Lens or Body

Say the tooth fairy in a burst of charity gave you £500 without wanting the customary tooth in exchange, but on condition you spent it on photographic gear, would you buy a new lens (and if so which?) or a second body for the occasion when your first camera body malfunctions hours before a holiday or important shoot (and if so, which body?).

Since I've asked the questions, let me declare my indecisions. There is of course always another lens I'd like, but I'm the original Mr Glass-Half-Empty. I can easily convince myself that my K5 will let me down at the worst possible time -- not because its given me any cause to think ill of it, but these electronic marvels simply aren't in the same reliability league, over time, as their mechaical predecessors. £500ish might almost get me a second K5, 2nd hand, but that would make the 2nd body insurance pure and simple. I'd like a smaller camera so it could get used on occasions when the larger camera is more than I want to carry. It would not be the same quality, but it should be a 'proper' camera and produce good results. There's a lot of choice, and the Pentax Q is part of it, and now very attractively priced. But I'm swayed by the seeming quality of the Sony RX100 -- not least because it won't involve me in hankering after another set of lenses to match my Pentax ones.

Sadly, all this is in the realm only of the imagination -- but I'd be interested to hear of others' choices, real or (like mine) illusory.

I think I'd chuck my useless k-r in the bin flog all my pentax gear and buy a Canon and hope that canon cameras last longer than 18 months.

Charlotte -- if you've had it from new, from a European retailer, you should be returning it to the retailer! No? The law gives you the right to expect such a product to last beyond 18 months.

Charlotte, you have recourse I'm sure and no-one should expect any camera to last only 18 months.

Hopefully you will take up whatever the problem is by contacting your supplier or Pentax.

I'm not planning on leaving pentax, but if I did I'd goto Nikon. For reasons beyond the allowed scope of this forum.

£500 and it had to be Pentax based..... I think i'd get a Sigma 85/1.4 - actually that's a bit more tan 500 IIRC. Ok I'd raid the piggy bank and make up teh difference

It depends on what lenses you have already and what type of shooting you do. If well stocked in that dept then another K5 would not go amiss but that would depend on whether, for the individual, it would be an advantage to have two identical cameras.

I'm with Smeggy - the siggie 85 is (probably) 'next' on my list if I suddenly get gripped by LBA, although it's quite pricey so I doubt I'll be getting it anytime soon. Alternately I would put it towards a sigma 500mm f4.5 (and have to add a monster wedge of cash) or perhaps get a sigma 150-500 from SRS (very tempting:shock I wouldn't limit myself to new lenses either - almost every lens I have has been acquired second hand.

I have a second body (I use a k5 and have kept my old k7 as back-up) but I very rarely use it... I suspect it would be different if I was doing more than simply taking photos for my own pleasure...

Cheers

I would go for some Ltd Glass, I have the 35 macro and I'm very pleased with it so an addition to my lens collection would be great, (don't let the wife know. Mums the word right).

I was in a similar quandary earlier this year £500 + VAT from long service.
The spending conditions electively ruled out second hand bargains.
I'd like to upgrade my K7 to a K5 but the Bigmos worked out a better option. (SRS had it on offer JUST within the budget)

The decision is surely dependant on your existing hardware, if you have a hole in your line-up then it might be the opportunity to fill it. The Bigmos has worked out very well for me as I do a fair bit of motor racing photography, along with birds, aircraft....

I also have a gap between the DA10-17 & the DA18-55 (bigger than the numbers suggest), the sigma 10-20 was a possibility here, but I'm not sure that cropping isn't enough to cope with this gap.

I'm not sure where this issue about reliability comes from. I've had my K-7 since Jan 2010 and so far I've taken over 80,000 pictures with it.
Tempting fate here... It's never let me down, Pentax say it's good for 100,000 actuations and I'm closing on that fast.
Keep the faith get a K-5

I'd probably go for a second hand K-x (great little camera) and a lens too! A very good K-x would cost under £250, leaving plenty for a decent lens. I have a K-x as backup to my K-5 and often find myself using this in preference, especially for macro work where its small size and light weight are a bonus.

Regards
David

I agree with this... Do you frequently switch-out lenses?

My 2 most used focal-lengths are 35mm and 100mm and would love a 2nd body dedicated to the 100mm

That's what I like to hear. I've had a couple of occasions where I've had to remove the battery to 'unlock' my K5 -- no big deal, but it makes you aware that the circuits may not always play ball. It really isn't like the ruggedness of a film camera -- I never gave a second thought to the reliability of the film cameras I had: there was precious little that could go wrong.

I switch lenses a reasonable amount, because I tend to use primes; but I don't mind that at all (usually) and in any case I try to predetermine what focal length I'm going to use when I go out and stick to it whenever I can. I wouldn't like to be carrying around two dslrs, even with the advantage of each having a dedicated lens. I see the attraction but it's not for me. As it is, I feel sometimes that I'm carting around everything bar the kitchen sink.

I know that feeling... But I sometimes wonder if instead of carting 6 or 7 lenses around I couldn't get away with 3 or 4 & 2-bodies... FA's35&50 on one and FA28&D-FA100 on another...

I have on occasion had 'good-photography' days with my K-x with FA35 and D-FA100 and my MZ-7 with the F35-70... Wasn't as odd a combo as it sounds... Honest!!