Birthday surprise

Ok, I'm looking for a moral judgement here. My birthday is in a month's time, and my wife reluctantly told me she's thinking of getting me a K-r.
I told her that, due to our restricted budget, maybe a pair of mountain-bike shorts might be more affordable. Deep down though, I really want the K-r. Have I done the right thing? Is it ok to forgo a new Pentax body, to put food on the table for the next few weeks?
Please help.

I have one rule for things like this, if you cant afford it dont buy it
Of course you could always consider selling the K100D to part finance the K-r, and do you really need all those lenses?. I sold my K20D and a couple of lenses to fund my K5 so you wont be the first, and you certainly wont be the last.

Obviously f the choice is new camera or food then food comes first, or paying the bills or whatever.
You couldn't enjoy guilt free use of your new camera if you knew you couldn't really afford it.

As Fatspider says consider selling some lenses, and you current camera to help pay for it if you really want it. Ask others in your family to give you money for your birthday so you can buy it. But if you still can't afford it after that then you can't afford it. Be happy with what you have for now and try to save a little every month towards a new model - ask your wife to put the money should would spend on cycling shorts into the pot as a starter.

My rule is a bit more flexible, which I regret when I get the credit card bill

However for the K5 I was a good boy, and sold my K20D plus a couple of lenses, along with a a couple hundred quid of SRS vouchers (I told my family and in-laws that was what I wanted for my birthday!) to finance the K5. I think I topped it up with about £70 cash. Well worth it, I hardly used those lenses and the high ISO of the K5 (and K-r opened up a whole new world of opportunities.

So in short I wouldn't give up food but I would consider selling some of your less used kit. The K100Ds still brings pretty good prices, I believe. Not sure who's buying them, the IR conversion crowd I think.

But it's a new PENTAX!!!! Surely the kids wouldn't mind baked beans dinners every night over the winter?
Regards

Well if they're anything like mine they would love baked beans every night. But then they would also fart a lot. I think I'd rather stick to the K100D

Not sure what prices are like over there, but here you could probably sell the K100D for about £200 so you'd only need to come up with £250 more. Looking at your sig you should easily be able to raise that, the M200 looks a bit redundant for starters

The phraseResistance is futile springs to mind

Hmmm

I am not the one to comment here really but here goes - I buy it if I have the cash, don't like credit, don't like debt and I always put my family before myself - would you believe that my Mum says I should be a little more selfish sometimes and a little less careful sometimes - who would ever have thought a Mum would give that advice .

Why not put the birthday on hold until finances improve - a card should do for know then you get the new Pentax and none of the guilt - maybe


Cheers


Stu

Thanks to all for the timely intervention. I've put the K-r on the back burner, and I'm taking the K100D out for a spin today. By the way, all those older lenses have been collected over a very short length of time, and cost bugger all. They represent a "collection", as opposed to regularly used workhorses. Even so, I'd probably trade a few in on a 50-135 without a second thought.
Regards

The price at a local retailer (JB HiFi) was $698 last week (440 GBP), for K-r body and kit lens.
Regards

Ok, the birthday has arrived, and my good woman has bought me....clothes, (at my very sensible request). I have, however, acquired a few hundred dollars to spend from other family members. Not enough for the K-r, but enough for a lens. I'm thinking of a Pentax 16-45, or maybe a Tamron 17-50 f2.8. This would be a replacement for the kit lens I have. Any thoughts on which one would be better?
Regards

My personal view is...

Glass is good. Always.

Have you considered rationalizing your lenses or even your entire system? ie rather than buying another lens because it's what you can afford, ask yourself what you really want and what you are prepared to get rid of to help pay for it?

Do you really need a 70-300 and an 80-400? And if you were to buy the 17-50 or 16-45 (both excellent lenses) do you need the 35-105?

Obviously if you were to buy a new SLR it would depreciate far faster than any lens so stick to good glass

But as I said, that's only my opinion.

I'm surprised no ones mentioned a second hand or clearance k-x as a cheaper alternative.

Here's my philosophy on the lens issue. For about twenty years, I had a P30-T and an Astron 35-75 and Sigma 70-210 f4-5.6. I'd always ignorantly thought that Pentax lenses were just overpriced versions of what I already had. Then I bought a K100D Super, and started hanging around this website, reading all the positive comments about the Pentax branded lenses. I tested the waters, first with a Takumar 135mm, then a 50mm f1.7. By now I was simply amazed at the colour rendition and sharpness, particularly of the 50mm. The 200mm f4 and 35-105 followed, and by then I was building a 'collection'. These old manual lenses are seldom used, but when they are, I know they will most likely produce a result far superior to anything I've produced in the twenty years prior. I reckon I'll keep the manual lenses as I really like well-built stuff, and in any case, each one only represents about $100 investment. It's time, however, to improve the AF stable, so perhaps the 70-300 Sigma and 18-50 could go.I'm even thinking of shifting the Tokina 28-70......
Regards

It is an entirely personal issue and it's about what you want and need. I suppose my advice is decide what you want and work out what you need to do to get it, rather than buy the wrong lens.

But if I were in your position with your lenses I 'd look at the 10-17 fisheye or the 12-24.