Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-08-2012, 10:09 AM   #16
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,197
QuoteOriginally posted by Philoslothical Quote
It really depends on what the person buying the camera wants to use it for though. Some people wouldn't make much use of the 55-300mm, others couldn't live without it.
That's very true. It depends upon what a person is expecting from a DSLR and what their future intentions are.

01-08-2012, 01:26 PM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,812
There's a very good reason why just about all manufacturers have 18-55 and 50-200 ('ish) as the two kit zooms -

(1) admittedly they are cheap (to make)
(1.a) being cheap to make means most probably they are relatively easy design and manufacture -
hence pretty good performance at "stoopidly" low prices.
(1.b) most manufacturers supply and encourage their kit lenses -
which probably means although unlikely to be the "bestest" lenses in the world -
but they have to be of good/adequate performance -
since the manufacturer is staking their reputation on those two most supplied prevalent lenses.

(2) these are probably the most used/popular and generally most useful focal lengths -
although I would also covet an ideal lens of 10-300 zoom with constant f/2.8 max aperture -
with the size and weight of the current 18-55 kit zoom
I doubt if I'd want to afford it - and if it is actually possible!

So I make do, and get away with, the two humblest kit zooms 18-55 & 50-200 -
yes, there are lots of times I wished I had the other lens on the body -
but the performance size, weight far out weigh any upgrade.

It's simply another philosophy of using the tools one has at hand -
of course I would love the ideal in everything, that would make my photography easier -
but I sincerely doubt if just an upgrade in equipment would improve my photography -
only time,and actual usage to gain that experience does it - for me - YMMV.
01-08-2012, 03:27 PM   #18
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by Wolfie665 Quote
New Pentax k-r kit
sell the kit 18-55mm lens
buy:
Pentax M 1.7 used lens
Pentax DA 17-70mm f4 AL IF SDM used Lens
Pentax DA 55-300mm new lens (metal mount not L)

That is exactly what I am doing
M50, I presume?

And are you selling-off the rest of your newly-acquired hoard?
01-08-2012, 03:38 PM   #19
Pentaxian
usn ret's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Southern Calif High Desert
Posts: 1,149
QuoteOriginally posted by vapentaxuser Quote
If someone came to you and said they were interested in the Pentax system but only had $1,000 to spend on both camera and lenses. What would you advise them to get?

My advice would be:

Pentax K-x/K-r body
DA WR 18-135 lens
DA 35mm AL lens
If you are buying, let us know what you chose, or is this a hypothetical exercise???? Cliff

01-08-2012, 04:13 PM   #20
Forum Member
Wolfie665's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 66
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
M50, I presume?

And are you selling-off the rest of your newly-acquired hoard?
Yes M 50mm. And yes already have sold all the Canon gear. Although judging by my ebay participation with Pentax lenses I am afraid we may have another LBA case here LOL
01-08-2012, 04:24 PM   #21
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
There ain't no perfect 'budget' kit -- were there, we wouldn't have all these fun exchanges. But some principles apply:

* Kx and Kr aren't WR so there's no need for a WR lens unless a desire to supplement the kit with a WR body lurks in the buyer's fantasies.

* The steal-of-a-deal kit is the DA18-55 plus DA 55-300. But it means swapping lenses at 55mm, so add a cheap F35-70 for that vital range. And a faster prime between 28-58mm is good.

* Except at the wide end, my minimalist AF kit include the DA18-250 and FA50/1.4. Add a Raynox DCR-150 for close work and 95% of needs are covered.

* Someone shooting interiors or cramped spaces may need a 10-20 / 1--24 / 12-24. Shooting only 'scapes may need a 16-45 or 17-50. Concentrating on people-shooting may require a 50-135 or 28-75 f/2.8.

* And of course a set of fine primes, AF and/or MF, may be just right and all that's needed. MF bargains at 28-35-50-135mm, AF deals at 35-50, great glass with the Ltds but for rather more cash.

The basic test: Ask thyself, "What do I want to do that I can't do with what I have?"
01-09-2012, 08:06 AM   #22
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 42
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by usn ret Quote
If you are buying, let us know what you chose, or is this a hypothetical exercise???? Cliff
I guess you could put it under the latter. It's a constructive discussion about what's the nicest DSLR/lens combo you could put together under a limited budget.
01-09-2012, 08:08 AM   #23
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 42
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Wolfie665 Quote
New Pentax k-r kit
sell the kit 18-55mm lens
buy:
Pentax M 50mm 1.7 used lens
Pentax DA 17-70mm f4 AL IF SDM used Lens
Pentax DA 55-300mm new lens (metal mount not L)

That is exactly what I am doing
That's a nice combo as well.

01-09-2012, 08:12 AM   #24
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 42
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
My initial Pentax kit (not counting the DA10-17 fisheye) was the DA18-250 and the FA50/1.4. I think a great startup kit would be the Kx or Kr, DA35/2.4, and the DA18-250 or its Tamron twin.

Moneywise, a two-zoom kit of the DA18-55 and DA55-300 makes sense. Usagewise, not so much. An awful lot of photographic subjects are best-shot in the 35-70mm range, and swapping lenses at 55mm is a pain and a loss. The 18-250 is simply the most flexible lens around and covers (well!) a vast and useful range, from almost-ultrawide at one end to great reach at the other end.

An 18-250 is not for low light, of course, so a faster prime should be included, and a new DA35/2.4 is the most affordable. A FA50/1.4 would be even better but would probably break the budget. I'd also push for some manual primes, but those can come later.

An advantage of an 18-250 as the basic kit lens is that a newbie can easily figure out which focal lengths they use most, so can plan future lens acquisitions based on usage. That could still be done with a two-zoom (18-55 plus 55-300) kit but it would be more of a pain. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
I agree. Though I think the other folks are right that the kit lens combo is perfectly fine for the K-x. The 18-250 is a good choice as well. I mentioned the 18-135 because it's widely available and optically a good fit. But the DA 17-70 is a good choice too if you don't want to go the kit lens route.
01-09-2012, 12:50 PM   #25
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
The basic test: Ask thyself, "What do I want to do that I can't do with what I have?"
Ha ha - oh dear. I really have to buy the lenses first to find out if I'm missing out on something I really need ! Currently I'm looking into digiscoping with the Skywatcher 80ED telescope, to add to the x4, x10 and x40 microscope objectives and Pentax adapter I've just bought
01-09-2012, 05:39 PM   #26
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,400
If you want to do Pentax on the cheap, look used. You can get DA and DAL 18-55 lenses for $40 from Henry's. Then go into manual focus, and M42 lenses, my whole 15 lens M42 kit cost me about $1200 and that includes getting a brand new 16mm zenitar fisheye, and a super tak 85/1.9. Lots of my lenses cost less than $30 to offset these two more substantial purchases, and in fact these are the only 2 over $100.
01-10-2012, 01:49 AM   #27
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
If you want to do Pentax on the cheap, look used. You can get DA and DAL 18-55 lenses for $40 from Henry's. Then go into manual focus, and M42 lenses
Excellent advice, but some newbs will feel techno-shock when they have to manually focus a lens, and will be moaning here about how their new dSLR sucks because they can't get sharp images. Thus does education commence.
01-12-2012, 03:09 PM   #28
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 50
A friend of mine was recently sucked into the pentax world. She got a K-X and two lens kit, the 18-55 and the 200mm for something like 499ish?

That was used off ebay. It should be entirely possible to get something like that and then pick up the DAL35 f2.4 for 169ish. Spend the rest on a bag, flash and tripod. Basic well reviewed Dolica ball head tripod runs 40-60. A basic P-TTL Vivitar flash is 120ish. etc...

Last edited by MadAmos; 01-12-2012 at 03:09 PM. Reason: word correction
01-12-2012, 03:28 PM   #29
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dallas / Yucatan
Posts: 996
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
My initial Pentax kit (not counting the DA10-17 fisheye) was the DA18-250 and the FA50/1.4. I think a great startup kit would be the Kx or Kr, DA35/2.4, and the DA18-250 or its Tamron twin.

Moneywise, a two-zoom kit of the DA18-55 and DA55-300 makes sense. Usagewise, not so much. An awful lot of photographic subjects are best-shot in the 35-70mm range, and swapping lenses at 55mm is a pain and a loss. The 18-250 is simply the most flexible lens around and covers (well!) a vast and useful range, from almost-ultrawide at one end to great reach at the other end.

An 18-250 is not for low light, of course, so a faster prime should be included, and a new DA35/2.4 is the most affordable. A FA50/1.4 would be even better but would probably break the budget. I'd also push for some manual primes, but those can come later.

An advantage of an 18-250 as the basic kit lens is that a newbie can easily figure out which focal lengths they use most, so can plan future lens acquisitions based on usage. That could still be done with a two-zoom (18-55 plus 55-300) kit but it would be more of a pain. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
I really agree with this. I recently did a little study of my photos and, leaving out interiors which were all shot near the wider end of my DA 12-24mm, I was surprised to see how many of my decent shots were at the 50-70mm range - using either of the kit lenses (max on the 18-55mm or low end on the 55-200mm. So, now besides my manual lens fetish, I'm going to be searching for something that covers that 35-70mm range that Rico mentioned in an AF lens, as well as reconsidering what I have in my manual lenses. (I had expected that longer telephoto shots would have been more common.)

Doing a review of your pile of digital shots can provide some revealing information. The 18-250mm would cover a lot of what I do, but I still find that manual lenses help my composition by forcing me to move around.
01-12-2012, 06:28 PM   #30
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by yucatanPentax Quote
So, now besides my manual lens fetish, I'm going to be searching for something that covers that 35-70mm range that Rico mentioned in an AF lens, as well as reconsidering what I have in my manual lenses.
The budget winner is the F35-70, usually around US$50 by itself, often for less when sold with a SF-1 or other 1990s AF body. The smallest zoom Pentax ever made, agile (fast AF), sharp as a bag of primes. Don't leave Earth without it. If that's too pricey, AF Promaster (Tamron) and Quantaray (Sigma) 28-70s can often be found cheap.

QuoteQuote:
(I had expected that longer telephoto shots would have been more common.)
Long teles are very useful and I love using the DA18-250 to get context shots at one end and grab details at the other. Most of us probably don't use it at the long end so much. But if we need the reach, it's there.

QuoteQuote:
Doing a review of your pile of digital shots can provide some revealing information. The 18-250mm would cover a lot of what I do, but I still find that manual lenses help my composition by forcing me to move around.
AF (super)zooms are great when we don't know what to expect, or can expect diverse opportunities. MF primes of any length force us to stop and look and move.
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, da, dslr, lens, pentax, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How does The Gimp go on a budget for PP? secateurs Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 13 11-28-2010 02:30 PM
Student Budget soppy General Talk 17 09-29-2010 07:22 PM
Tripod on a budget? NecroticSoldier Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 18 04-10-2010 07:31 AM
LBA on a budget Gregor Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 03-15-2010 01:38 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:19 PM. | 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