lens suggestions with the k-5

Hello... just sold my Nikon D300 and am now going to order a K-5 this week. I need to get one or two lenses to go with my new toy.

Am looking for suggestions for lenses as I shoot 90% my kids sporting events. in that 90% about 50% will be inside dance and gymnastics.

the other 50% will be outside football and baseball.

My budget is about 500-1000 and I can either get one really good lens or two lenses that might be good not great.

Please help as I am confused with the pentax lenses....

(I am not opposed to sigma or tamron lenses as well.)

thanks a bunch!

Based on my own experience, I would suggest the DA 55-300 as your kid sports workhorse ( http://www.amazon.com/Pentax-55-300mm-Samsung-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0012QCYNM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1304800096&sr=8-1 ). It has very good image quality for the price ($360 from Amazon US) of the lens. Not the fastest thing in the world, but given your budget and the fact that the K-5 is quite good in low light, I think it's a decent choice. There are 2 versions of this, a higher quality one with metal mount and a hood, and a cheaper one without hood and having plastic lens mount. I'm not familiar with the Sigma and Tamron offerings.

I would also suggest the kit 18-55 WR lens ( http://www.amazon.com/18-55mm-3-5-5-6-Weather-Resistant-Pentax/dp/B002BSGUZ8/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1304800469&sr=8-10 ) which has good image quality and will allow you the flexibility of wider angle shooting for those in-tight situations. It's only $153 from Amazon. I have the earlier generation non WR version of this which is the same optically. I've been pretty satisfied with my copy of it.

Both lenses get you coverage from 18 to 300 mm for only $513 leaving some budget for other things you may want or need.

ENJOY!

spineguy said:

Hello... just sold my Nikon D300 and am now going to order a K-5 this week. I need to get one or two lenses to go with my new toy.

Am looking for suggestions for lenses as I shoot 90% my kids sporting events. in that 90% about 50% will be inside dance and gymnastics.

the other 50% will be outside football and baseball.

My budget is about 500-1000 and I can either get one really good lens or two lenses that might be good not great.

Please help as I am confused with the pentax lenses....

(I am not opposed to sigma or tamron lenses as well.)

thanks a bunch!

Click to expand...

--
DarylK

what a great response! thanks so much!

any other ideas?

thanks again!

Don't spend $153 for the kit lens, it's only worth $75 to $100 as evidenced by people or dealers receiving their K-5 plus kit lens package and then immediately selling the kit lens on ebay. I'm sure you noticed this anyway, you can order it as a package with the K-5 and it tends to only affect the price by around $100 compared to the K-5 body only.

In any case, the kit lens is worth owning if you don't already know exactly how you're going to feel about what range you'd like to have on your wide angle zoom. And while some could say you'll only replace it, that argument cuts both ways. You can either skip it because you would only replace it fairly soon, or you can see it as being so inexpensive that doing so is no big deal and leaves you still owning the kit lens as a spare/backup or to put on a cheaper K-mount camera for the kids someday.

what about the 2.8 lenses they offer... just nervous about not having a fast enough lens inside...

coming from the d300 which was horrible inside, i needed the 85 1.8 to get by.

thoughts?

spineguy

I wasn't sure of the currency you were talking in, but yes I would say buy the K-5 with the Kit lens and then treat yourself to the DA*50-135 f2.8 assuming you found the 85mm had sufficient range before.
--

The K-5 results at ISO 1600, 3200, and even 6400 are so good that you often don't need apertures wider than 2.8 for light-gathering purposes alone. You may still want a wider aperture for depth-of-field effects, but that's a different point.

At 1600 on the K-5 you often don't even bother to visit the Noise Reduction section of your image controls in Lightroom or whatever your choice of software. At 3200 you do, but only if printing or displaying large, or if needing to clean up before sharpening.

My DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 has been bright and clear enough indoors, though in severely low light I sometimes don't trust autofocus with it.

I also own the DA*50-135 F2.8 which is has excellent IQ - it's an impressive lens IMHO. It's pricier though, and of course doesn't reach as far as the 55-300. When I was shooting my son's hockey indoors (terrible light) with my K200D set to max iso of 400, no way could I use the 55-300 effectively - had to use the 50-135 set to F2.8 (which wasn't a problem - didn't need much more zoom length than that anyway for hockey). If I would have had a camera with the low light capability of the K-5 at the time, however, I think this hockey scenario could have been tackled with the 55-300. For football (and track), the 50-135 just wasn't long enough to satisfy me, so the 55-300 (and a monopod) came in very handy.

So thinking in terms of compromise (i.e. the presumption that your budget cannot affort both lenses) I would tip my hand to the 55-300 on the faith that the K-5's high ISO capabilities can adequately compensate for the lens' slower aperture.
--
DarylK

You may also consider something like the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 ex non OS version, which would give you a little extra range and is said to have fast focussing.

I would suggest, as others have, to get the DA 50-135 F:2.8. It is a magnificent lens, and will be your starting point for portraiture, as well as being 'almost' long enough for the relatively small fields of the sports you have mentioned. (The sports I generally photograph are either Aussie Rules football or cricket which are played on vastly larger fields) I believe these are going for around the $800 mark in the USA.

I would also suggest getting a 'good' AF teleconverter to go with the 50-135. You may need to stretch the budget just a tad to get this combo, but for say, $300 you should be able to pick up something like a Tamron AF 1.4x or 2x converter. (Make sure it has the connections for SDM)

A 1.4 will give you a 70 - 190 F:3.5 (35mm FOV equivalent of 100 - 285 F:3.5)
A 2x will give you a 100 - 270 F5.6 (35mm FOV equivalent of 150 - 405 F:5.6)

If you only want reach for sports, have a think about the Sigma 150 -500 as well. Slightly outside your budget, but you will certainly have the range.