New camera, or a new lens? Help...

Stephen_H wrote:

When you write "missing a few candid family photos", does this apply irrespective of which lens you're using, (implying a slow or faulty body), or only when using the 18-55mm, which might suggest either a faulty lens or a low light issue?

Qualitywise: Bit soft. Can't crop as much. Colour is sometimes a bit dull. Needs work in Photoshop. This can be blamed the lens.

Timewise: There's just the missed shot because my auto focus is hunting, or won't let me take the shot because it hasn't confirmed focus. These are fairly common. This I can blame on the camera body.

It's hard to put my finger on it, but I immediately see the difference in my photos when I use my 35mm prime. It's hard to compare focusing in it because it's a macro lens so it always feels a bit slow to focus - all its internals seem to have so far to travel.

Stephen H.
----------------------------------------------------------
Pentax K-50 with kit les (sorry) and the beautiful 35 macro limited.

Hmmm … "bit soft" … mine aren't! I've got a DA and a DAL WR and I'm quite satisfied with them. Having said that I don't have a modern Pentax prime to compare them with

Auto-focus hunting … a problem with the smaller aperture of the 18-55mm, especially at the long end. The newer bodies are better in low light … but the autofocus still works better with a wide aperture lens. f/5.6 is the smallest "recommended" aperture for reliable operation of the autofocus system on all the bodies, as far as I'm aware, and that assumes reasonable light and a contrasty subject.

I suspect the "differences" you're seeing are due, in part at least, to the shallower depth of field available from the 35mm, with it's wider aperture, giving an impression of improved sharpness and contrast from subject isolation … my Fujinon 35mm f/1.9 is very good at that

Good luck