The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Lens Suggestion for Pentax K10d
Dark Moon
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
So I've decided on the DSLR I'll be upgrading from my Canon A570 to - a Pentax K10d. I'm currently shopping for lenses and I'm hoping to get some advice on what would suit my needs best. My budget is fairly limited - I'd like to keep it under $300 for the first lens. I certainly don't expect pro-glass, but I don't want to shoot with shit either.
I've been told by numerous photographers that if you want to produce the best shots possible, you use prime lenses. They're always faster and always sharper than their zoom cousins, and as long as you don't buy pro-level, rather affordable too. I also don't mind lugging a few lenses with me when I'm walking around with my camera, so this wouldn't be a problem for me either. My questions: Are primes really that much better?
Moving right along: I currently shoot almost exclusively landscapes with my P+S, and love shooting at night/in darker situations. However, I need to get DA lenses if I want to keep the weather-proof qualities of my camera. The DA primes are all out of my price range, while the kit lens (Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6) is certainly cheap at $200. However, f/3.5 seems pretty slow, the variable aperture make me nervous, and most reviews indicate that the lens is at its worst when at 18mm (really soft), which is where I'd likely spend most of my time when doing landscapes.
So I move on with my thinking. I think I currently only shoot landscapes because my P+S has a really wide lens on it that's relatively slow. Perhaps a slightly more 'normal' lens will allow me to do both portraits and some landscape work - something like a Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4, which from what I've seen is an excellent lens (and only $300). It scales up to 75mm - would this be acceptable for landscape work for a while if I choose to get this now and another, wider prime later?
Given all that, I'd still love to hear alternative suggestions. A pair of good, cheap, older primes? The K10d can use any lens ever made for a Pentax-mount, and it has in-body image stabilization, so the only disadvantage of the older lenses would be the loss of the weather proofing. Which leads to another question: How much does a non-DA lens compromise the weather proofing on the camera? Or should I just get the 50mm for now and save up for a wider angle lens later on? Alternately, should I just get the kit lens (18-55mm) and use that until I want pro-level glass?
Please, do tell!
I've been told by numerous photographers that if you want to produce the best shots possible, you use prime lenses. They're always faster and always sharper than their zoom cousins, and as long as you don't buy pro-level, rather affordable too. I also don't mind lugging a few lenses with me when I'm walking around with my camera, so this wouldn't be a problem for me either. My questions: Are primes really that much better?
Moving right along: I currently shoot almost exclusively landscapes with my P+S, and love shooting at night/in darker situations. However, I need to get DA lenses if I want to keep the weather-proof qualities of my camera. The DA primes are all out of my price range, while the kit lens (Pentax DA 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6) is certainly cheap at $200. However, f/3.5 seems pretty slow, the variable aperture make me nervous, and most reviews indicate that the lens is at its worst when at 18mm (really soft), which is where I'd likely spend most of my time when doing landscapes.
So I move on with my thinking. I think I currently only shoot landscapes because my P+S has a really wide lens on it that's relatively slow. Perhaps a slightly more 'normal' lens will allow me to do both portraits and some landscape work - something like a Pentax FA 50mm f/1.4, which from what I've seen is an excellent lens (and only $300). It scales up to 75mm - would this be acceptable for landscape work for a while if I choose to get this now and another, wider prime later?
Given all that, I'd still love to hear alternative suggestions. A pair of good, cheap, older primes? The K10d can use any lens ever made for a Pentax-mount, and it has in-body image stabilization, so the only disadvantage of the older lenses would be the loss of the weather proofing. Which leads to another question: How much does a non-DA lens compromise the weather proofing on the camera? Or should I just get the 50mm for now and save up for a wider angle lens later on? Alternately, should I just get the kit lens (18-55mm) and use that until I want pro-level glass?
Please, do tell!
Dark Moon on
0
Posts
Also, what do you plan on doing with these shots? Posting them online? Printing them? How large? If it's mostly for posting online and printing 6x9's then you'll be hard pressed to tell the difference between a $100 lens and a $1,000 one.
Or do the same with a Nikon. I'm pretty sure they recently released new models, making very decent used cameras very suddenly affordable.
That said, the only lens you want to bother with upon starting out is the cheapest 50mm prime you can get for your camera. Between that and the kit lens you'll have lots of opportunity to learn.
Oh, one other thing: If you buy Canon you can rent lenses from Don's Photo. They rent L series lenses. Nice ones.
CUZ THERE'S SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE AND IT'S GIVING ME A RASH
It came kitted with a 18-55 zoom, but I'm looking at getting a new 70-300 telephoto for around $150, and a superwide 12-22 for around $210. If you get the Pentax though, I'm not sure exactly what you'll be spending. This is going to be my first DSLR, but hopefully I will be able to give you some feedback after a few months.
Good luck