Thinking the Unthinkable???


jules

Link Posted 15/08/2012 - 21:44
No not leaving Pentax but I really miss my Limited Primes!
Strapped at the mo but I've realised the only lens I'm really using is my Siggy 8-16, so I'm thinking of unloading the 17-70 which is getting used about one in five shots and the 60-250 which has only been on the camera three times to take test shots! Mad? maybe but I miss the 21/40/ and 70mm I used to have...
Any wise owls out there to show me the error in my ways here?
Cheers Jules...
tri-elmar-fudd

Back in the room!
“The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.”...Ansel Adams
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com

ChrisA

Link Posted 15/08/2012 - 22:23
jules wrote:

Any wise owls out there..

Too-whit-too-woo

The error in your ways is your concept of the unthinkable.

For instance, I spent three hours in SRS the other day with a good friend, I was trying hard to be impartial, we were deciding between the K-5 and the D7000.

The super quick focusing of the 18-135, the lovely ergonomics of the K-5, and the horrible placement of the D7000's ISO button made it look like it was going in only one direction...

... but after much deliberation, she came out with an Olympus OM-D.

Still think any kind of "oo should I keep this lens or that one" is thinking the unthinkable?


.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.

simonkit

Link Posted 15/08/2012 - 23:22
Hi Jules,

Funnily enough I was just reading through an old thread of mine asking for info on the DA21mm vs the Da 17-70...if I remember correctly you posted a reply saying that you much preferred the zooms, are you sure it's not just LBA again

I guess if you're missing the convenience factor then the Ltds might make sense again, if it's about IQ are they really that much better than the 17-70 - several people told me they're not so I'm still using the 17-70 and enjoying it, together with the DA 12-24 on occassions. They are bulky though but so is the K5 body, personally rather than smaller lenses on a bulky body I'm seriously considering the new Sony RX100 for the times when I want to go "lightweight"


Simon
My website http://www.landscapephotographyuk.com

My Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/landscapephotographyuk

Find me on Google+ link

jules

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 10:16
ChrisA wrote:
jules wrote:

Any wise owls out there..

Too-whit-too-woo

The error in your ways is your concept of the unthinkable.

For instance, I spent three hours in SRS the other day with a good friend, I was trying hard to be impartial, we were deciding between the K-5 and the D7000.

The super quick focusing of the 18-135, the lovely ergonomics of the K-5, and the horrible placement of the D7000's ISO button made it look like it was going in only one direction...

... but after much deliberation, she came out with an Olympus OM-D.

Still think any kind of "oo should I keep this lens or that one" is thinking the unthinkable?


simonkit wrote:
Hi Jules,

Funnily enough I was just reading through an old thread of mine asking for info on the DA21mm vs the Da 17-70...if I remember correctly you posted a reply saying that you much preferred the zooms, are you sure it's not just LBA again

I guess if you're missing the convenience factor then the Ltds might make sense again, if it's about IQ are they really that much better than the 17-70 - several people told me they're not so I'm still using the 17-70 and enjoying it, together with the DA 12-24 on occassions. They are bulky though but so is the K5 body, personally rather than smaller lenses on a bulky body I'm seriously considering the new Sony RX100 for the times when I want to go "lightweight"


Simon

Actually this is making me lose sleep! So it's serious to me, I want all the toys thats true! I know I can't, thats crap! I feel I was happier with the Limiteds, If I have both I'll end up not using the Zooms or Vice Versa, money is the big issue at the moment so it's one or the other fuelled by selling the zooms except the Siggy 8-16 because it walks all over the DA 15mm Ltd I had, plus it has a warmer colour which suits my Landscape Photography.
The 60-250 is a lovely Lens but for me not long enough for aviation/Wildlife and just a little heavy for a compact Landscape kit and the Kicker being I'm just not using it!
Maybe I should just unload that un but it's such a lovely thing my preciousssss!
And maybe do a Mike Pursey and get the Siggy 50-500 OS for when I really need to do, long tom work and only carry it when required, he's got both and more which makes me green

Simon,
LBA Maybe? I get your point on the Compactness of the kit, A DSLR regardless of wether it's a K? or K?? is not compact even with a 40mm Ltd on it, that rings many bells. I've even been ogling the OMD E5 as well of late but I think I'm going to stay APSC for as long as I can, and anyway thats not a Pentax!
Cheers Jules...
tri-elmar-fudd

Back in the room!
“The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.”...Ansel Adams
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com
Last Edited by jules on 16/08/2012 - 10:23

johnriley

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 10:25
You are suffering from a longing and state of indecision that plagues many photographers at one time or another.

We buy a lens. Itch for another. Sell the first lens. Regret it. Long to replace it. But what about.....and so on.

It's madness. I suggest you pause, for a month discipline yourself to actually use what you have and make some fine shots. Learn your current kit in depth. By the end of the month you might be able to afford to extend your repertoire with a new lens, without cannibalising the exisiting range.

Just a thought!
Best regards, John

jules

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 12:20
johnriley wrote:
You are suffering from a longing and state of indecision that plagues many photographers at one time or another.

We buy a lens. Itch for another. Sell the first lens. Regret it. Long to replace it. But what about.....and so on.

It's madness. I suggest you pause, for a month discipline yourself to actually use what you have and make some fine shots. Learn your current kit in depth. By the end of the month you might be able to afford to extend your repertoire with a new lens, without cannibalising the exisiting range.

Just a thought!



Me Told!
Cheers Jules...
tri-elmar-fudd

Back in the room!
“The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.”...Ansel Adams
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com

johnriley

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 12:22
Not you Jules! I was referring to the overall question.
Best regards, John

jules

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 12:23
Doesn't change the fact that I think you may be right however.
Cheers Jules...
tri-elmar-fudd

Back in the room!
“The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.”...Ansel Adams
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com

Mike-P

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 14:24
I'm the last person to give advice on chopping and changing lenses ...so I won't.

One thing I will add is that the 17-70mm is still in my go everywhere bag while the 21mm/35mm/40mm/70mm are never used .. infact I have thought about selling them on many occasions.




Hmmm, fancy a swap ... your 17-70mm and 60-250mm for my 21mm/40mm/70mm all in a Pentax LTD case
No equipment list here but thanks for taking an interest. My Flickr

jules

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 15:06
I know your kidding/playing devils advocate Mike! And since they're lenses you already have, so you must think there is profit in there for you, still I'll mull it over, I'm that daft
Got any magic beans?
Cheers Jules...
tri-elmar-fudd

Back in the room!
“The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.”...Ansel Adams
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com

MattMatic

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 15:27
Oh dear...

I dare not think about this subject. Had a DA17-70 and switched to the DA*16-50... but still rather liked the 17-70 and its range and carry-anywhere ability! But then I have the FA24-90 that I can't quite bring myself to part with (even though I use it so little it pains me), the FA35/2 was rather nice indeed, the A28/2.8 was fun to play with, and the A50/1.4 was such a lovely piece of brick-like solid engineering, and the F100/2.8 macro is getting missed (even though I only ever used it a couple of times a year), the FA80-320 had a nicer rendering compared to the DA55-300 I currently have (though it does have rotating from element and no decent hood other than a sink-plunger type)... then there were some of the Tokinas I had, and some other bits too...

...definitely madness

It's always tricky as there are certainly different requirements. For pro work it's the DA*16-50 & DA*50-135, DA12-24 for me (can't beat that combination). But then the DA*60-250 would be extremely useful too

For fun stuff and walkabout it's something else!! Now the Pentax Q is part of that fun arena.

Oh the joy of Pentax LBA!!!
Matt
http://www.mattmatic.co.uk
(For gallery, tips and links)
Last Edited by MattMatic on 16/08/2012 - 15:28

jules

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 16:15
Joy indeed!
In my previous Pentax incarnation, I owned the 12/24 18-55WR/ 15/21/40/70/77 Ltds/ 105 macro/ 200 SDM/300 SDM and the 1.7 AFA.
Cheers Jules...
tri-elmar-fudd

Back in the room!
“The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.”...Ansel Adams
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com

Father Ted

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 16:27
I'm just glad I can't afford LBA
Getting there! Thanks to you guys

Pentax K10d, *istDL, Kit lens ( 18-55mm ), 50mm f1.7 lens, Tamron 70-300mm lens, Prinzflex 70-162 manual lens, Various old flashes.

jules

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 16:30
Hmm a nice silver K 01 and Mikes Ltds, dreaming again...
Cheers Jules...
tri-elmar-fudd

Back in the room!
“The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it.”...Ansel Adams
www.exaggeratedperspectives.com

BigJR

Link Posted 16/08/2012 - 16:51
jules wrote:
Hmm a nice silver K 01 and Mikes Ltds, dreaming again...

Stop it, I'm already having thoughts about the K-01 since seeing SRS have got the body for £349!
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.