[Wasp]

Flash is a whole new area to learn. I think most photographers would benefit from a flash but when starting out unless it is a priority I think it is something to let go until later. The learning curve to do it right is rather large.

Agreed. With the low light sensitivity that the K1 offers, there is little need for flash. There are still great uses for flash, like portrait photography, but it is an art that needs to be mastered.

[ehrwien]

By L series do you mean the "Limited" lenses?

No, I think he meant lenses like a DA L 18-55 or DA L 55-300, see here: Pentax DA L Zoom Lenses - Reviews and Specifications - SLR and Interchangeable Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
But those are crop sensor lenses anyway, and I don't think there are Pentax lenses meant for full frame that have this cheap make.

But perhaps it was a nudge at Canon users, whose L series lenses are considered the best for their system. Not so in Pentax land The Limited lenses are abbreviated as Ltd, if at all, not as L.

[kayasaman]

No, I think he meant lenses like a DA L 18-55 or DA L 55-300, see here: Pentax DA L Zoom Lenses - Reviews and Specifications - SLR and Interchangeable Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
But those are crop sensor lenses anyway, and I don't think there are Pentax lenses meant for full frame that have this cheap make.

But perhaps it was a nudge at Canon users, whose L series lenses are considered the best for their system. Not so in Pentax land The Limited lenses are abbreviated as Ltd, if at all, not as L.

Thanks for clearing that up....

Yeah, I already asked about using FDA lenses on the K1. The general consensus was that it isn't a good idea!

[UncleVanya]

The 28-105 is lighter and has a bit more on the long end and less on the short end. I know a lot of K1 users who own both and use the 28-105 a lot more than the 24-70. It is purportedly very sharp. The need for f2.8 is what distinguishes the two lenses - and the need for wider views.

As for L I’m not aware of any D FA L lenses. The DA 35 (f2.4) and DA 50 (f1.8) aren’t technically DA L lenses but share many of the same characteristics. The DA L lenses are typically the same optically but with a composite mount and without quick shift focusing. There is nothing wrong with these lenses but generally they are crop only as are the DA versions. Some may cover larger than just crop sensor you’ll have to read about them to know.

If you think the weight of the 24-70 and the lack of 71-105 wouldn’t bother you, and/or you can’t live without 24-27mm or f2.8 then get the 24-70. On my Sony FF I have their 24-105 f4 and I have no plan to add a 24-70 f2.8. I have an 85 f1.8 if I need shallow depth of field portraits and the high ISO performance makes the extra cost and weight of a 24-70 f2.8 a non-issue. Honestly I also bought a 28-70 f3.5-5.6 when I thought the 24-105 was only a temporary loan and recently gave that to my father. I liked it for the size and weight and genuinely miss it despite it having warts compared to the 24-105. I think the cost of adding the Pentax 28-105 is low enough particularly when buying it in a package that it is hard to justify NOT getting it.

[kayasaman]

The 28-105 is lighter and has a bit more on the long end and less on the short end. I know a lot of K1 users who own both and use the 28-105 a lot more than the 24-70. It is purportedly very sharp. The need for f2.8 is what distinguishes the two lenses - and the need for wider views.

As for L I’m not aware of any D FA L lenses. The DA 35 (f2.4) and DA 50 (f1.8) aren’t technically DA L lenses but share many of the same characteristics. The DA L lenses are typically the same optically but with a composite mount and without quick shift focusing. There is nothing wrong with these lenses but generally they are crop only as are the DA versions. Some may cover larger than just crop sensor you’ll have to read about them to know.

If you think the weight of the 24-70 and the lack of 71-105 wouldn’t bother you, and/or you can’t live without 24-27mm or f2.8 then get the 24-70. On my Sony FF I have their 24-105 f4 and I have no plan to add a 24-70 f2.8. I have an 85 f1.8 if I need shallow depth of field portraits and the high ISO performance makes the extra cost and weight of a 24-70 f2.8 a non-issue. Honestly I also bought a 28-70 f3.5-5.6 when I thought the 24-105 was only a temporary loan and recently gave that to my father. I liked it for the size and weight and genuinely miss it despite it having warts compared to the 24-105. I think the cost of adding the Pentax 28-105 is low enough particularly when buying it in a package that it is hard to justify NOT getting it.

I'm just going over the review of the 24-70 f2.8 right now.

HD Pentax-D FA 24-70mm F2.8 ED SDM WR Reviews - D FA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database


For me, it's a difficult decision. Yep I like to capture wide scenes though there is only 4mm between the 24-70 and the 28-105.

I think the biggest concern I have with the 28-105 is the low-light capability.

At night I become a little bit like a moth attracted to a flame whenever I see bright lights.

Because of this aspect and the fact that I don't take many pictures during the day unless on vacation somewhere scenic I need something that will have good night performance.

Based on everybody's suggestions it might be worth going for the 24-70 initially, then later on going for the 15-30 and further down the line the 70-210.

Those 3 lenses should pretty much cover all my bases....

Though one thing that I am trying to understand is with those 3, is there any need for a fast prime?? Weight savings to one side.... is f2.8 good enough for low-light level / full darkness work or is it better to go down to f1.8 or even more open ie. F1 or f1.4??

If I can figure this out, then I should be good to go with a longer term plan. I would rather get something that I would use often then leaving it off the camera as simply a "just to have" lens.

[RICHARD L.]

Twenty years ago, no photo-journalist wanted to be caught dead without some 28-70 mm f/2.8 + 80-200 mm f/2.8 lenses, be they Nikon, Canon or whatever make. These were the "bread and butter" tools of the photographers.

Nowadays, camera companies offer lenses like the Pentax 15-30 mm f/2.8, 24-70 mm f/2.8 and 70-200 mm f/2.8, all expensive but stellar lenses.

Personally, I shoot landscapes and the DFA 28-105 mm HD amply satisfies my needs, coupled with the DFA* 70-200 mm f/2.8. I acquired both lenses used in excellent condition, the 28-105 for 327 $ and the 70-200 for 1350 $. I have an older FA* 28-70 mm f/2.8 that is quite good but I must admit the DFA 28-105 mm HD is superior at f/11 in well-lit conditions. When light levels are low, I simply use a Manfrotto tripod and the DFA 28-105 mm performs very well starting @ f/6.3, so it covers all my needs.

The choice is yours (between a 24-70 and a 28-105) but I would first give a try to the latter (DFA 28-105 mm HD).


Regards

[kayasaman]

Twenty years ago, no photo-journalist wanted to be caught dead without some 28-70 mm f/2.8 + 80-200 mm f/2.8 lenses, be they Nikon, Canon or whatever make. These were the "bread and butter" tools of the photographers.

Nowadays, camera companies offer lenses like the Pentax 15-30 mm f/2.8, 24-70 mm f/2.8 and 70-200 mm f/2.8, all expensive but stellar lenses.

Personally, I shoot landscapes and the DFA 28-105 mm HD amply satisfy my needs, coupled with the DFA* 70-200 mm f/2.8. I acquired both lenses used in excellent condition, the 28-105 for 327 $ and the 70-200 for 1350 $. I have an older FA* 28-70 mm f/2.8 that is quite good but I must admit the DFA 28-105 mm HD is superior at f/11 in well-lit conditions. When light levels are low, I simply use a Manfrotto tripod and the DFA 28-105 mm performs very well starting @ f/6.3, so it covers all my needs.

The choice is yours (between a 24-70 and a 28-105) but I would first give a try to the latter (DFA 28-105 mm HD).


Regards

Thanks so much for the input!! would love to see some of your work

I think it's settled. Start with the 28-105mm

One quick question is can you handhold the 28-105 at night using the ShakeReduction in a lit area? - as in, inside a city.
I will definitely be trying this out but just wanted to know your experience.

Thanks

Since the shake reduction function is built into the sensor apparatus instead of the lens (as per some other manufacturers' products), it works pretty well with any lens you stick on the camera. I'll modify that - in my experience, it works so well that you have to work at it to get motion blur if your settings are at all reasonable for the conditions. I suspect that you will get a different effect depending on the focal length - but I'm not sure how that would work, I'm just speculating that a wider angle of view means more control would be necessary, but I'll leave that question to the physicists among us.

[kayasaman]

Thanks so much for the input!! would love to see some of your work

I think it's settled. Start with the 28-105mm

One quick question is can you handhold the 28-105 at night using the ShakeReduction in a lit area? - as in, inside a city.
I will definitely be trying this out but just wanted to know your experience.

Thanks

Actually just found them:

HD Pentax-D FA 28-105mm F3.5-5.6 ED DC WR Reviews - D FA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

[RICHARD L.]

One quick question is can you handhold the 28-105 at night using the ShakeReduction in a lit area? - as in, inside a city.I will definitely be trying this out but just wanted to know your experience.

As you know, it is the sensor that is stabilized in a Pentax K1, not the lens like Nikon and Canon do. My advice :"When in doubt, use a tripod !"

Have a look at the "Lens Reviews" Section, I posted multiple reviews in K mount, 645 and 67 formats. My latest reviews cover the DFA 28-105 mm HD and the DA 18-135 mm ED WR. I have over 60 Pentax lenses and I would not let any go for the world. Sometimes you fall on magnificent copies of certain lenses and you fall madly in love with them. That's what happened with these two lenses recently.

Best regards

DA 18-135 mm ED WR on K3


DFA 28-105 mm HD on K1

[UncleVanya]

Night time exposure varies. You have to decide what iso you are comfortable with. Can you post any of your past shots to help guide us? You can shoot at very high iso depending on what the goal is. Also f2.8 at the wide end is less than one stop faster. F5.6 at the long end is two stops slower. 4mm on the wide end is a LOT wider.

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Sony vs Pentax isn’t relevant for the coverage discussion. So I’m sharing the first one in my search.

---------- Post added 06-16-21 at 04:32 PM ----------

At 3 min 30 seconds this shows the difference between 70 and 105 on the long end but again not the Pentax lenses. Useful for knowing what perspective that you will have.

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

[kayasaman]

Night time exposure varies. You have to decide what iso you are comfortable with. Can you post any of your past shots to help guide us? You can shoot at very high iso depending on what the goal is. Also f2.8 at the wide end is less than one stop faster. F5.6 at the long end is two stops slower. 4mm on the wide end is a LOT wider.

https://youtu.be/lRtsTACiviQ

Sony vs Pentax isn’t relevant for the coverage discussion. So I’m sharing the first one in my search.

These are some of the photos I've taken in the past.

Am above quota so will try in 2 sections

[kayasaman]

Night time exposure varies. You have to decide what iso you are comfortable with. Can you post any of your past shots to help guide us? You can shoot at very high iso depending on what the goal is. Also f2.8 at the wide end is less than one stop faster. F5.6 at the long end is two stops slower. 4mm on the wide end is a LOT wider.

https://youtu.be/lRtsTACiviQ

Sony vs Pentax isn’t relevant for the coverage discussion. So I’m sharing the first one in my search.

---------- Post added 06-16-21 at 04:32 PM ----------

At 3 min 30 seconds this shows the difference between 70 and 105 on the long end but again not the Pentax lenses. Useful for knowing what perspective that you will have.

https://youtu.be/1MgRyDdErzI

Second section

[UncleVanya]

On my mobile. I can’t see Exif data. What were those exposures at? Iso f/stop shutter.

[kayasaman]

On my mobile. I can’t see Exif data. What were those exposures at? Iso f/stop shutter.

The first set of images the camera claims:

F2.8, 2 seconds exposure, ISO 100 7.90mm focal length (which i guess is around 30mm in 35mm equivalent)


The second set of images taken with my cell is: 24mm (6.70mm EXIF) focal length, ISO 1600, f1.8 (fixed aperature), 1/11s shutter