sure what other 1 or 2 lenses that would suit me and my budget, so I ask for some advice. Thanks in advance!

Sounds like you like macro work, I shoot the Pentax FA 100/2.8 with VERY good results - have you thought about going with the new K10d with 18-55 pkg with it and then this 100 macro would still give you a little shopping around to maybe find a mid range zoom for later and would be a great system to build to

Retnuhrace · 12-26-2006, 11:20 AM

Ok, so I have a full cart at Beach Camera. I have the K100D body with the 18-55 kit lens for $557 (before $50 rebate). I have the Pentax P-D FA 100mm 2.8 Macro lens for $489 (before $100 rebate). I have the Pentax DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED for $230 (before $50 rebate). I have an accessory kit thingy (with batteries and memory and other things) for $150. Here's where I'm confused however. I was going to get the 3 pack of filters (UV, polarizer, FLD) for $50, however do I need both the 49mm (as it suggests for the 100mm macro) and 52mm (as it suggests for the 50-200) packs? I'm all new to this stuff, so I'm not sure.

**NaClH2O** · 12-26-2006, 12:05 PM

You don't need the filters for macro work. In fact except for a polarizing filter, which I use to cut water and sun glare, I'd stay away from filters completely. Many say that you need a UV filter to protect the front element, but this is a hold over from the old film days when lens coatings were quite soft. Nowadays these coatings are quite hard and you don't need the filter to protect the front element. Use the hood for that instead. I'll probably start a storm of controversy with this as people feel strongly both ways. My suggestion is to wait a while, read up all you can on filters and then make a decision. In any event save the $50 for that filter pack. A good circular polarizing filter costs at least that much alone. As far as I'm concerned it doesn't make sense to put a poopy cheap $20 filter on an excellent $450 lens.

NaCl(my take on it anyway)H2O

Jack Glisson · 12-26-2006, 12:23 PM

I agree with the previous about the need for filters - A polarizer is important but everything else is ususally done in photoshop these days with much more control! My FA-100 is 58 mm though for filter size - I have had it for a few years and guess things can change but check your specs before you buy smaller ones - my opinion (which is virtually worthless) is that a uv filter just gives one something else to clean!! I just caught myself on an omission though - I don't do much scenic but a graduated neutral density is something to look into - the square gels work nicely and can just be hand held in front of the lens for adjustment.

12-24-2006, 12:59 PM	#1
Retnuhrace New Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 19	DSLR Newbie here asking for advice Well, after a few days of researching different entry-level DSLRs heavily, I have decided to get a K100D (body only) for about $434 after $50 rebate. Now, I have a budget of about $1500 for everything that I need, so that means I have about a grand or so to spend on lenses. This is where I am totally confused despite reading multiple reviews. I'd like to use this camera for taking awesome up-close macro shots (so I guess it'd make sense to get a good macro lens). I also would like to take general scenery shots, and, in time, shots at things like football games. Other than a macro lens, I'm not sure what other 1 or 2 lenses that would suit me and my budget, so I ask for some advice. Thanks in advance!

12-25-2006, 07:09 AM	#9
stern Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Vienna, Austria Photos: Gallery Posts: 112	just a caveat concerning the sigma 18-125/200 Originally posted by NaClH2O For your macro, I'd go with the Tamron 90mm f2.8. Great macro lens, also a good short telephoto and a good portrait lens. I'd get the Pentax DA 50-200 as a telephoto zoom and if you can find one, an FA 50mm 1.4, if you can't find a new FA 50 1.4 you can sometimes find an A 50 1.4 or 1.7 second hand at KEH or eek bay. You will lose the autofocus capability but still have automatic aperture. I would actually get the 18-55. It is a very good lens for the money. Much better than the usual run of "kit" lenses. If you really don't want to go with the kit, get the Pentax DA 16-45. That will cover the wider end for you until you find out what your favorite focal lenghts are. NaCl(the Tamron 90 and the FA 50 are my two most favorite lenses)H2O i have the sigma 18-125 appr. 22-190 in 35mm terms). this lens is very well reputed and it delivered some very fine results..... yet, i'm unhappy since this autumn when i used this otherwise perfect everyday lens (when you want only one lens to carry around) as there is severe pincushoning at the wide end when the motif is near. for documentation purposes i took pictures of a couple of billboards and found this effect on each one of them. i can imagine that the 18-200 will behave similarily. the pentax 18-55mm ("kit") lens doesn't show this effect, so i switched. the sigma 18-125 is otherwise very good also at 18mm for landscapes. if you can afford it (in the U.S. you have rebates we europeans never get...), try the pentax 16-45mm/f4.0, its one of the best"standard" lenses.

12-26-2006, 11:20 AM	#13
Retnuhrace New Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 19 Original Poster	Ok, so I have a full cart at Beach Camera. I have the K100D body with the 18-55 kit lens for $557 (before $50 rebate). I have the Pentax P-D FA 100mm 2.8 Macro lens for $489 (before $100 rebate). I have the Pentax DA 50-200mm F4-5.6 ED for $230 (before $50 rebate). I have an accessory kit thingy (with batteries and memory and other things) for $150. Here's where I'm confused however. I was going to get the 3 pack of filters (UV, polarizer, FLD) for $50, however do I need both the 49mm (as it suggests for the 100mm macro) and 52mm (as it suggests for the 50-200) packs? I'm all new to this stuff, so I'm not sure. Last edited by Retnuhrace; 12-26-2006 at 03:29 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Newbie wants advice	trent84	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	06-12-2011 09:31 AM
Newbie seeking advice	gramar	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	03-18-2011 03:15 PM
Macro advice for newbie	Deadsnott	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	12	03-04-2010 03:07 AM
Just a newbie to DSLR	S7umpy	Welcomes and Introductions	3	12-26-2009 03:55 AM
Newbie asking advice.	Orrin1	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	5	11-10-2009 06:43 AM

12-24-2006, 01:11 PM	#2
-=JoN=- Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: NYC Posts: 999	Pentax D-FA 100mm (1:1 Macro) 21520 Pentax D-FA 100mm f/2.8 Macro Auto Focus Lens with Hood - U.S.A. and an all around lens for everything in between 777109 Sigma 18mm - 200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC Autofocus Aspherical Zoom Lens for Pentax Digital SLR Cameras leaves u enough money to buy a UV filter, and some other accessories

12-24-2006, 01:11 PM	#3
trog100 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: UK Posts: 642	sigma 17 x 70mm zoom.. sigma 105mm macro.. sigma 70 x 300mm zoom.. that should come close to taking up your 1000 dollars.. trog

12-24-2006, 02:43 PM	#4
slip Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: 2 hours north of toronto ontario canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,535	Originally posted by trog100 sigma 17 x 70mm zoom.. sigma 105mm macro.. sigma 70 x 300mm zoom.. that should come close to taking up your 1000 dollars.. trog you might want to check out the sigma 70mm macro as it can second as a good portriat lens.... about the perfect focal length for this... the above sounds like good choices... good luck randy

12-24-2006, 03:34 PM	#5
Photo Tramp Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Lancaster, PA. Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,041	For the money I have to second Trog's offerings to your quest. Good Shooting. Cheers: David

12-24-2006, 09:06 PM	#6
Retnuhrace New Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 19 Original Poster	Thanks for the help guys... the package that Trog offered seems great, however, all 3 lenses are out of stock currently at sigma4less.com, so I guess I'll have to try somewhere else (for more money however).

12-24-2006, 09:19 PM	#7
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	For your macro, I'd go with the Tamron 90mm f2.8. Great macro lens, also a good short telephoto and a good portrait lens. I'd get the Pentax DA 50-200 as a telephoto zoom and if you can find one, an FA 50mm 1.4, if you can't find a new FA 50 1.4 you can sometimes find an A 50 1.4 or 1.7 second hand at KEH or eek bay. You will lose the autofocus capability but still have automatic aperture. I would actually get the 18-55. It is a very good lens for the money. Much better than the usual run of "kit" lenses. If you really don't want to go with the kit, get the Pentax DA 16-45. That will cover the wider end for you until you find out what your favorite focal lenghts are. NaCl(the Tamron 90 and the FA 50 are my two most favorite lenses)H2O

12-25-2006, 06:56 AM	#8
trog100 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: UK Posts: 642	the tamron 18 x 200mm plus the tamron 90mm macro would make a nice set up.. the 18 x 200 super zoom is way way better than those who dont have one think it is.. add the super sharp fast shorter primes at a later date if u feel the need.. the cheaper tamron 70 x 300 cant really be faulted for the money either.. trog

12-25-2006, 07:20 AM	#10
barondla Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: midwest, United States Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,717	Buy the Pentax 18-55 kit lens (it focuses really close at 55mm). Good enough that I bought my K10D with it. Even though I already had 16-45. Buy the 50-200 Pentax. Can't be beat for the price. Grab the DFA 100 Pentax macro. This should be close to $1500. Great all around kit. Enjoy. thanks barondla

12-25-2006, 09:17 AM	#11
trog100 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: UK Posts: 642	all this lens talk does make one realize just where the money goes thow.. its isnt the entry level dslr body.. trog

12-26-2006, 10:55 AM	#12
Jack Glisson New Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Western Kentucky Posts: 5	Originally posted by Retnuhrace Well, after a few days of researching different entry-level DSLRs heavily, I have decided to get a K100D (body only) for about $434 after $50 rebate. Now, I have a budget of about $1500 for everything that I need, so that means I have about a grand or so to spend on lenses. This is where I am totally confused despite reading multiple reviews. I'd like to use this camera for taking awesome up-close macro shots (so I guess it'd make sense to get a good macro lens). I also would like to take general scenery shots, and, in time, shots at things like football games. Other than a macro lens, I'm not sure what other 1 or 2 lenses that would suit me and my budget, so I ask for some advice. Thanks in advance! Sounds like you like macro work, I shoot the Pentax FA 100/2.8 with VERY good results - have you thought about going with the new K10d with 18-55 pkg with it and then this 100 macro would still give you a little shopping around to maybe find a mid range zoom for later and would be a great system to build to

12-26-2006, 12:05 PM	#14
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	You don't need the filters for macro work. In fact except for a polarizing filter, which I use to cut water and sun glare, I'd stay away from filters completely. Many say that you need a UV filter to protect the front element, but this is a hold over from the old film days when lens coatings were quite soft. Nowadays these coatings are quite hard and you don't need the filter to protect the front element. Use the hood for that instead. I'll probably start a storm of controversy with this as people feel strongly both ways. My suggestion is to wait a while, read up all you can on filters and then make a decision. In any event save the $50 for that filter pack. A good circular polarizing filter costs at least that much alone. As far as I'm concerned it doesn't make sense to put a poopy cheap $20 filter on an excellent $450 lens. NaCl(my take on it anyway)H2O

12-26-2006, 12:23 PM	#15
Jack Glisson New Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Western Kentucky Posts: 5	I agree with the previous about the need for filters - A polarizer is important but everything else is ususally done in photoshop these days with much more control! My FA-100 is 58 mm though for filter size - I have had it for a few years and guess things can change but check your specs before you buy smaller ones - my opinion (which is virtually worthless) is that a uv filter just gives one something else to clean!! I just caught myself on an omission though - I don't do much scenic but a graduated neutral density is something to look into - the square gels work nicely and can just be hand held in front of the lens for adjustment.