Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-31-2015, 02:15 AM   #16
Pentaxian
Paul the Sunman's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,122
I think this is getting a bit too expensive for the OP. Let's tone things down a bit here.

05-31-2015, 03:02 AM   #17
Forum Member




Join Date: May 2012
Location: Biddinghuizen, the Netherlands
Posts: 54
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul the Sunman Quote
I think this is getting a bit too expensive for the OP. Let's tone things down a bit here.
Don't think so, OP wants a K-3 and better glass so he got suggestions !
05-31-2015, 05:42 AM   #18
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Essex County, Ontario
Posts: 476
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
The K-3 is a huge leap ahead of the K-r, but if you're short on cash, why not upgrade to the K-50 instead and spend the extra money on a few primes such as the DA 35mm and DA 50mm?

As an all-in-one lens with good image quality, I can recommend the Sigma 17-70mm or Pentax 18-135mm:

Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 Contemporary Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews
Pentax-DA 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 Review - Introduction | PentaxForums.com Reviews
After all this I think Adam still makes the most sense. K-50 is a substantial leap over the Kr and the price has never been better. K-3 will be available for a while yet and will continue to come down in price in the same pattern we have seen other models as they are discontinued.
05-31-2015, 05:51 AM   #19
smf
Loyal Site Supporter
smf's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Midland, MI
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,356
I second the suggestion that the OP have two camera bodies during the trip — perhaps a compact (pocket-size) body if a second large body would be a problem.
I recently heard about a photographer whose only camera body was ruined during an expensive, long-planned trip.
Best wishes!

05-31-2015, 06:11 AM   #20
Pentaxian
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,873
QuoteOriginally posted by Hehe Quote
Hmm, K-50. I feel like I'd want to upgrade all the way to K3 rather then going with the K-50. I feel as though I'd want to upgrade at some point soon and so I might as well just go the whole way either now or later on next year. But those lenses look great - I was looking at the sigma 17-70mm. I was also looking at the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. Is that applicable with Pentax? I was looking at it on my friends Nikon d7100.

---------- Post added 05-31-15 at 02:21 PM ----------

Oh I just found the review on it! would you recommend the Sigma or the 18-135 over the Tamron?
I did mention earlier on about the DA 18-135... I have the k-5, k-5IIs and the k-3, this lens really shines with the k-3 since you can get the most out of this lens with high dynamic range sensor, the AF system and also the ability to crop. I recommend a k-3 paired with the 18-135 lens. I don't know about the off brand lenses from Sigma or Tamron, but personally I would prefer the Pentax DA 18-135 as it is recognized by the camera and certainly would be easier to tune in the AF fine adjustment if need be. But if it is an off-brand, then you don't know if you encounter problems it could be due the lens or the camera... of course just IMHO...
05-31-2015, 07:57 AM   #21
Pentaxian
Aaron28's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Huntsville, Al
Posts: 1,070
go with glass and get reimpressed with yer K-r then make upgrade body wise when the time comes
05-31-2015, 02:00 PM   #22
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 211
QuoteOriginally posted by Hehe Quote
Hmm, K-50. I feel like I'd want to upgrade all the way to K3 rather then going with the K-50. I feel as though I'd want to upgrade at some point soon and so I might as well just go the whole way either now or later on next year. But those lenses look great - I was looking at the sigma 17-70mm. I was also looking at the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8. Is that applicable with Pentax? I was looking at it on my friends Nikon d7100.

---------- Post added 05-31-15 at 02:21 PM ----------

Oh I just found the review on it! would you recommend the Sigma or the 18-135 over the Tamron?

the 17-50 f2.8 is fine. And the K3 is fine.
05-31-2015, 02:18 PM   #23
Pentaxian
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,116
Most of my travel shots have been taken with my 18-135, with my K-5 at first, and K-3 more recently. Having the (considerable) extra FL at the long end has been worth much more to me than having the extra millimetre or two at the short end, as I've often been frustrated by not being able to get close enough to something, or for capturing detail. I do carry the DA15 for extra width when it's needed, but that may be stretching the budget too far, in this case. Having said that, bundling the 18-135 with a K-3 gives good value, is an easy carry, is flexible and is WR. I'd look at that combination first and then add the DA15 if or when funds allow.

05-31-2015, 03:06 PM   #24
Forum Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: California
Posts: 64
Another (qualified) vote for Adam's suggestion.

I would go for lenses most of all which will make a bigger difference than between all 3 bodies.

But, the K50 is a ridiculous bargain right now at least stateside. The only significant weakness in the body is lowlight AF without the assist light. With good glass the K50 produces technically terrific images, and very useable images up to ISO3200 or so (of course depending on your use).

The two kit lenses are really limiting, and the real limits they impose are creative (yes, they are not technically amazing for sharpness etc, but they are often good enough in those areas for many people). The limits they impose are that they are not very wide and are very slow -- they simply can't do wide, can only do shallow depth of field in limited situations, and will require high ISO or slow shutter speed in low light, which can ruin a lot of images. Yes the Tamron 17-50 is definitely sharper and constant f2.8 but it won't open up that much for you beyond the kit 18-55 (though I do use mine instead of the kit lens, it's not where I put my extra lens money first).

For a trip, I would (and do!) add to your kit lenses a low light prime lens, like a Sigma 30 1.4 (50mm is too long for this and 35 2.4 too slow -- for pubs, close portraits, nights out, street, inside buildings), and an ultra wide either the 10-17 (most fun to me) or the 15 limited (for size for sure) or one of the wide rectilinear zooms (these choices are all for inside buildings, landscapes, cityscapes, architecture, and straight up fun composition). But of course it all depends on what you like to snap!

The low light prime 30 (normal), the ultra wide, and the two kits, covers everything pretty well and depending on which of the latter you pick, pretty inexpensively. Your creative options will expand dramatically and you'll get a lot more out of being able to change lenses with an SLR whichever body you have.
05-31-2015, 05:27 PM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Fredericton New Brunswick Canada
Photos: Albums
Posts: 332
Another old school guy here. If I were doing Europe I would want to go wide, and light. Keep the Kr, great IQ in a small, lightweight camera. For those narrow streets and architecture, I would go wide and buy lightweight pancake primes. Probably, my kit would be the 15, the 21 and the 40mm pancakes. Nothing more. Boy, would that be a pleasurable trip... lightweight kit and awesome photos. (I've been out of the loop for awhile: I'm assuming those pancakes are still available).

And when you do upgrade your camera body, you will still have those awesome pancakes. You will never grow tired of them.
05-31-2015, 10:50 PM   #26
New Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 13
Original Poster
Yeah ok, so thanks for all your help guys haha a lot of responses!
I'm going to head into the local camera shop and try some primes see the image quality etc.

I'm probably going to try wide angle prime (maybe 15?) and 30. Then if they work well i'll also bring my 50-200mm to europe with me.

However, what do you guys reckon between the big debate of nikon d7100 v k3? before I invest in some nice quality pentax lenses haha

---------- Post added 06-01-15 at 03:58 PM ----------

As in: once i've bought these lenses I'd definitely want to be with the K3. However before I make that decision I could decide to make the switch to the dark side... my friend has the nikon d7100 and i've been jealous for a while.

which do you reckon would preform better? The nikon d7100 18-105 or 18-140 kit lenses
or the Pentax k3 18-135 kit lens.

I've been trying to do a bit of research on the matter and don't see a whole lot of differences besides the amazing 51 point AF system of the 7100. Also the price being around $100 cheaper then the pentax k3 combo (but i'm sure that will go down soon once the k3 II hit the markets here in Australia)
06-01-2015, 01:00 AM   #27
Site Supporter
Mallee Boy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hindmarsh Isl. Sth Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,485
The K3 is a very good camera. It didnt win the TIPA award for nothing.
The Nikon is also a very good camera.
What you are buying into is a camera system....something that you will want to add to in coming years. Nikon lens array is a little cumbersome and expensive depending on the body you buy, not all lens functions such as AF will work on all bodies (my daughter bought a low end Nikon and found that the higher quality Nikon glass would only work as a manual lens.) whereas the Pentax is backwards compatible across all its lenses.

Also check out lens prices; many Nikon lenses are very, very expensive whereas the most expensive Pentax lens is still something one can aspire to rather than dream about. Pentax lenses are very good quality.
Third Party lenses are readily available for the Pentax as you have noted, the Tamron 17-50 is highly regarded. The Sigma range is extensive and I have a few that are amongst my favourite glass.

I also own a Nikon D800, so I have first hand knowledge of the two marques.

My pick? The Pentax K3. The lens? if you can afford it the 18-135, otherwise the Tamron 17-50.

Choose carefully.
06-01-2015, 02:41 AM   #28
New Member




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 13
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Mallee Boy Quote
My pick? The Pentax K3. The lens? if you can afford it the 18-135, otherwise the Tamron 17-50.
Thanks very much for your advice Mallee, very helpful! Are you suggesting the 18-135 over the tamrom 17-50? I thought the Tamron was suppose to be superior.
06-01-2015, 02:34 PM   #29
Site Supporter
Mallee Boy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hindmarsh Isl. Sth Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,485
Tamron may give you a marginally sharper image (you will waste a lot of time trying to see the difference) and it has the advantage of f2.8, although that is largely negated by the ISO performance of the K3. The 18-135 has the greater reach and is therefore (inmho) a more versatile lens.

As a travel lens and a starter kit the 18-135 gives you a lot. If your budget stretched then an 18-250 (or thereabouts) would be even better.

PS: you realise this lens dilemna will never cease. Welcome to the world of LBA.

Last edited by Mallee Boy; 06-01-2015 at 02:39 PM. Reason: PS
06-02-2015, 05:13 AM   #30
Des
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Sth Gippsland Victoria Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,657
@Hehe, I think you are making the common mistake of thinking that it is the camera body that is holding you back.

When people say, "Nice pictures, you must have a good camera" it shows their ignorance. First, on a DSLR, lenses matter more than the body, in terms of image quality. Second, and more importantly, skills matter more than gear. If you look at the best photos on this site, you might be surprised to see that many were taken with cameras that can now be bought second-hand for <$200. Many were taken with lenses that can be bought fairly cheaply. Why the best photos stand out is generally because of the skill of the photographer. OK, spend a few hundred getting better lenses and you will see results. But the best (and cheapest) way to improve your photography is to improve your skills. Don't think spending $1000 or more on a new body will do it for you.
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, d7100, dslr, europe, guys, haha, k-50, k3, kit, lens, lenses, lot, money, nikon, pentax, photography, quality, sigma, tamron
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question Find a thread - Help Me - Please? Deedee Site Suggestions and Help 2 04-26-2014 02:34 PM
Help me make a decision please Tom777 Pentax K-3 25 03-25-2014 05:13 AM
Hello! Please help me with this lens. TheOldestVampire Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 12-27-2013 12:01 PM
Macro Please help me I'm falling........ eaglem Post Your Photos! 8 06-25-2013 03:23 PM
Please help me decide! :) Macintosh Sauce Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 7 06-20-2013 11:26 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:08 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