[Hehe]

Hi guys,

I've been a pentax user for a while now. I purchased my first DSLR (pentax K-r) in highschool when I was starting to really develop with my photography. I'm now a poorish uni student and been wanting to upgrade for a while seeing i'm still really into photography. I live in Australia but am going overseas to Europe for a semester exchange. I was thinking about upgrading when I get home and see how much money I have left over. However I've recently metioned this to my parents and they said I might as well upgrade now and bring an upgraded kit with me to Europe and I'll pay them back when I get back. I'm trying to decide between upgrading my DSLR to the K3 however I've also been thinking maybe I should just upgrade my lens. I've currently just got the kit 18-55mm and 50-200mm WR obviously pretty basic lenses.

So basically my question is: Should I upgrade to K3 or spend the money into buying an upgraded and good quality lens and upgrade to the K3 next year. And if you think I should upgrade lenses which lenses would you recommend for travel (a mixture of landscapes and street photography).

Thanks heaps!

[Adam]

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

[marco crescenzio]

great suggestion , that's what I would have said too.

[Hehe]

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?

[transam879]

If you can manage the extra expense, I's recommend the K-3 & 18-135 kit since you'd save money on the lens buying it with the kit. You'll eventually want to upgrade to the K-3, or comparable model at some point and the prices are great right now for the K-3/K-3 kit. That's if you can convince your parents to front some extra cash. Then when you return, and pay them back, you can start looking at some higher quality lenses. The weather sealed combo and range of the K-3 18-135 kit may come in handy during your trip, especially if you are out and about and get stuck in inclement weather.

[outcast86]

What about the k-5ii(s)? Still good upgrade and not as pricey, leaves a room for a lens upgrade ... A while back I wet this road from a k-7 to k-5iis because of high iso issues with the k-7 and added a tamron 17-50 for the price of a k-3. So far the k-5iis has been great and the tammy I just got recently, don't have an opinion on it yet...but the point being, don't have to upgrade to the last model of the flagship since the one before is almost on par and a half the price...

[Billk]

What about the k-5ii(s)? Still good upgrade and not as pricey, leaves a room for a lens upgrade ... A while back I wet this road from a k-7 to k-5iis because of high iso issues with the k-7 and added a tamron 17-50 for the price of a k-3. So far the k-5iis has been great and the tammy I just got recently, don't have an opinion on it yet...but the point being, don't have to upgrade to the last model of the flagship since the one before is almost on par and a half the price...

Does anyone have an opinion on whether the extra AF points on the K3 make it superior to the K5s? That would seem to be its main selling point over the K5IIs in particular.

Love the K7 at 200 ISO. Don't mind it at 400 ISO. Start getting cranky at 800 ISO. Not sure whether to just wait for the FF and have the K7 as my back up or get something that is better at high ISO and has better AF now.

[sterretje]

If I think Europe, I see old cities, narrow streets, cathedrals etc; Something where wider is probably more useful than longer. For me, that would exclude the 18-135 if I was looking for a new standard lens; for those cases where you need longer, you have the 50-200.

You can consider to add an UWA zoom like a 10-20 or 12-24 for those situations where you need wi................de. Add 35/2.4 as standard lens and use the existing 50-200 for when you need longer. Those three lenses would make a fine travel kit for Europe for me

[Hehe]

You can consider to add an UWA zoom like a 10-20 or 12-24 for those situations where you need wi................de. Add 35/2.4 as standard lens and use the existing 50-200 for when you need longer. Those three lenses would make a fine travel kit for Europe for me

Thanks for your help,
do you reckon just stick with the k-r? or upgrade a body as well?

[officiousbystander]

As you're in Australia you should check out the DCXPERT Ebay store which is run by the local Pentax distributor. You'll see a K50 body only there for $A499 as well as a good range of lenses. The K3 body only is $A1075. Even if they're more expensive than B&H, postage is free and you have the advantage of a local warranty. I went from Kx to K5 which is a huge leap and I have yet to outgrow it. The K50 has the same sensor as the K5 but packaged in more up to date tech.

[sterretje]

do you reckon just stick with the k-r? or upgrade a body as well?

Your K-r should be fine; do you feel it limits you somehow? For me it would depend on funds. Plenty money and add the camera; a little less and add the lens(es) first. Remember to take both cameras if you add another one; it would be a pity if the new one gives problems and you can't take pictures while overseas.

[Kerrowdown]

I'm old school and would always put the money into glass before bodies, because Pentax allows you to continue using even older lenses on modern cameras.

Once I've got the required lenses... then I think about bodies, unless of course there a major development (i.e. FF) or a feature that I need.

While my cameras give me what I need, I don't upgrade.

[Paul the Sunman]

If you can hold off a little while, the price of the K3 will come down a lot once the K3ii hits the shelves in Australia. At the moment, DigiDirect is selling the K3+18-135 kit for $1498. I'm sure that will drop. They also have semiregular "10% off everything" weekends if you're lucky.

The 18-135 is an excellent travel lens. My son took his K-30 to Europe last year with only that lens, and he was very happy with it. Don't forget, it's WR for when the weather isn't great. It's wide enough and long enough for nearly all travel uses.

[Des]

I agree with Paul. Hold off on the K-3 for now (its price will drop a lot over the next few months, as will the K-S2, which is another body to consider). Get the 18-135. It's the ideal travel lens: light weight, compact, wide range, good IQ, WR. Get a compact cheapish prime as well for low light, wider aperture and whenever you need the zing of extra sharpness. You've probably already got a preference about a particular focal length, but most people would go with something in the 28-70 range, e.g. DA 35 f2.4, DA 40, any of the 50s (DA 50 f1.8 is cheap and good), or DA 70. Use the prime for stitching panoramas shots too.

[BertH]

I would suggest the K-5 IIs and a splendid lens : the Pentax 16-85mm. It will be a great combo for traveling our wonderful continent.
Inside buildings, I would suggest the Sigma 10-20mm/4.5 or the Tamron 10-24