[ChristianRock]

As I'm quite new to photography (like 1 week now), I actually want to try out everything. I like to have (interesting) people in my pictures, but with a nice background - if you know what I mean. Imagine the Champs Elysees in Paris as a background.

I'm with you.

I think that, for the type of photography that you are mentioning, you don't really want wide angle lenses because they make the scene in the background too small. You also don't really want a longer telephoto like that 75-300mm because it will focus on your subject and blur the background away.

What you want - in my opinion - is to walk around with a prime that is somewhat close to what we call the "normal range". In APS-C terms, I would say that would include lenses in the 24 to 50mm range. The 24mm would include more of the background without making it look excessively small. The 50mm will compress the background a bit (making it slightly larger than it is) without blurring it away (unless you shoot close to wide open). My suggestion would be the DA 35mm f/2.8 Limited Macro - the combination of that lens and the K10D is, in my opinion, pure magic. A much more affordable yet still very high quality alternative is the DA 35mm f/2.4 AL - very sharp, nice colors and - in my opinion - even better with skin tones than the Limited lens is. On the plus side it's also extremely light so even the K10D won't feel like a heavy camera.

Here's some suggestions, including those I just mentioned:

SMC Pentax DA 35mm f/2.8 Limited Macro - 200 to 300 used for the SMC version, the HD might be a bit more
SMC Pentax DA 35mm f/2.4 AL - about 80 dollars used
SMC Pentax DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited - about 150-200 dollars used. I haven't had it but lots of people like it a lot. There's a cheaper and even smaller XS version of this lens that can be had for 100-150 dollars used.
SMC Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8 - about 100 dollars used (or get the AF version SMC-Pentax-F 28mm f/2.8 for 125-200 dollars)
SIgma Ultrawide II - there's two versions, manual focus and AF. There's an AF copy in our Marketplace right not for about 80 dollars, which is a superb price for this wonderful lens.
SMC Petnax-F 50mm f/1.7 or SMC Pentax DA 50mm f/1.8 - for about 60-90 dollars used, lots of fun to be had with these AF lenses. Or, get the super-cheap yet at least as good, SMC Pentax-M 50mm f/1.7 for about 30 dollars used.
SMC Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4 - can't leave this one out as you can find them for about 100 dollars these days...

There's also some good 24mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.8 and 35mm f/2.8 manual focus third party lenses that are cheap and fun to play with.

Good luck and let us know what you end up with.

[Naj90]

I'm with you.

I think that, for the type of photography that you are mentioning, you don't really want wide angle lenses because they make the scene in the background too small. You also don't really want a longer telephoto like that 75-300mm because it will focus on your subject and blur the background away.

What you want - in my opinion - is to walk around with a prime that is somewhat close to what we call the "normal range". In APS-C terms, I would say that would include lenses in the 24 to 50mm range. The 24mm would include more of the background without making it look excessively small. The 50mm will compress the background a bit (making it slightly larger than it is) without blurring it away (unless you shoot close to wide open). My suggestion would be the DA 35mm f/2.8 Limited Macro - the combination of that lens and the K10D is, in my opinion, pure magic. A much more affordable yet still very high quality alternative is the DA 35mm f/2.4 AL - very sharp, nice colors and - in my opinion - even better with skin tones than the Limited lens is. On the plus side it's also extremely light so even the K10D won't feel like a heavy camera.

Here's some suggestions, including those I just mentioned:

SMC Pentax DA 35mm f/2.8 Limited Macro - 200 to 300 used for the SMC version, the HD might be a bit more
SMC Pentax DA 35mm f/2.4 AL - about 80 dollars used
SMC Pentax DA 40mm f/2.8 Limited - about 150-200 dollars used. I haven't had it but lots of people like it a lot. There's a cheaper and even smaller XS version of this lens that can be had for 100-150 dollars used.
SMC Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8 - about 100 dollars used (or get the AF version SMC-Pentax-F 28mm f/2.8 for 125-200 dollars)
SIgma Ultrawide II - there's two versions, manual focus and AF. There's an AF copy in our Marketplace right not for about 80 dollars, which is a superb price for this wonderful lens.
SMC Petnax-F 50mm f/1.7 or SMC Pentax DA 50mm f/1.8 - for about 60-90 dollars used, lots of fun to be had with these AF lenses. Or, get the super-cheap yet at least as good, SMC Pentax-M 50mm f/1.7 for about 30 dollars used.
SMC Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4 - can't leave this one out as you can find them for about 100 dollars these days...

There's also some good 24mm f/2.8, 28mm f/2.8 and 35mm f/2.8 manual focus third party lenses that are cheap and fun to play with.

Good luck and let us know what you end up with.

Very nice, especially the list you compiled - it's super useful! I will definitely look through them and explore some sample pictures on the internet with the lenses taken. I may then see how much I can spend on it without going broke. Thanks a lot ! And indeed I think the 'normal range' would be cool, although at this phase if I find a cheap lens I might just buy it to try it out - like the Sigma 100-300mm I found for 40 bucks (see my previous reply to K-Three).

[ChristianRock]

Very nice, especially the list you compiled - it's super useful! I will definitely look through them and explore some sample pictures on the internet with the lenses taken. I may then see how much I can spend on it without going broke. Thanks a lot ! And indeed I think the 'normal range' would be cool, although at this phase if I find a cheap lens I might just buy it to try it out - like the Sigma 100-300mm I found for 40 bucks (see my previous reply to K-Three).

I don't think that Sigma gets very good reviews... and it's aperture is slow... (if it was the f/4 version then that would be another story...)

If you need to have a telephoto lens in that range, just go for the SMC DA 55-300mm f/4-5.8. The DA L version (with plastic mount) can be found used for as low as 60-70 dollars sometimes. I don't think you'll have any complaints.

[pres589]

Tamron 17-50, SIgma 17-50, or Sigma 17-70 all seem quite useful for the OP's purposes. A fast 50 like the DA 50 1.8 or F 50 f1.7 would be nice as well. But I'd start with a quality zoom.

The 18-55 isn't a bad lens but earlier versions weren't exactly great performers. That said, taking a walk with one and really figuring out how to get the best results with it would be useful to someone new or experienced.

[Naj90]

I don't think that Sigma gets very good reviews... and it's aperture is slow... (if it was the f/4 version then that would be another story...)

If you need to have a telephoto lens in that range, just go for the SMC DA 55-300mm f/4-5.8. The DA L version (with plastic mount) can be found used for as low as 60-70 dollars sometimes. I don't think you'll have any complaints.

Thanks again ChristianRock, appreciate it. I'll have a look at the list also provided by yourself then and take all these helpful comments into consideration

---------- Post added 08-11-22 at 09:11 AM ----------

Tamron 17-50, SIgma 17-50, or Sigma 17-70 all seem quite useful for the OP's purposes. A fast 50 like the DA 50 1.8 or F 50 f1.7 would be nice as well. But I'd start with a quality zoom.

The 18-55 isn't a bad lens but earlier versions weren't exactly great performers. That said, taking a walk with one and really figuring out how to get the best results with it would be useful to someone new or experienced.

I will definitely look into these as well, many thanks! I am looking forward to my photography journey even more now with such a vibrant community helping out

[Des]

Thank you Des and thank you for the elaborate explanations and recommendations, I really appreciate it.

You're welcome.

I will most likely start out with budget lenses, probably second-hand so that I can find my style and try out different things and see what I enjoy indeed . Then hopefully I can buy some more advanced bodies and gear to shoot more professionally and with more knowledge.

It's a good idea to try lots of styles of photography, with minimal outlay. But ...

I found one that said "Sigma telelens 100-300mm (Pentax mount)" - see picture below. She sells it for 40 bucks, do you think it's worth it or should I just stick to the Pentax lenses you recommend - even if I'm a beginner who doesn't want to spend a lot of money on gear yet until I find out my style and learn some more?

I would skip this one. I agree with CR that spending a little more on a DA or DA L 55-300mm f4-5.8 in good condition would be a much better buy. The Pentax one would have its use even if you got a later generation camera than the K10D. The Sigma will be a mediocre lens on any camera. Even a mediocre lens can produce some acceptable images, but you will always be wondering whether it's the lens that is holding you back.

One thing to remember is that cheap telephoto lenses use several interlocking barrels (usually plastic) that slide out when zoomed to maximum focal length. They start out fitting snugly, but over time they tend to work loose. This happens faster if the user has a habit of leaving the lens fully extended between shots (as many of us tend to do). Then the barrels become a little wobbly. Even a very small amount of wobble can mean that the elements don't line up perfectly and the resolution will be affected. Focus accuracy might also suffer. So when you are buying a telephoto zoom that it 5 or more years old, especially sight unseen, it is always a bit of a gamble.

[pentasonic49]

I have a lot of lenses including a kit 18-55 WR which is a keeper, very good results for a relatively cheap lens, as are all the slight variations. I used to have a Sigma 70-300 APO which was very good, I regret selling it, although it has since been replaced by a Pentax 55-300, which is slightly better. It depends what type of photography you like best, go for the tele zoom first, and then think of something wider than your kit lens. A standard 50mm will give better definition, any one will do although those with the A on the aperture scale are much easier for beginners to use, and autofocus is not essential either.

[Naj90]

You're welcome.

It's a good idea to try lots of styles of photography, with minimal outlay. But ...

I would skip this one. I agree with CR that spending a little more on a DA or DA L 55-300mm f4-5.8 in good condition would be a much better buy. The Pentax one would have its use even if you got a later generation camera than the K10D. The Sigma will be a mediocre lens on any camera. (...) So when you are buying a telephoto zoom that it 5 or more years old, especially sight unseen, it is always a bit of a gamble.

All right, I told the seller that I'm not going to buy it. Thanks again for the advise!