[cpk]

35 and 21

Actually, 40 and 21. The 35 is relatively heavy when you want to travel light.

Mind you, the 35 works beautifully on my IR-converted K7.

[EArenz]

I'm a bit broke and threatened with divorce if I get one so paying anymore for the bigger lens is death lol.

You guys are getting off the track with the expensive lenses. See the snippet by the OP above.
This was in reference to the 18-135mm which with some looking around can be had in good shape for about $250.
(Although the 40mm XS alone might be a good choice at around $150.) Small, light and sharp.

[ramseybuckeye]

If you can afford the K-3 and the 18-55 you should be a able to get a K-3 and 35/2.4 or 40sx for nearly the same, or a K-S2 or K-30 and an 18-135, or 21 for similar money. But go for the better lens over the 18-55. Whatever you get you'll do fine with it. It's all about what's behind the camera anyway, so whatever you get, learn how to use it.

[aleonx3]

I use the k-3 with the DA 20-40 for street and general photography. It is a great combo for outdoor and indoor shots.

[furryurry]

Body: K-3 or K-5IIs (16Mp, probably better dynamic range, probably not as good AF, lower price and the saved money you can spend on a better lens or lensES!!!) or K-3II (pixel shift, GPS (don't know how those are important to you), higher price).
Lens: Don't know if WR is important to you; if it is I'd get Pentax DA* 16-50mm f/2.8. Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 supposed to be sharper but doesn't have a WR, it saves you the worries about the SDM, although you can try and get a DA* 16-50 with a broken SDM and convert it to screwdrive and save some money (again I don't know how important it is for you to have a silent AF). Don't know how SDM compares to HSM either. I also don't know what more is important for you - the reach of the 18-135 lens or the f/2.8 of the DA* and Sigma.

Anyway I'd get a K-5IIs with DA 16-50/2.8 if WR is needed, or with the Sigma 17-50/2.8 if it is not. Or the same but with the K-3II body if the divorce thing goes well.

P.S. I'm also talking about used equipment mostly.

[beachgardener]

The 35 is relatively heavy when you want to travel light.

the 35 f2.4 is quite light, that and the 50 f1.8 might be in budget.

[Nicolas06]

Yes K3 and 18-55 are a great combo, truely.

The Camera body is really fast and reactive, pro level and in the same price range, nothing will be faster. The 18-55 while basic make nice photos, is innexpensive and is great for stree photography as it is also small/light unnobtrusive. You'll be fine with your choice.

You could always get more, spend more money. That's true. But if you are just starting, I'd give this nice combo a try, learn and train and eventually later move on.

[cpk]

the 35 f2.4 is quite light, that and the 50 f1.8 might be in budget.

Good point about the 35. I was thinking of the 35 Limited Macro.

[TER-OR]

21mm ltd, keep an eye open for a used copy. Beforehand, yes, the kit lens is not bad. Stop it down to f8-ish and you're good to go, the images will be good.
If you have more budget, get the 18-135 kit, you won't regret having that lens.

Fast? Why do you need super-fast (wide aperture) lens for street photography? If FAST means frames per second? The K3 boots glutes at that.

[BigMackCam]

The K3 boots glutes at that.

[Penumbra]

Fast? Why do you need super-fast (wide aperture) lens for street photography?

For shots like these (with the DA 50mm at 2.8):



For me personally, it's how i see interesting street photography, but i am aware that taste differes
And the lenses recommended here (21ltd, 35 ltd and 35 2.4, 20-40, 40), none of them are really ultra fast.

After much time spent over the lens subject i decided I will never again buy something that won't allow me at least a 2.8 one way or another (like for example the 20-40 is 2.8 only at the wide 20-24-ish mm end)

[emalvick]

I guess it just matters, how the original poster intends on shooting.

Budget-wise, I would suggest a used body going to a K-50, K-5, or even a used K-3 may work well as an initial start. If you want more general of a lens, then the 18-135 is good. However, for street photography, I like using a 21 mm and 43 mm lens. Both may be out of your budget, but if you get something small (the DA 35 or DA 50 would work too), it makes a nice street kit. To those that scoff at a Pentax dSLR for street photography, the combination of one of the bodies and the two primes I mentioned is quite similar to the GR ii and other fixed lens or mirrorless systems. People are not intimidated by the camera and I can get some great street shots.

As a landscape photographer, I actually love my Tamron 17-50/2.8, which I think you could get used for a cheap price. the 18-135 and 18-55 are great, but if you can save money on the body, you might be able to have more flexibility for the lens side of things. My only other suggestion would be not to buy older zooms. Old Pentax prime lenses are great, but the zooms are generally not (I'm sure there are good ones out there, but I suspect their a needle in a haystack).

[Nicolas06]

21mm ltd, keep an eye open for a used copy. Beforehand, yes, the kit lens is not bad. Stop it down to f8-ish and you're good to go, the images will be good.
If you have more budget, get the 18-135 kit, you won't regret having that lens.

Fast? Why do you need super-fast (wide aperture) lens for street photography? If FAST means frames per second? The K3 boots glutes at that.

A walkaround in the streets of Verona, Italy... Everything was take with FA77

FA77 f/3.5



FA77 f/1.8



FA77 f/2.5



FA77 f/2.2



FA77 f/1.8


FA77 f/2.2



I don't know if the purist would consider such kind of picture street photography or not. At least these are photo taken in the streets showing the city, the people and what they do, for me at least that good enough. And not having everything in focus help concentrate on the main subject. I don't claim theses shoots are any good, but at least that an interresting possibility.

As a mater of personal taste, I much much prefer FA77 for that kind of things than DA21. I times the DA15 is also quite interresting but I use it less often

DA15



In conclusion, any focal length/apperture can be used for street photography.

[robgski]

The FA 77mm is a great lens, but even used it's expensive. For a bargain, IMO, the 40mm XS or the 40mm LTD delivers great sharpness and clarity, and it's a good FOV for street, and urban depending on how close you want to get to the subject, as others have mentioned, you can get either used for a very good price here on PF

[Nicolas06]

The FA 77mm is a great lens, but even used it's expensive. For a bargain, IMO, the 40mm XS or the 40mm LTD delivers great sharpness and clarity, and it's a good FOV for street, and urban depending on how close you want to get to the subject, as others have mentioned, you can get either used for a very good price here on PF

Sure I don't say one has to buy it, that was not my point. But honestly using a 40mm or a 77 lens isn't going to give the same type of photos. The perspective distorsion will be much different, f/2.8 is not f/1.8 and the bokeh will be very different. I guess the DA70 if similar framing was the goal would do it.

But my point is more any lens, any apperture can do it. it depend what you want to show and capture. You'll not be able to do the same with DA40 than with FA77 and you'll not be able to do the same with FA77 than with DA40. There no such thing as one being better than another: they don't do the same stuff.

Restricting yourself to one prime in particular if you begin and don't know much photography can help on learning but can also be extremely anoying or even make the beginer loose his joy of using the camera.

I'd be more for a zoom, even the 18-55 to begin. it is almost free in bundle and one can progress from that. In daylight there no particular issue. Also it's size keep it relatively unobtrusive.