Good Morning all, and thanks again.
What I have just done is looked at a load of my pictures, especially walk around and hols, and discovered that(on the 18-55 lens) most by far were shot at 18mm and a few around the 28/32mm mark with a few at 55mm. Not really much in-between. That blows my thoughts of a 43mm equivalent. It just shows what we do when we have a zoom. Maybe the 18-55 for me is a good keep on the camera most of the time lens! Maybe a top class 18-70 or 18-135 might be worth thinking about.

I guess these days I would always use Auto everything, as the electrics are so good. I suppose the option for manual focus would be good option.

Are primes always better than zooms these days, or is a good quality zoom more that good enough for most of us? That shows my ignorance, but you good folk take a lot more shots than me.

Regards

Geoff

Thanks folks. Just walked in (11-45pm gmt) so will write again after a nights sleep.

I am possibly prepared to spend up to £350 (ish) if necessary, as I will probably not buy another lens. As I like birding, I probably need to spend £5000 to get what I need, but will not be doing that. I just want a good general purpose point and shoot type lens like as I said the 45mm old (35mm Rokkor)) was, and fancy a quality prime. How much difference I would see from the kit models I have these days, I do not know, but it would be nice to see

Hello,

I bought my K-x with the kit 18-55 and 55-300 lens two years ago. I like both lenses despite what some reports say, but would now like a first prime lens for "general" use. My old 35 Minolta years ago had a 45mm Rokkor lens, which I liked a lot. I thought the extra 5mm down from 50mm was useful for Nat. Trust Houses etc.

Is there a Pentax or other make with a K fit that folks could recommend.

Regards

Geoff

I updated the firmware to 1.01. It worked easily following the instructions. I did have a spare card which helped.

I took some reasonable shots with the 50-200 in the short time I have had the Camera. I am just putting 2 in the gallery . Then it's me done unless I get something really special in the future. These 3 (pheasant) are just a beginners "for starters"

Geoff

P.S. see I have to wait a day to upload another.

Congrats Jaqui, but don't lessons from me on Zooms, although I fared a lot better with the 50-200 than I am at present doing with the 50-300

Thanks again. If it ever stops raining I will go out.

For the time being I will use

Exposure - CW
and
AF - Spot

Will probable use these on the 28-55 and the 50-300, although it is the large Zoom that cause me problems. Having said that,on one occasion, I discovered that instead of altering the shutter, I ended up with -1.7 compensation, which did me no good It wasn't till I got home that I realized.

I know it's practice, but thought I would ask for help anyway, so thanks again.

geoff

P.S. put the only decent shot in the Gallery "pheasant"

Thank you.

So CW is fine for general landscape as well then? If so, I will set mine on that and leave unless I just want say a birds head.

Now I need some fine weather to pactice - rain for most of the next week

Thanks sterretje

I did mean AF, and your point is taken, but I am not that experienced yet. It seems that if I were to take say the centre spot under select, you might get say the birds head in focus, but perhaps not the rest of it.

I am just wondering if it might be best to use C/W metering and Auto 5 for birding shots.

Hello all,
Could you give me a little help please. Is there a lot of difference between the 5 and 11 spots? Would the 11 be better for say Landscapes as it includes a wider field?

Would you use 11 on dull and low light shots?

Which of the two do most of you default to when using Matrix?

Many thanks

Geoff

Thanks guys.