Lens vs Photoshop

Hey, I'm a newbie here and still wondering, why should I invest into good expensive lenses and bodies for matter of fact? And not just have the 18-55 and 55-300 and with assistance from PS, can't I get similar quality pictures??? As PS will be MUCH MUCH cheaper (I can get CS5 for £180).

I understand that if information isn't there, no PS will help to generate it and any modification will lose info and sharpness etc. and with better lens it will be a better starting point. But I'm a beginner and will not be printing my pictures on A2 canvases or anything. So where to put my money?

Help needed for lost ignorant soul

PS: I just ordered a new lens from SRS so currently going along lens path. But not sure if it's a right thing.

All Pentax lenses are good lenses, although obviously there will be advantages to the more expensive ones in the range.

We need good lenses as a poor picture will not be saved by Photoshop.

However, it's a partnership. All digital images will be improved by some post processing, even if only crop, levels and sharpening. It doesn't need to be CS5 though, Elements will do very nicely for most straightforward photographic work.

I myself prefer to use both good gear and less expensive gear... sometimes getting the shot is the most important thing and other times getting the best shot possible is the priority....
know what each peice of equipment is capable of, and having the skills to use each to it's fullest potential is what separates the pros from the amateurs.

for example I used a 35 2.4 and a 100mm macro to shoot stills video on a cooking show...
no way I was gonna shoot sputtering grease in a pan with my expensive macro, and no way I was gonna do a double page magazine spread of the finished dish with anything other than my 100mm macro...
as for photoshop... you can do wonders in post..but.. time is money, and "Fix it in post" translates into "I don't know what the hell I'm doing, but I hope I can fix it later in photoshop" on a real job, esp when there's lot's of images and footage to work through.

hey, thanks for the quick reply. However my question was more related to investing money and time as a beginner. Should I keep saving up to get the limited and other great lenses or try to get mediocre/good (£100-£150) lenses that cover most of the focal length (10mm-300mm as an example) and try to improve them in PS?

Essentially what I'm asking, is there a point in buying primes that are already covered by the range of lets say 18-55 and 55-300 or I will be better off investing that into some good PS (not necessarily CS5) and courses?

Edit: Didn't see Don's post there. I understand that for a pro there is time that needs to be invested. But from a point of view of a beginner. Touch it up a little bit in PS for 5 min as there aren't hundreds of pictures. So doing a little of PS I could live with, if that would save me few hundred £ from lenses.

Just wondering as I'm on a tight budget.

Cheers,
Aleks

You can fake a lot of techniques on PS, you can stop down a lot of decent lenses and get them to perform etc.

I used the 18-55 & 55-200 combination for 2yrs and would quite happily go back to it if pressed. But then you need a fast 50mm, then a dedicated macro, then.... then...

Guess its just how bored you are and the amount of disposable income you have to lubricate it

The best thing about Pentax cheap quality lenses, how about before blowing big money picking up a cheap Pentax 50mm 1.7, and yes you will experience new and great things

try this... when you have shot's you're not happy with analyze them... was it user error, technique or camera error? if no to those then ask yourself "Could I have gotten the shot I wanted with...xxx piece of equipment?
if your constantly walking backwards into things while trying to get the shot, then you know you need a wider lens... if your subjects are too small in the frame then you need a macro or tele...

so as a begginner, I'd say this...first learn the gear you got, then when you understand a little more about what you need, you'll have more specific questions and people will be able to get you more specific answers... but as you develop those skills, you'll know what you need.
other than that, I'd suggest when buying new gear, that you look for ways to ADD to your capabilities before you start replacing or replicating stuff you already own...

Cheers, I think I got my answer

Idea remained the same before I tried the PS with it's bells and whistles. Stick to good lenses and gain skills, if really needed then get the PS out.

Cheers,
Aleks

Trouble is there are far more skills to be mastered in photoshot. Its far easier to learn good camera skills. Though photoshop tuition is easier to come by..

Photoshop can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. All it can do is give a good photo a final polish.

Pentax's more basic lenses are in fact very good, and if there is anything wrong with your photos at the moment, it is almost certainly down to what is behind the camera, not what is in front of it.

Save your money, and spend time instead. But if you are determined to divest some wonga, like a structured approach, and have more self-discipline than some of us, you could do a course, like this one:

Course

Good luck.

G

I have spent a lot of time learning to know intimately the characteristics of the lenses I own. I don't have any 'exotic' ones but I do know each one inside out and therefore I know instantly which to use in a certain situation, and what aperture I need to set to make it perform in the way I wish. For example, my old 135mm SMC Takumar F3.5 is superb for portraits and still life shots, giving the colours a warmth that the modern lenses don't, whilst still being very sharp. My DA 16-45 is great for landscapes, but tends to make a mess of tree branches. The 55-300 is a fantastic all-rounder and my old Chinon 50mm F1.9 makes a good macro lens when teamed up with tubes.

Before you go and spend a fortune, get to know the lenses you have and what you can do with them. Armed with this knowledge you will know better which lenses you want to upgrade to next.

Regards
David

Based on my own experience I'd advise you to pick up some good used Pentax M or A primes and have a play with them. Other than them needing to be used in manual mode/manual focus there isn't a great deal optically between the best of them and the modern primes.

I'd start with a M or A 50mm 1.7 and work from there. You can get these for very little money and sell them on without a loss in the future if you upgrade.

They are beautifully made and very sharp. Using manual mode will teach you much more about the mechanics of photgraphy than buying a modern prime and sticking the camera on auto or even AV mode.

Since I've bought a few manual lenses I'm enjoying the hobby far more and have been encouraged to become far more creative. There is something about getting a good shot with these lenses that is lacking with a modern one with all the bells and whistles!

All Photoshop teaches you is how to cheat.

Rubbish in the shot, Photoshop answer, edit it out.
Photgraphic answer, either remove the offending rubbish or recompose the photo.

Sky not blue, Photoshop answer, take out the grey sky and replace it with a blue one. (Then some smart Alec will tell you that the shadows are wrong.)
Photographic answer, either not bother (if it is that important) or recompose so that as little as possible of the sky is not in the frame.

Photography has taught us how to cheat since it was invented. Everything you can do in Photoshop can be done in camera or in the darkroom. Not so quickly, but it can be done.

Painting also taught us how to cheat - how much did Constable re-arrange his landscapes, for example?

It's all down to artistic licence and inspiration and the desire to express the world as we see it.

And the camera cannot lie which is why photographic evidence is used in court!