Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-25-2008, 03:52 AM   #16
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hradec Králové, Czech Republic
Posts: 11
Reasons?

I think you should ask yourself: Why K10D is not enough for me? If you have a specific reason(s), like "Because I need higher ISO quite often", people can give you an advice, which of the mentioned upgrades would be better. If you are not currently limited by the camera you have, there is no reason for change. Especially if you are still learning photography - constant playing with new "toys" with plenty of functions is not a way to learn what is really important. I agree with others that a decent lens suitable for your needs would be better.

PS: If you still have some spare money and feel like to buy something "new", buying and using a cheap old "student" film body (K1000, ME-Super...) together with a decent 50mm lens on Ebay as a second camera would be not only fun, but could maybe help you to learn a great deal of those "more important things". ;-)


Last edited by Tomas_IV; 02-25-2008 at 03:55 AM. Reason: typo
02-25-2008, 03:02 PM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 975
go out shooting, and enjoy it

i will sort of just place my vote in, so to speak, with one addition. os here it goes:

i know where you're coming from, and what drives you right now (i think): you _must_ buy something new to play with. i will, at the risk of being a PITA, repeat what others have mentioned: cool off, get some more mileage on the k10d, get another battery if you need to, maybe the baterry grip, one or two more cards, and go out shooting. a lot. this is the great thing about digital: you can learn so much faster, because it is so cheap to shoot more, not much more expensive, short term, than shooting a litle (unlike film/slide). take advantage of that. spend the money to buy yourself time to shoot, trips to locations that inspire you (if that's the case), or whatever floats your inspirational boat. you will soon learn what the limitations of your current gear are, for your particular needs, and can come back here asking with more information, about which lens to get, and so on. if you _must_ spend a lot of money, first figure out what you need, i am sure we can recommend a very nice lens (or even the k20d, if it turns out to be what you need, but i honestly doubt that), or maybe a tripod, or a car, a book, software.. right now we really cannot know . seriously: it's not about technology, have fun SHOOTING!

hope this helps

ps: all the technology in the world won't help you make better pictures, actually, all the knowledge in the world won't either (i have neither, but i think i have quite a decent amount of both: my girlfriend walks all over my shots with hers, though she understands half of what i do about photography. it's not engineering, it may look like it, but it's really not ). you do need both, though, even though they are not enough. at this point it seems technology is certainly not what you lack: learn more, shoot more. but this is kind of offtopic
02-25-2008, 03:25 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 975
example

example: had a quick look at your photos (very nice, btw, you are doing much better, as a "rookie", than i am after a decade or so -- guess i'm just an older rookie), it seems wildlife and flowers/macro seem to be your thing. i noted the dissapointment with the 50-500sigma, is that because it is quite soft at the long end (not that i can help, just curious, thinking of a longer lens myself). i also note you seem to have a 300/2.8 tamron, though, which seems to be doing a good job, so i guess you're pretty much set with that setup. maybe, if macro is also something you like a lot, get one of the fixed focal macro lenses (i would incline towards the 100mm, rahter than the 50mm, as it gives more working distance, but that's just me, matter of prefference -- some people would like a 35mm macro, or even shorter). if you want longer focal lengths, and are bothered by the sharpness of the sigma 70-300 and 50-500, maybe it's time to consider an EX tele from sigma (beware, they are not cheap), i hear they are quite good , also pentax has a superb (it seems right now) 200mm/2.8 just out, and a 300mm/4 (which i don't know much about, but being DA* it is probably stellar, as usual, and will determine me to sell my car, house, cat, to get it ), so maybe that is also something to consider, if fixed focal length is not a problem for you, and weather sealing matters (i guess it would, if you are serious about the outdoors); but, again, be carefull, neither of them is exactly what one would call cheap

overall, i think what you really want to spend on is going "on location" more, baterryes so you can be away for longer, memory cards, a tent and so on. but maybe the wildlife shots are just "incidental", and not what you like to shoot most? do tell us
02-25-2008, 04:04 PM   #19
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Utah
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 17
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by nanok Quote
example: had a quick look at your photos (very nice, btw, you are doing much better, as a "rookie", than i am after a decade or so -- guess i'm just an older rookie), it seems wildlife and flowers/macro seem to be your thing. i noted the dissapointment with the 50-500sigma, is that because it is quite soft at the long end (not that i can help, just curious, thinking of a longer lens myself). i also note you seem to have a 300/2.8 tamron, though, which seems to be doing a good job, so i guess you're pretty much set with that setup. maybe, if macro is also something you like a lot, get one of the fixed focal macro lenses (i would incline towards the 100mm, rahter than the 50mm, as it gives more working distance, but that's just me, matter of prefference -- some people would like a 35mm macro, or even shorter). if you want longer focal lengths, and are bothered by the sharpness of the sigma 70-300 and 50-500, maybe it's time to consider an EX tele from sigma (beware, they are not cheap), i hear they are quite good , also pentax has a superb (it seems right now) 200mm/2.8 just out, and a 300mm/4 (which i don't know much about, but being DA* it is probably stellar, as usual, and will determine me to sell my car, house, cat, to get it ), so maybe that is also something to consider, if fixed focal length is not a problem for you, and weather sealing matters (i guess it would, if you are serious about the outdoors); but, again, be carefull, neither of them is exactly what one would call cheap

overall, i think what you really want to spend on is going "on location" more, baterryes so you can be away for longer, memory cards, a tent and so on. but maybe the wildlife shots are just "incidental", and not what you like to shoot most? do tell us

The majority of what I like to shoot is wildlife.

My Sigma 50-500 is an EX also.

Thanks all!!.... I will be looking into a few lenses instead.

Suggestions on lenses will be greatly appreciated.Will the Pentax 200mm smc P-DA* F2.8 ED(IF) SDM Lens be that much better than my 70-300mm, (faster, sharper?) Or even up to the 300 if will be far superior to my other?


Last edited by Cvrn; 02-25-2008 at 08:47 PM.
02-25-2008, 11:22 PM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brazil
Posts: 377
QuoteOriginally posted by Cvrn Quote
The majority of what I like to shoot is wildlife.

My Sigma 50-500 is an EX also.

Thanks all!!.... I will be looking into a few lenses instead.

Suggestions on lenses will be greatly appreciated.Will the Pentax 200mm smc P-DA* F2.8 ED(IF) SDM Lens be that much better than my 70-300mm, (faster, sharper?) Or even up to the 300 if will be far superior to my other?
Pff. Prime DA star vs the cheapest lens available is monstruosity. It would beat the Tamron in the blink of a shutter. That is a question you should never ask again

I would suggest getting the 50-135* or 16-50*, so you can take advantage of the weather proofing and have exquisite photo opportunities few people can afford (rain, over water, windy beaches, etc). That's what I'd like to do. At the moment I'm just wrapping my 18-55 in a supermarket plastic bag and securing the plastic with the hood

My next wish is a cone hood that extends about 30cm from the lens, blocking anything from sticking to the front surface
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, d200, dslr, k20, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax Da 16-45 or D200 fault djayvo Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 10-25-2010 07:27 PM
Any opinions on the Nikon D200? KungPOW Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 28 10-09-2009 03:14 PM
D200 Body for $620 Shipped deadwolfbones Photographic Technique 0 02-23-2009 04:49 PM
Pentax K10D vs Nikon D200 karq Pentax DSLR Discussion 14 02-01-2009 03:34 AM
Nikon D200 vs Pentax K10D codiac2600 Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 05-03-2007 08:47 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:35 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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