Lenses and the K5


pammihooper

Link Posted 29/04/2011 - 11:55
Okay, there's been a lot said about lenses - but that's the problem. Reviews saying this or that is the best ever, are blasted by one saying same lens is complete rubbish. I've got the P 55-300mm which I like a lot, but need others - prime, wide angle, portrait...whatever. I've spent so long looking that funds are now an issue. I know I'm asking 'how long's a piece of string', but I'm tired of surfing and wasting time looking. Any tips please?
'my beauties' - Pentax DA55-300mm F4-5.8ED, Tamrom DiII SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR LD Aspherical (IF)

Oggy

Link Posted 29/04/2011 - 12:09
Hi Pammo - welcome to the forum.

I too get rather jaded when it comes to reviews.

One thing you could try is to ask more specific questions here. There is a wealth of knowledge on this forum.

karma mechanic

Link Posted 29/04/2011 - 12:10
It really depends on what you want to do. The 55-300 covers a good range, but if you want wider then there are a number of relatively cheap options.

A suggestion - get hold of the 18-55 kit lens and use it for a while to see what the wider end of things does for you. It is readily available for just a few quid since many people upgrade, but it gives very good quality and flexibility for the price. Once you become aware of its limitations you can consider what to buy next.
My own website is www.richardgaddphotography.com

Also on 500px

pammihooper

Link Posted 29/04/2011 - 12:56
Hi, other than the 55-300, I do have a kit 18-55 but would like to upgrade. As I've yet to specialise in most categories, could do with something in range of between 10 to 50mm, maybe pancake. Portrait, landscape and macro - but at the moment I could only aford one. I know it's subjective, but I'm getting nowhere fast.
'my beauties' - Pentax DA55-300mm F4-5.8ED, Tamrom DiII SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR LD Aspherical (IF)

testdasi

Link Posted 29/04/2011 - 13:14
pammihooper wrote:
Okay, there's been a lot said about lenses - but that's the problem. Reviews saying this or that is the best ever, are blasted by one saying same lens is complete rubbish. I've got the P 55-300mm which I like a lot, but need others - prime, wide angle, portrait...whatever. I've spent so long looking that funds are now an issue. I know I'm asking 'how long's a piece of string', but I'm tired of surfing and wasting time looking. Any tips please?

You need to be very specific, both in understanding your needs and asking questions. The more specific, the better advice people can give you. Some basic considerations you need to think about:

* how much fund? - the most important thing

* for what purpose/purposes? - 2nd most important thing

* prime vs zoom?

* maximum dimension / weight? - e.g. I personally would not consider any 70-200mm lenses because they are too big and heavy

* IQ tolerance? - e.g. I found FA 50mm at f1.4 to be way too soft but some like the dreaminess.

* IQ compromise?
e.g.(1) When I buy a fast lens (f2.8 or better), I want to use it wide open so sharpness wide open is more important i.e. I prefer a lens that is sharper wide open (within the acceptable sharpness zone - see IQ tolerance above) even if its maximum sharpness is not as good as the alternatives.
e.g.(2) I found chromatic aberrations to be the most difficult to fix in post so I prefer a lens with less CA even if it has below average vignetting and barrel/pin-cushion distortion.

* Manual or Auto Focus? - MF is cheaper than the AF equivalent but less convenient. Purists prefer MF.

If you can think about those considerations and post it here, I bet people will be able to give you much better advices.

====================================
My Flickr
My PPG
The Rotary Shutter
Last Edited by testdasi on 29/04/2011 - 13:19

sterretje

Link Posted 29/04/2011 - 14:10
The kitlens is perfectly OK for all subjects that you mention except for macro (it is good for close ups with its 1:3 magnification). For macro, consider a Raynox DCR150 adaptor for your 55-300.

Possible quality upgrades for the kit lens are DA17-70/4, DA16-45/4, 3rd party (Sigma, Tamron) 17-50/2.8. All are more than suitable for landscapes (I personally don't believe in ultrawide for landscapes). So it boils down to extra reach at the longer end (DA17-70/4), extra wide (DA16-45/4) or a stop faster (17-50/2.8 options).

I don't do many portraits and would simply use one of the above for that (DA16-45/4 might be slightly to short). If portraits are more important than landscape, consider a Tamron 28-75/2.8.

My choice being in your shoes on a tight budget (how tight?) and assuming you're looking for an quality upgrade as well:
DA17-70/4 + DA35/2.4 (optional, for lower light conditions) + DA55-300 + Raynox
Alternative with a priority on landscape:
3rd party 17-50/2.8 + DA55-300 + Raynox
Alternative with a priority on portraits:
3rd party 28-75/2.8 + DA55-300 + Raynox with in future a wide angle

Please be aware that I don't own any of the lenses (except for the DA55-300) but all are well regarded.

Make your choice.
Pentax K10D + Vivitar 55/2.8 macro + Super Takumar 55/1.8 + SuperMultiCoated Takumar 85/1.8 + SuperMultiCoated Takumar 135/3.5 + SuperMultiCoated Takumar 200/4 + Super Takumar 300/4
Pentax K100D + DA18-55ALII + DA55-300
Pentax K5 + FA31Ltd + M50/1.7 + DFA100WR + M120/2.8 (+ DA18-55WR at occasion)

Helpful

pammihooper

Link Posted 29/04/2011 - 14:24
Thanks guys. That's great. The breadth and concise info is perfect. I'll start checking things out again. I guess I could go 500 and have a preference for sharp, clear landscapes but would like to try portarits and also macro. I've purchased a very cheap bolt-on macro/fisheye and am having lots of fun with that. Once again thanks.
'my beauties' - Pentax DA55-300mm F4-5.8ED, Tamrom DiII SP AF17-50mm F/2.8 XR LD Aspherical (IF)
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.