Time to rethink the KIT LENS idea?

Started 5 months ago | Discussions
PrakticaB
Forum MemberPosts: 58Gear list
Like?
Re: Time to rethink the KIT LENS idea?
In reply to Zvonimir Tosic, 5 months ago

Zvonimir Tosic wrote:

Instead of mucking around in endless circles with variations on the same theme when it comes to kit lenses, I would rather suggest Pentax turns a new chapter and makes:

  • all “normal” lenses a constant f4 aperture, nice quality glass, and
  • higher-end lenses at f2.8 or f2 (where applicable) for those who need more.

So instead of endless 18-55/3.5-5.6 iterations, make just ONE: say, 17-50/f4, with better glass. The quantity of sales will justify the investment. And then seal the deal.

Basically, the ideea would be to promote the 17-70/4 as "semipro" kit (or whatever Ricoh marketing find right) also with WR and at a more reasonable price - lets say 300 instead of 500 Euro at present.

Yes, that would be great!

 PrakticaB's gear list:PrakticaB's gear list
Pentax K100D Pentax K-5 II Pentax smc DA 16-45mm F4 ED AL Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
brecklundin
Senior MemberPosts: 1,983Gear list
Like?
Flash is a simple option to account for aperture
In reply to Rod McD, 5 months ago

Rod McD wrote:

Hi,

I think it's difficult to be too prescriptive...... Pentax has :

the 16-45/4, 16-50/2.8, 18-55/3.5-5.6, 18-55WR/3.5-5.6, 17-70/4, 18-135/3.5-5.6, and the 18-250/3.5-6.3. And the 20-40/2.8-4 Ltd. (I'm not sure if every one of these is still current.)

I guess choice is good and these offer a lot. There's something for everyone whether you like it long, or fast or are happy with f5.6 or slower. (I never did personally get the point of the Limited zoom. If it had been a 16-40mm with stellar IQ, it might have been different but that's just me.)

Somebody mentioned the Fuji kit zoom in an earlier post in this thread. That's an 18-55/2.8-4 and because it's for a mirror-less system it's smaller and lighter than similar DSLR lenses. It's an excellent lens, probably the best 18-55 in the business, but it's in a much higher price bracket than the Pentax 18-55's. It's around $700, but sells for $400 if you buy it with a new Fuji body. It's been their only kit lens for two years, but they've recently chosen to offer a 16-55/2.8WR and an 18-135/3.5-5.6WR as well. Soon to be available. So it looks like they're diversifying their 'kit' lens products too.

Why focus on and worry about whether a Zoom is constant aperture or not? It used to matter back in the pre-TTL flash days, because you had to recalculate your aperture for flash photography if you zoomed a variable aperture zoom. So, the "pro" lenses all became constant aperture lenses. In these days of flash automation, I can't really see why it matters. I'm open to either type as long as their other characteristics meet my needs.

As you know lighting is complicated.  In almost every situation flash, when it can influence a shot, can totally alter a scene.  TTL/PTTL/whatever is no panacea to lighting a subject "in the wild" so-to-speak.  It's why aperture, shutter speed and ISO matter much more than light from a flash, especially a single or even just the on-board flash.  Fill lighting can help open shadows somewhat.  To properly light most scenes it can take a LOT of lights with a ton of fine tuning to get a shot that a 2-4 stop faster lens would allow in seconds rather than 10's or minutes or longer.

I use flash but rarely in uncontrolled situations.  In a studio of controlled scene they are great tools but never can they really make up for the lens aperture unless you are planing on a lot of post.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
yardcoyote
Senior MemberPosts: 2,657Gear list
Like?
Yes. How about a prime?
In reply to Zvonimir Tosic, 5 months ago

I think camera manufacturers should go back to offering a prime as a kit lens, or at least make a prime an option.  An optically excellent, reasonably fast prime in some variation of the "normal" focal length would be a break from the endless iterations of the basic slow zoom for someone who wants to start with a genuinely great lens, not one that is (by necessity-- I understand this) compromised.

The strangest change I've seen in my return to photography after a hiatus is the idea that zooms are now the default type of lens, and primes are some kind of weird specialty product.  I'll admit I have a personal bias, but the option to choose an excellent fast prime over a basic (and or mediocre) zoom should appeal to artists, enthusiasts, second body buyers who already have a kit zoom, and others who are expected to be a large part of the market for DSLRs in the future.  If nothing else, it would be a point distinguishing Pentax from others.

 yardcoyote's gear list:yardcoyote's gear list
Pentax K-30 Pentax smc DA* 55mm F1.4 SDM Pentax smc FA 50mm F1.4 Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jimrpdx
Senior MemberPosts: 2,905Gear list
Like?
maybe the 17-85± is it?
In reply to yardcoyote, 5 months ago

I would like 18-55 to disappear as the mainstream 1st lens, and downgrading the 17-85ish from DA* to DA makes it a good candidate.  Depends on the speed at that point; a lot of nice classic glass used f/3.5-4.5 and that would be fine with me.

-- hide signature --

Jim in (or near) Oregon -- Pentax user, Alpha & m4:3 veteran
talking to myself at http://granitix.blogspot.com

 jimrpdx's gear list:jimrpdx's gear list
Pentax K-5 Pentax Q Pentax K-S1 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mark Ransom
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,012
Like?
The K-01 for example
In reply to yardcoyote, 5 months ago

I bought my K-01 with the 40mm pancake as a kit, and it's just about a perfect pairing. Here's an example from last weekend:

Split Rock Lighthouse

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zvonimir Tosic
Senior MemberPosts: 2,192Gear list
Like?
Lovely photo Mark
In reply to Mark Ransom, 5 months ago

I really like it. Where it is was taken?

-- hide signature --

Madamina, il catalogo è questo; Delle belle che amò il padron mio; un catalogo egli è che ho fatt'io; Osservate, leggete con me.

 Zvonimir Tosic's gear list:Zvonimir Tosic's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zvonimir Tosic
Senior MemberPosts: 2,192Gear list
Like?
I support your idea
In reply to yardcoyote, 5 months ago

yardcoyote wrote:

I think camera manufacturers should go back to offering a prime as a kit lens, or at least make a prime an option. An optically excellent, reasonably fast prime in some variation of the "normal" focal length would be a break from the endless iterations of the basic slow zoom for someone who wants to start with a genuinely great lens, not one that is (by necessity-- I understand this) compromised.

The strangest change I've seen in my return to photography after a hiatus is the idea that zooms are now the default type of lens, and primes are some kind of weird specialty product. I'll admit I have a personal bias, but the option to choose an excellent fast prime over a basic (and or mediocre) zoom should appeal to artists, enthusiasts, second body buyers who already have a kit zoom, and others who are expected to be a large part of the market for DSLRs in the future. If nothing else, it would be a point distinguishing Pentax from others.

I think the idea is wonderful and there should be more basic kit offerings:

  • camera plus unique quality zoom (not exceeding f4)
  • camera plus quality prime lens
  • camera plus prime and zoom from above, etc.

Standard zooms are boring, everyone does it, and I am personally sick of seeing everyone doing same in this industry. When everybody does the same, then everybody is basically wrong too.

One could ask: what is Pentax advantage if their offer is exactly the same as of others? Unique yet obscure camera features won't sell it at a first glance, but good quality optics certainly will make a lot of difference

-- hide signature --

Madamina, il catalogo è questo; Delle belle che amò il padron mio; un catalogo egli è che ho fatt'io; Osservate, leggete con me.

 Zvonimir Tosic's gear list:Zvonimir Tosic's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zvonimir Tosic
Senior MemberPosts: 2,192Gear list
Like?
Ditto!
In reply to DAVID MANZE, 5 months ago

DAVID MANZE wrote:

Hi,

Personally I think a new kit lens must be motorized like the competition's, many customers when comparing camera bodies at the "counter" will be swayed the wrong way with the screw drives whirring antics and pick the Canikon's offerings. How many have been lost this way.
The first point of contact is the most important!

-- hide signature --

Dave's clichés

Totally agree Dave.

-- hide signature --

Madamina, il catalogo è questo; Delle belle che amò il padron mio; un catalogo egli è che ho fatt'io; Osservate, leggete con me.

 Zvonimir Tosic's gear list:Zvonimir Tosic's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Zvonimir Tosic
Senior MemberPosts: 2,192Gear list
Like?
16-45 and 17-70 are goners
In reply to Rod McD, 5 months ago

Rod McD wrote:

Hi,

I think it's difficult to be too prescriptive...... Pentax has :

the 16-45/4, 16-50/2.8, 18-55/3.5-5.6, 18-55WR/3.5-5.6, 17-70/4, 18-135/3.5-5.6, and the 18-250/3.5-6.3. And the 20-40/2.8-4 Ltd. (I'm not sure if every one of these is still current.)

I guess choice is good and these offer a lot. There's something for everyone whether you like it long, or fast or are happy with f5.6 or slower. (I never did personally get the point of the Limited zoom. If it had been a 16-40mm with stellar IQ, it might have been different but that's just me.)

16-45 and 17-70 are no longer in production. Cross them out.

Kit zoom by Fuji is a welcome moment of sanity to this sorry industry, as Fuji is the first doing justice to the kit lens. As stated in other posts, 35mm film-age f/3.5-536 kit zooms are exactly f2.8-4 APS-C alternatives!

So Fuji is doing what others should have been doing all this time — but didn't!

-- hide signature --

Madamina, il catalogo è questo; Delle belle che amò il padron mio; un catalogo egli è che ho fatt'io; Osservate, leggete con me.

 Zvonimir Tosic's gear list:Zvonimir Tosic's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix X100
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JeffAHayes
Senior MemberPosts: 1,968Gear list
Like?
Re: Flash is a simple option to account for aperture
In reply to brecklundin, 5 months ago

brecklundin wrote:

Rod McD wrote:

Hi,

I think it's difficult to be too prescriptive...... Pentax has :

the 16-45/4, 16-50/2.8, 18-55/3.5-5.6, 18-55WR/3.5-5.6, 17-70/4, 18-135/3.5-5.6, and the 18-250/3.5-6.3. And the 20-40/2.8-4 Ltd. (I'm not sure if every one of these is still current.)

I guess choice is good and these offer a lot. There's something for everyone whether you like it long, or fast or are happy with f5.6 or slower. (I never did personally get the point of the Limited zoom. If it had been a 16-40mm with stellar IQ, it might have been different but that's just me.)

Somebody mentioned the Fuji kit zoom in an earlier post in this thread. That's an 18-55/2.8-4 and because it's for a mirror-less system it's smaller and lighter than similar DSLR lenses. It's an excellent lens, probably the best 18-55 in the business, but it's in a much higher price bracket than the Pentax 18-55's. It's around $700, but sells for $400 if you buy it with a new Fuji body. It's been their only kit lens for two years, but they've recently chosen to offer a 16-55/2.8WR and an 18-135/3.5-5.6WR as well. Soon to be available. So it looks like they're diversifying their 'kit' lens products too.

Why focus on and worry about whether a Zoom is constant aperture or not? It used to matter back in the pre-TTL flash days, because you had to recalculate your aperture for flash photography if you zoomed a variable aperture zoom. So, the "pro" lenses all became constant aperture lenses. In these days of flash automation, I can't really see why it matters. I'm open to either type as long as their other characteristics meet my needs.

As you know lighting is complicated. In almost every situation flash, when it can influence a shot, can totally alter a scene. TTL/PTTL/whatever is no panacea to lighting a subject "in the wild" so-to-speak. It's why aperture, shutter speed and ISO matter much more than light from a flash, especially a single or even just the on-board flash. Fill lighting can help open shadows somewhat. To properly light most scenes it can take a LOT of lights with a ton of fine tuning to get a shot that a 2-4 stop faster lens would allow in seconds rather than 10's or minutes or longer.

I use flash but rarely in uncontrolled situations. In a studio of controlled scene they are great tools but never can they really make up for the lens aperture unless you are planing on a lot of post.

I've used the pop-up flash on my K-3 even at a reasonable distance (15-20 feet, or so), and even at such a distance at something like F5.6-F8 when shooting outdoors and getting dark or uneven shadows during the daytime and it sometimes is JUST "what the doctor ordered," surprisingly. There was a time when I'd use a powerful external flash like that, but after I had so many disappointing results with TTL with my Metz on the K-5 -- especially with bounce -- I got out of the habit of using external very often, and I've found that in many situations, unless I'm really pushing things, it's amazing how much difference that little pop-up flash can make.

Jeff

-- hide signature --

A word is worth 1/1000th of a picture... Maybe that's why I use so many words!

 JeffAHayes's gear list:JeffAHayes's gear list
Pentax WG-3 Pentax K-5 Pentax K-30 Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL (IF) SDM +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
JeffAHayes
Senior MemberPosts: 1,968Gear list
Like?
Re: The K-01 for example
In reply to Mark Ransom, 5 months ago

Mark Ransom wrote:

I bought my K-01 with the 40mm pancake as a kit, and it's just about a perfect pairing. Here's an example from last weekend:

Split Rock Lighthouse

Sweet shot, Mark.

I've also seen the K-5II and K-3 sold in "kits" with either the DA 50 F 1.8 (a prime, but not what I'd call a "quality" prime), as well as other possible "kit" combos, such as the DFA 50 F 2.8 Macro and 10-17 fisheye. These were all B&H deals, not, so far as I know pre-packaged Pentax kits, but all the same, in every case, the camera was available at a discount, and the lens(es) were available at usually a substantial discount along with it (including the deals I just mentioned for the K-3, which is a current deal at B&H)

I agree with whoever it was who posted that perhaps they should offer a "beginners kit," an "enthusiasts kit" and maybe a "pro kit," with the lenses appropriate for each level, and perhaps offer customers a choice of one or two lenses at each kit level. NOBODY is doing that. Maybe it's too complicated; maybe not. Doesn't seem that way to me, so long as you don't go all out with special packaging for each "kit" until you see how it's going to work out. "Kits" could still be sold in the individual camera and lens boxes. Since I haven't bought a kit beyond buying the K-3 SE, which came with the battery grip, I don't know if they include the lenses in the same packaging, or not, in kits, but were they to try doing various "kits," they shouldn't HAVE to.

Jeff

-- hide signature --

A word is worth 1/1000th of a picture... Maybe that's why I use so many words!

 JeffAHayes's gear list:JeffAHayes's gear list
Pentax WG-3 Pentax K-5 Pentax K-30 Pentax K-3 Pentax smc DA* 16-50mm F2.8 ED AL (IF) SDM +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
13thBagel
Contributing MemberPosts: 940Gear list
Like?
Re: Yes. How about a prime?
In reply to yardcoyote, 5 months ago

yardcoyote wrote:

I think camera manufacturers should go back to offering a prime as a kit lens..

Was this not done when Pentax introduced the Q+01?

BTW: Dandy combo... even better with the Q7... Totally brilliant when the Q7 was (is) offered as a complete system kit (all lenses, plus...) for considerably le$$ than if bought separately.

Cheers... M

-- hide signature --

Bet my camera is cr@ppier than your camera...

 13thBagel's gear list:13thBagel's gear list
Pentax Q7 Pentax K-3
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
yardcoyote
Senior MemberPosts: 2,657Gear list
Like?
Re: Yes. How about a prime?
In reply to 13thBagel, 5 months ago

With the K-01, yes. Why not offer kit primes across the line, though? I would have pounced on a WR version of the 35 or 50 when I bought my K-30. (I would like that lens today, actually.)

 yardcoyote's gear list:yardcoyote's gear list
Pentax K-30 Pentax smc DA* 55mm F1.4 SDM Pentax smc FA 50mm F1.4 Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 35mm F2.8 Macro Limited
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Leandros S
Senior MemberPosts: 1,111Gear list
Like?
17-70 still listed
In reply to Zvonimir Tosic, 5 months ago

Zvonimir Tosic wrote:

Rod McD wrote:

Hi,

I think it's difficult to be too prescriptive...... Pentax has :

the 16-45/4, 16-50/2.8, 18-55/3.5-5.6, 18-55WR/3.5-5.6, 17-70/4, 18-135/3.5-5.6, and the 18-250/3.5-6.3. And the 20-40/2.8-4 Ltd. (I'm not sure if every one of these is still current.)

I guess choice is good and these offer a lot. There's something for everyone whether you like it long, or fast or are happy with f5.6 or slower. (I never did personally get the point of the Limited zoom. If it had been a 16-40mm with stellar IQ, it might have been different but that's just me.)

16-45 and 17-70 are no longer in production.

Ricoh still lists the 17-70. On whose authority are you claiming it's not in production?

-- hide signature --

No amount of perceived entitlement can replace actual expertise.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Mark Ransom
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,012
Like?
Re: Lovely photo Mark
In reply to Zvonimir Tosic, 5 months ago

Thanks! This is the Split Rock Lighthouse on the north shore of Lake Superior. It's probably one of the most photographed places in Minnesota.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fakuryu
Senior MemberPosts: 1,081Gear list
Like?
In some markets, the DA 35 f2.4 was the kit lens
In reply to yardcoyote, 5 months ago

yardcoyote wrote:

I think camera manufacturers should go back to offering a prime as a kit lens, or at least make a prime an option. An optically excellent, reasonably fast prime in some variation of the "normal" focal length would be a break from the endless iterations of the basic slow zoom for someone who wants to start with a genuinely great lens, not one that is (by necessity-- I understand this) compromised.

The strangest change I've seen in my return to photography after a hiatus is the idea that zooms are now the default type of lens, and primes are some kind of weird specialty product. I'll admit I have a personal bias, but the option to choose an excellent fast prime over a basic (and or mediocre) zoom should appeal to artists, enthusiasts, second body buyers who already have a kit zoom, and others who are expected to be a large part of the market for DSLRs in the future. If nothing else, it would be a point distinguishing Pentax from others.

I wish it was offered here too when I bought my K-r I don't know if they still offer it as a kit.

-- hide signature --

There is no such thing a "Pro" level gear, just Pro level work.

 fakuryu's gear list:fakuryu's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX7 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Pentax K-r Pentax Q Pentax K-5 II
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fredrious
New MemberPosts: 3Gear list
Like?
Re: Time to rethink the KIT LENS idea? Not hardly!
In reply to KentG, 5 months ago

KentG wrote:

Your sentiment is good but you are fighting the known demographics. Something over 75% of existing DSLR owners buy only 2 lenses for their camera in their lifetime. That is the sole reason the camera makers have 2 lens "kits". All the other lenses in their lens maps are done to capture the business of the remaining less than 25% of DSLR buyers. Putting out better ($$$) kit lenses means their kits are not competitive against their rivals price wise. That would hurt their business worse that any other thing they could do wrong. We are that remaining 25% and we tend to buy bodies not kits. We may have bought a kit in the past but now we know better. Since most of their business is that sell and forget 75% do you think there is any valid reason for what you are asking for? I don't see how.

I'm not sure about your 25% to 75% statistics, but even assuming it to be the case, I strongly believe that the 25% minority are actually the people who preserve the whole photography business and bringing much more money to the companies over a longer time. The 75% may buy a camera and a kit lens (or two!) once and forever, but it is the rest 25% who (possibly) stay with a brand, upgrading their cameras, buying a selection of lenses and accessories and so on. I don't think if a better quality (and logically! more expensive) kit lens will kill the business of non-professional majority, but instead will definitely give them more chance to enjoy their unique camera bodies much more (whatever Pentax camera they have). This way the probability that a amateur shooter upgrades to a more professional level will increase, and this in turn will rise the number of long term Pentax shooters who invest much more money in their camera gears in the future.

Note that the whole Pentax lens prices (including kit lenses) are all over the map. I think the Pentax strategy is to sell very good camera bodies with more affordable prices (compare to other verdicts) and  compensate the lower price of the camera by very expensive (though high quality) lenses. This can also explain the reason why they do not improve their kit lenses.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jimrpdx
Senior MemberPosts: 2,905Gear list
Like?
Re: Time to rethink the KIT LENS idea?
In reply to PrakticaB, 4 months ago

I was just burned (though gently) by the proliferation of Pentax 18-55s.  I ordered an 18-55wr through an Amazon affiliate, and they sent me an original, first-optical-version of the 18-55!  Yes the box was marked 'weather resistant' but they were way off.  Thankfully the refund and return was fairly painless - but will it be marked properly for the next buyer?

Time to move to a new FL zoom that only exists as a single flavor, or a prime kit.  Let's go with either a premium kit with two Limiteds (21+70?) or one with just the 35/2.4.  Personally I'd prefer the nonexistent DA26/2.4WR, that way they can market a 40mm equivalent again like the good ol' days 

-- hide signature --

Jim in (or near) Oregon -- Pentax user, Alpha & m4:3 veteran
talking to myself at http://granitix.blogspot.com

 jimrpdx's gear list:jimrpdx's gear list
Pentax K-5 Pentax Q Pentax K-S1 +2 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ImageAmateur
Senior MemberPosts: 1,509
Like?
Re: Time to rethink the KIT LENS idea? I agree Nikon too
In reply to Zvonimir Tosic, 4 months ago

Zvonimir Tosic wrote:

Instead of mucking around in endless circles with variations on the same theme when it comes to kit lenses, I would rather suggest Pentax turns a new chapter and makes:

  • all “normal” lenses a constant f4 aperture, nice quality glass, and
  • higher-end lenses at f2.8 or f2 (where applicable) for those who need more.

So instead of endless 18-55/3.5-5.6 iterations, make just ONE: say, 17-50/f4, with better glass. The quantity of sales will justify the investment. And then seal the deal.

And that is the quality incentive loud enough to draw attention and buy the Pentax camera and the system in the first place, and convinces people to stay longer with the brand.

Boring variations of the same f3.5-5.6 kits are seen everywhere, across all Japanese camera makers, and they mean nothing. It's a repetitive formula that I sincerely doubt it works. In today's camera market, it strikes me more like "being penny wise, and pound foolish." Which means, caring more about little costs now, but caring less about losing a LOT in the long run. User's loyalty today means everything and is a difference between staying in business and going out of business.

That is one, and, I believe, primary reason people switch brands — users never experience better quality lenses from day one, or lenses that make a helluva lot difference in image quality and, from there, users never experience higher esteemed value of the system. And that is why they don't invest in new lenses. Incentive to buy new lenses (main profit for the camera maker) come only from a good lens. Otherwise people think it's a camera problem, and switch brands.

What are users thoughts on this?

-- hide signature --

Madamina, il catalogo è questo; Delle belle che amò il padron mio; un catalogo egli è che ho fatt'io; Osservate, leggete con me.

I agree. Anyone buying a D7100, K3 or 70D is not going to keep the kit lenses long. They serve one purpose...to give a lens to a beginner who can get a DSLR for not much more than the P&S compacts.

As for Nikon pumping out 18-3200 and 18-300 iterations. Some love them, but they are WAY too much money for not a lot of quality, mostly at the long end suffers terribly.

-- hide signature --

Wishing You Good Light.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
northcoastgreg
Forum MemberPosts: 55Gear list
Like?
Re: 17-70 still listed
In reply to Leandros S, 4 months ago

Leandros S wrote:

Ricoh still lists the 17-70. On whose authority are you claiming it's not in production?

They could be old stock Ricoh hasn't been able to sell off as yet. The 17-70 is, optically, a very good lens, but it's been plagued with issues relating to AF/SDM and lacks WR. The new mid-level/prosumer type of lens adumbrated on the road map (and rumored to be an 18-70 f2.8-4) is almost certainly a replacement for the DA 17-70. In any case, it's difficult to understand why Ricoh/Pentax would wish to keep both lenses in production.

 northcoastgreg's gear list:northcoastgreg's gear list
Pentax K200D Olympus PEN E-PL1 Pentax K-5 Olympus OM-D E-M5 Pentax K-5 IIs +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads