Second Lens Advice for Newbie ??

bluebronco · 08-03-2009, 10:45 AM

I was in the same situation. Kit 18-55mm. I was kind of lucky. I inherited a few pentax lenses from my wife's grandpa. It is a SMC Pentax-FA 70-200mm 4/F. I also had an old (30 yrs) 50mm 2.8/F. I went ahead and bought a Sigma 18-200mm 3.5-6.3/F for every day. It works well. It needs lots of light. I am going to sell the other ones and buy a fast smaller zoom with a 1.8/F. Still researching. You can find old prime lenses that are fast on eBay. It is amazing the difference between "faster" lenses.

Originally posted by El Bolson

Hello,

I've had a K100d for the past few years, that came with the standard 18-55mm lens, which I have made work in many situations, but would like to upgrade to add another lens and see what you pros out their suggest.

I know it would have to do with my many preferences, styles of shooting, etc, but let's just say another good all around lens - prob a tele/zoom I think would be a good investment.

Would something like an 18-200mm be a good fit with my other lens for an addition?

Please suggest!! And keeping it on the low price range as well - just a hobbyist here

Thanks!

Marc Sabatella · 08-03-2009, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by El Bolson

I've seen a Sigma 28-200 AF on ebay for pretty cheap (IMO) and am curious if anyone has had good experiences with this lens...

The *only* superzoom (eg, more than 3-4X) considered on a par with the 50-200 would be the Tamron/Pentax 18-250 (eprhaps Sigma too; it's too new for a consensus to have developed).

Here's a basic rule to consider: for a given price, the lower the zoom factor the better. That is, a $250 prime will be better than a $250 3X zoom, which will in turn be better than a $250 6X zoom, which will in turn be better than a $250 10X zoom. To get a 10X zoom that compares in quality to a 3X one, you should expect to pay much more for it. In fact, you could probably get a pretty good predictor of lens quality by taking the price and dividing it by the zoom factor.

So there is very little chance any inexpensive 28-200 is going to come close to a similarly priced 50-200. Again, as a *replacement* for your 18-55, it might be sort of interesting, as you would gin a lot at the long end, but you'd give up quite a bit at the wide end too. But it would make for fewer lenses changes - you could leave the 28-200 on the camera most of the time, switching to the 18-55 only when you need something wider. Quality would no doubt be not as good as the 18-55 + 50-200, but maybe good enough to be a good tradeoff for the convenience if you're of that mindset.

Marc Sabatella · 08-03-2009, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by newarts

Unlike many others, I find scant use for wide angles as I tend to emphasize a subject when I frame a photo - usually I fill the frame with a subject, so my 18-55mm kit lens gets little use at the wide end.

Actually, I'm with you there, and am often happy to travel with just a handful of primes, the widest of which is 28mm. But I do like carrying the kit lens for landscape - it's really quite good at f/8 or f/11, and while I do a lot of landscape around 28mm or higher, I do just enough wider to not want to be without that option.

**rparmar** · 08-03-2009, 02:24 PM

Lots of good advice here. Having compared the 50-200mm and Sigma options I say go for the 55-300mm. Not only is it light for its range, it has excellent optics. You may have to save up for it, but that's better than getting something you might be disappointed with. That said, I am not really a telephoto person.

The DA12-24mm will fill in the wide end of your kit lens. Expensive now at retail but one was going reasonably here second-hand. No compromises whatsoever with this lens. Best for interiors and cramped European locations. I can live without it, but when you need it, you really need it.

If you simply want improved IQ and slightly wider reach, the DA16-45 is a very good deal for the money. Nice for landscapes.

But forget all that advice and instead just get some manual primes to really learn about photography. The 28 / 50 / 110 combo that worked on film still works on digital just fine.

**Rondec** · 08-04-2009, 04:49 AM

The one thing I would add to the discussion is that you won't regret saving to buy quality lenses. I have a couple of lenses that I got for cheap prices but never use because they just don't have the sharpness, etc of others. In the end, I would have been better saving the money I spent on those lenses because I don't use them anyway.

bluebronco · 08-04-2009, 08:26 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

The one thing I would add to the discussion is that you won't regret saving to buy quality lenses. I have a couple of lenses that I got for cheap prices but never use because they just don't have the sharpness, etc of others. In the end, I would have been better saving the money I spent on those lenses because I don't use them anyway.

Right with ya

Duck Dodgers · 08-04-2009, 06:23 PM

Just to echo the remarks about fast primes, while my first lens after the kit lens was a Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm f/2.8-4 v3, the next one was a Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7. I find myself using it more than another other lens, even today.

GerryL · 08-04-2009, 07:21 PM

I started with the kit lenses DA 18-55mm AL II and the DA 50-200mm.
Once I had those I went into LBA and can't get satisfied till I got one on the 300mm end.
Up till now I am trying to find and pick a good 70-300mm or 75-300mm.
I have bought other primes before getting the 70-300mm, but till I get those I guess I would still be always thinking and looking for them on ebay or the marketplace or the www.
Maybe I'm just still into LBA that's why..

Scottie137 · 08-04-2009, 07:40 PM

My second lens was a 70-300. I soon got a 28-80 (Tamron) with close up focus capabilities. Both let me get my feet wet in their respective areas (macro(ish) and tele). But when I got a FA 50mm 1.4 for xmas, my world was changed (at least as it related to photography). I did eventually get a Pentax DA 18-250 which was a fine walk around lens. It served me well on trips to France and in the states. It does depend on what types of photography you're going to be doing. If its for family photos, the range and convenience of the 18-250 (or some other wide to tele lens) is hard to beat, but the 50 1.4 let me get indoor shots I never would have been able to think about with other, slower, lenses. Lastly, a decent flash can really open up your photography as well. Good luck!

tojax · 08-05-2009, 08:09 PM

After I bought my K20d, I went out and got some duplicates of manual lenses that I had when I owned a K1000 back in the 80's. I found a used Pentax manual 50mm f/1.4 and a 135mm and am getting a cheaper Tamron zoom while I save up for better AF wide angle and zoom lenses. I'll go with those while I re-teach myself photography. For some reason the 18-55 kit lens just doesn't give me the results I want, whereas the cheap 135mm manual prime lens took some pictures I liked right at the beginning.

GerryL · 08-06-2009, 02:49 PM

Originally posted by tojax

For some reason the 18-55 kit lens just doesn't give me the results I want, whereas the cheap 135mm manual prime lens took some pictures I liked right at the beginning.

This surprised me about the 135mm too!

..and I don't think the brand matters not unless it's a truly crap unknown brand.

adriano210 · 08-06-2009, 03:45 PM

get brite 50mm prime

tojax · 08-06-2009, 06:23 PM

Originally posted by GerryL

This surprised me about the 135mm too!

..and I don't think the brand matters not unless it's a truly crap unknown brand.

It was a Pentax 135mm but the results were better than expected. The 2 pictures I posted were with this lens.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Newbie Lens advice!	anthropas	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	18	12-07-2011 04:32 PM
newbie needs advice, help!!	lowflyer V8	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	1	04-25-2010 03:34 PM
Newbie asking advice.	Orrin1	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	5	11-10-2009 06:43 AM
Help Needed: Lens Advice for Newbie for Trip	beth_w737	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	12-21-2008 09:24 PM
Newbie needs some lens advice	91FE	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	03-25-2008 06:51 PM

08-03-2009, 10:45 AM	#16
bluebronco Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Iowa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 170	I was in the same situation. Kit 18-55mm. I was kind of lucky. I inherited a few pentax lenses from my wife's grandpa. It is a SMC Pentax-FA 70-200mm 4/F. I also had an old (30 yrs) 50mm 2.8/F. I went ahead and bought a Sigma 18-200mm 3.5-6.3/F for every day. It works well. It needs lots of light. I am going to sell the other ones and buy a fast smaller zoom with a 1.8/F. Still researching. You can find old prime lenses that are fast on eBay. It is amazing the difference between "faster" lenses. Originally posted by El Bolson Hello, I've had a K100d for the past few years, that came with the standard 18-55mm lens, which I have made work in many situations, but would like to upgrade to add another lens and see what you pros out their suggest. I know it would have to do with my many preferences, styles of shooting, etc, but let's just say another good all around lens - prob a tele/zoom I think would be a good investment. Would something like an 18-200mm be a good fit with my other lens for an addition? Please suggest!! And keeping it on the low price range as well - just a hobbyist here Thanks!

08-03-2009, 10:59 AM	#17
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by El Bolson I've seen a Sigma 28-200 AF on ebay for pretty cheap (IMO) and am curious if anyone has had good experiences with this lens... The only superzoom (eg, more than 3-4X) considered on a par with the 50-200 would be the Tamron/Pentax 18-250 (eprhaps Sigma too; it's too new for a consensus to have developed). Here's a basic rule to consider: for a given price, the lower the zoom factor the better. That is, a $250 prime will be better than a $250 3X zoom, which will in turn be better than a $250 6X zoom, which will in turn be better than a $250 10X zoom. To get a 10X zoom that compares in quality to a 3X one, you should expect to pay much more for it. In fact, you could probably get a pretty good predictor of lens quality by taking the price and dividing it by the zoom factor. So there is very little chance any inexpensive 28-200 is going to come close to a similarly priced 50-200. Again, as a replacement for your 18-55, it might be sort of interesting, as you would gin a lot at the long end, but you'd give up quite a bit at the wide end too. But it would make for fewer lenses changes - you could leave the 28-200 on the camera most of the time, switching to the 18-55 only when you need something wider. Quality would no doubt be not as good as the 18-55 + 50-200, but maybe good enough to be a good tradeoff for the convenience if you're of that mindset.

08-03-2009, 11:06 AM	#18
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by newarts Unlike many others, I find scant use for wide angles as I tend to emphasize a subject when I frame a photo - usually I fill the frame with a subject, so my 18-55mm kit lens gets little use at the wide end. Actually, I'm with you there, and am often happy to travel with just a handful of primes, the widest of which is 28mm. But I do like carrying the kit lens for landscape - it's really quite good at f/8 or f/11, and while I do a lot of landscape around 28mm or higher, I do just enough wider to not want to be without that option.

08-03-2009, 02:24 PM	#19
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,823	Lots of good advice here. Having compared the 50-200mm and Sigma options I say go for the 55-300mm. Not only is it light for its range, it has excellent optics. You may have to save up for it, but that's better than getting something you might be disappointed with. That said, I am not really a telephoto person. The DA12-24mm will fill in the wide end of your kit lens. Expensive now at retail but one was going reasonably here second-hand. No compromises whatsoever with this lens. Best for interiors and cramped European locations. I can live without it, but when you need it, you really need it. If you simply want improved IQ and slightly wider reach, the DA16-45 is a very good deal for the money. Nice for landscapes. But forget all that advice and instead just get some manual primes to really learn about photography. The 28 / 50 / 110 combo that worked on film still works on digital just fine.

08-04-2009, 04:49 AM	#20
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,668	The one thing I would add to the discussion is that you won't regret saving to buy quality lenses. I have a couple of lenses that I got for cheap prices but never use because they just don't have the sharpness, etc of others. In the end, I would have been better saving the money I spent on those lenses because I don't use them anyway.

08-04-2009, 08:26 AM	#21
bluebronco Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Iowa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 170	Originally posted by Rondec The one thing I would add to the discussion is that you won't regret saving to buy quality lenses. I have a couple of lenses that I got for cheap prices but never use because they just don't have the sharpness, etc of others. In the end, I would have been better saving the money I spent on those lenses because I don't use them anyway. Right with ya

08-04-2009, 06:23 PM	#22
Duck Dodgers Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: in the 24½th Century! Photos: Gallery Posts: 439	Just to echo the remarks about fast primes, while my first lens after the kit lens was a Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm f/2.8-4 v3, the next one was a Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7. I find myself using it more than another other lens, even today.

08-04-2009, 07:21 PM	#23
GerryL Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: CA Posts: 2,731	I started with the kit lenses DA 18-55mm AL II and the DA 50-200mm. Once I had those I went into LBA and can't get satisfied till I got one on the 300mm end. Up till now I am trying to find and pick a good 70-300mm or 75-300mm. I have bought other primes before getting the 70-300mm, but till I get those I guess I would still be always thinking and looking for them on ebay or the marketplace or the www. Maybe I'm just still into LBA that's why..

08-04-2009, 07:40 PM	#24
Scottie137 Senior Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Atlanta, Ga Photos: Albums Posts: 186	My second lens was a 70-300. I soon got a 28-80 (Tamron) with close up focus capabilities. Both let me get my feet wet in their respective areas (macro(ish) and tele). But when I got a FA 50mm 1.4 for xmas, my world was changed (at least as it related to photography). I did eventually get a Pentax DA 18-250 which was a fine walk around lens. It served me well on trips to France and in the states. It does depend on what types of photography you're going to be doing. If its for family photos, the range and convenience of the 18-250 (or some other wide to tele lens) is hard to beat, but the 50 1.4 let me get indoor shots I never would have been able to think about with other, slower, lenses. Lastly, a decent flash can really open up your photography as well. Good luck!

08-05-2009, 08:09 PM	#25
tojax Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Colorado Photos: Gallery Posts: 53	After I bought my K20d, I went out and got some duplicates of manual lenses that I had when I owned a K1000 back in the 80's. I found a used Pentax manual 50mm f/1.4 and a 135mm and am getting a cheaper Tamron zoom while I save up for better AF wide angle and zoom lenses. I'll go with those while I re-teach myself photography. For some reason the 18-55 kit lens just doesn't give me the results I want, whereas the cheap 135mm manual prime lens took some pictures I liked right at the beginning.

08-06-2009, 02:49 PM	#26
GerryL Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: CA Posts: 2,731	Originally posted by tojax For some reason the 18-55 kit lens just doesn't give me the results I want, whereas the cheap 135mm manual prime lens took some pictures I liked right at the beginning. This surprised me about the 135mm too! ..and I don't think the brand matters not unless it's a truly crap unknown brand.

08-06-2009, 03:45 PM	#27
adriano210 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Dublin Posts: 60	get brite 50mm prime

08-06-2009, 06:23 PM	#28
tojax Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Colorado Photos: Gallery Posts: 53	Originally posted by GerryL This surprised me about the 135mm too! ..and I don't think the brand matters not unless it's a truly crap unknown brand. It was a Pentax 135mm but the results were better than expected. The 2 pictures I posted were with this lens.