To raise cash for new lens purchase, two items for sale :-
1) Pentax M200 F4. 200mm F4.0, built in metal lens hood.
Images uploaded to my flickr here

The optics are excellent, no scratches or fungus. One very small mark on the lens hood. Only thing that stops me desribing it as mint is the original lens caps are missing, both lens caps are there but not original. Looking for £90 including UK postage ovno.

2) Vivitar Tele Converter 2X-22, two times teleconverter.
Images for this item here
This one is mint. In original leather case, all stitching and red felt lining complete. Both original caps on the converter, absolutely no marks on the optics or converter. I question if this was ever used before I bought it ! Looking for £40 including UK postage ono.

PM or direct email at [email protected]

thank you
Kevin

...hmm, one lesson learned, dont advertise good buy on Pentax lens in a Pentax forum. Someone got a nice lens

Davex, thanks that is helpfull. Not aware they are hong kong company but thought it must be imports, almost £100 less than nearest competitor and 7 year warrenty ...

Despite posting a which DA* thread earlier this week, based on a couple of recomendations and thinking about best quality -v- price -v- practicality I have now decided on a sigma 24-70 F2.8 for my portrait and upcoming wedding shoots.
I now have a dilema whether to buy new or second hand :-
Best new price I have found is from a company called "one stop digital" It looks like an import as they are offering a 7 year warrenty, price £340.
Used one from ebay seller, £240.

Cash difference aside, my dilema comes from many reports that Sigma quality control is not too good and many people have had more than one copy of a lens before they get a good one. In this situation, I have no idea how I would get on with one stop digital as I have never heard of them up until now. Therefore, am I better getting the used example that comes with 5 day no quibble, testing it to ensure its good and chances are if its good now it will still be good in five years time so the lack of warrenty is not such a big deal.

I would appreciate your opinions on which is best and also any recommendations or otherwise for one stop digital.

Many thanks
Kevin

wise words fatspider. We host the site through zenfolio, so they can browse on line but if they screen grab etc, they will have a watermark. Your comment re younger generation is spot on and we have recently added digital downloads to our product list, the young ones just dont seem to want to hang a print on the wall, just display them on the facebook virtual wall. It would be nice to get some money back from prints, even just to cover expenses. I did pick up some good advice reading wedding threads on another forum, unfortunately that forum saw major toy throwing, it is nice to have an open discussion on the subject without it getting nasty !
Also your point with guests snooping over my shoulder, is a bit of a risk given the format we are using but not a huge amount we can do about it other than ensure our images blow theres away !

when I say for free, we are not charging to shoot the wedding. We will make money from the prints. We have taken three bookings on this basis. This is very small but varies, one outdoor ceremony, one registery office and one church. I understand this is not sustainable and maybe the staged shots for the portfolio would have been a better idea but staged shots do not give experience of the nerves and stress that only a real shoot will do

1) Will also have a look at the tamron, have seen this mentioned a couple of times now and thanks for link
2) Other things to remember - LOL, looks like I am not the only one with borderline OCD

It seems to be the old dilema ...

Need to do some shoots to get some money to get the gear I need but need to do some shoots for no money to get the experience I need to charge but need the kit to do the free shoots.

Viscous circle that only my flexible friend can solve

agreed and all taken on board. We are not pitching above ourselves with these weddings, they all know we have not shot a wedding before, but all are on a budget where if we were not doing it a family member would be shooting with a compact. This does not mean I take it lightly, I will meet each couple and scout each location, lighting I am okay with and have everything I need in this department but know my IQ and amount of keepers could be increased with a better lens. Unfortunately ther is limited space left on the pllastic so I cannot get both 16-50 and 50-135 so trying to work out my best option.
Is the IQ of the 16-50 hugely better than the surprising quality of the 18-55WR ?

Thanks for replies. I completely understand the crop comment re the 50-135 v 70-200 but these guys are also shooting crop sensors !

Appreciate comments about crowd control, we have a few other family and a 50th birthday with 120 guests to practice on but this is definately a weak area that needs sorting fast !

The other train of thought (or the most prominent of the mass of trains in my head at the moment !) is to keep shooting the club with the 18-55WR as they are more than happy with the shots we are producing and go for the 50-135, or then do I sacrifice 10mm and get the 60-250, but I think the F2.8 would be more suitable than F4
I have a second body, not a second K20 but a Kx. I will also have a second shooter att the weddings but unfortunately he shoots a crop sensor Canon He has kit 18-55 and a nice 70-300

Now the website is up and running and we have some bookings and some events under our belts, the two things that look to have half a chance of some profit are :-
1) nightclub shoots, we have already done three and more in the pipeline
2) Weddings, three booked for this year, all very low budget, small affairs being shot for free with only prints being charged (got to start somewhere !).

My current lenses (excluding old M series) :-
18 - 55 WR
50 - 200 DAL
100 DfA Macro

I am looking at investing in a "proper" lens, thinking the 16-50 DA* would actually give good coverage to both these types of events. But, doing some research, it seems many wedding togs shooting canon use the 70-200L ! I did not expect to need this length for a wedding shoot. I shot a portrait shoot recently and almost exclusively used the macro lens wide open, it is not bad at all.
Would the 16-50 and 100 macro suffice.
Comments, suggestions, advice, leftfield other suggestions all welcome