K20D - help me pls to choose lenses

[boorko]

Hallo all,

few weeks ago you helped me to choose between k20D and GX20. The winner is... K20D... and comming today's issue - lenses

First of all about me:

• K20D will be my first SLR camera - actualy I use Pana FZ30. It is nice universal compact camera, but it is like a toy comparing with any low end SLR - starting with a noise, ending with poor DOF variability
• unfortunately I cannot spend so much time photographing like most of people here in the forum (work, dog, ...), so I do not want to spend 3T$ for camera and all accesories I would like to have
• my interests in photography - a bit of everything. I love macrophotography in the nature, I am photographing family members and my dog (of course)... and (as most of you) I cannot imagine be without my camera during vacation or a trip
• I would like to start "more serious" work in macro and in portraits

This week I am going to order K20D body (cannot wait).

Finally my questions:

1) which lenses for start? As I wrote above - not the best, not the basic... something that will not degrade such camera as K20D is... but simultaneously that will not be wasting money for (comparing with you) occasional photograph

• a) set lens 18-55 + some better long one? which one?
• b) only body + some better 2 lenses? which one?

2) one of the lenses should be suitable for serious macro work

Sorry for a long text, I just tried to explain situation. Thanks for all your advices and inputs.

Boorko
-----
Panasonic FZ-30

 

[sfa1966]

• unfortunately I cannot spend so much time photographing like most

of people here in the forum (work, dog, ...), so I do not want to
spend 3T$ for camera and all accesories I would like to have

• my interests in photography - a bit of everything. I love

macrophotography in the nature, I am photographing family members and
my dog (of course)... and (as most of you) I cannot imagine be
without my camera during vacation or a trip

• I would like to start "more serious" work in macro and in portraits

Finally my questions:
1) which lenses for start? As I wrote above - not the best, not the
basic...

Well, you have quite a few needs and it seems a restricted budget. I would go for:

a) DA18-250 (for the vacation/trip lens and general all-round use);
b) Sigma 105 macro (for the macro);
c) DA70 for the portrait lens

None of these are cheap, but they fit your description of "not the best, not the basic ..."

Also consider used Pentax primes: the SMC-M 50/1.7 is found in abundance, (I saw at least four copies in shops in Hong Kong this afternoon!) and usually for under $100 dollars. Quite nice for a portrait lens, and gets you into the enjoyable intricacies of manual focussing and metering with the K20D.

Good luck, whichever lenses you end up with.

--
Cheers,
sfa

A very limited photographer ...

 

[Camancha]

Hmm....

Suggestion 1:
DA35mm/F2.8 LTD Macro, for macro And general purpose
DA70mm/F2.4 LTD, for portrait and general purpose, short tele.

Suggestion 2:
DA 40mm/F2.8 LTD for general purpose.
DFA 100mm/2.8 Macro, for portraits and macro.

Kind regards
.lars

 

[thecodthemullet]

1: pentax 18-55 (2) and tamron 70-300

would give you a good starting setup to at least see if you needed something specific in another area i.e like a specialised macro or portrait lens.

2: 16-45, tamron 90 macro, da 50-135 (or sigma 50-150)
a bit more expensive (and advanced) kit but one that would thrive on the k20.

Rohan
--
I hear birds out the window, quick i must grab my camera.
http://floatycod.zenfolio.com/

 

[dudlew]

If it were me in your shoes, I would consider the Sigma 17 - 70 or the Pentax 17-70 as a starter lens. They give wide to short tele, and the Sigma at least gives pseudo macro. I have the Sigma and love it. Would choose it over the kit lens any day.

I would then also consider maybe the 50 - 150 or 50 - 135 as someone else said, as they are fast and covers the range most people mention for portraits.

D
--



A happy Former Fuji S5100 digicam fan.
Now a happy Pentaxian!! (K100D)
Feel free to visit my gallery.
http://photobucket.com/albums/y226/dudlew/
You can also check out my blog!!
http://dudlew.blogspot.com/

 

[boorko]

1: pentax 18-55 (2) and tamron 70-300

would give you a good starting setup to at least see if you needed
something specific in another area i.e like a specialised macro or
portrait lens.

2: 16-45, tamron 90 macro, da 50-135 (or sigma 50-150)
a bit more expensive (and advanced) kit but one that would thrive on
the k20.

Both 1) and 2) seems to be suitable for start and for my needs. I am going to start studying details and compare other recommendations

Rohan
--
I hear birds out the window, quick i must grab my camera.
http://floatycod.zenfolio.com/

--
Panasonic FZ-30

 

[boorko]

If it were me in your shoes, I would consider the Sigma 17 - 70 or
the Pentax 17-70 as a starter lens. They give wide to short tele, and
the Sigma at least gives pseudo macro. I have the Sigma and love it.
Would choose it over the kit lens any day.

Thanks dudlew, Sigma 17-70 was one of my first choises - it is recommended in few treads here. Could you explain what pseudo macro means? Macrophoto with my Pana FZ30 was possible only from 20-30 cm... here I expect to focus from bigger distance. As an example, here is a part of my macro work
http://picasaweb.google.com/boorko/BorkoveMacroPokusy

I would then also consider maybe the 50 - 150 or 50 - 135 as someone
else said, as they are fast and covers the range most people mention
for portraits.

As for tele, 135 seems to be short. What about Sigma/Tamron 18-250? Or, what about to use 1,4x teleconverter? with 50-135mm?

--
Panasonic FZ-30

 

[thecodthemullet]

boorko wrote:
Could you explain what pseudo macro
means?

it means a lens has some macro ability 1:2 or 1:3 but not 1:1

the tamron 70-300 is 1:2 the sig 17-70 has 1:2.3 whereas a true macro like the da35, tamron 90 or sigma 180 has a 1:1 ratio 1mm in life is 1mm on the sensor. it also means the minimum focus distance is less with 1:1 than with a 1:2 lens of the same focal length and depending on the angle of view you wish to achieve this can be important.

As for tele, 135 seems to be short. What about Sigma/Tamron 18-250?
Or, what about to use 1,4x teleconverter? with 50-135mm?

remember that on aps-c crop (pentax dslr sensors) 135 mm is 200 mm in 35mm (fullframe)format and that 150 is 225mm. these are specialist portrait zooms (50-135/50-150) and as such aren't really something you would be using to chase birds around your backyard. but for your dog or people they would be ideal.

Rohan
--
I hear birds out the window, quick i must grab my camera.
http://floatycod.zenfolio.com/

 

[MatthijsNL]

Well, in my humble opinion and experience, the DA 16-45 is the best walkaround zoomlens Pentax has made, or is at all available for the K-mount. That's mainly by judging image quality. It does have some practical downsides: As the barrel extends when zooming out (it's at it's longest at 16 mm) the pop-up flash gets blocked at focal lenghts below 22/23 mm. It's also not weathersealed and doesn't come with SDM (which means that it produces a slight noise when autofocussing). That said: sharpness is top notch, even when used wide open (constant f/4), distortion is very low even at 16 mm and the range is wonderful, especially for landscapes. The lens is pretty useless for portraits though as 45 mm is just too wide for most portraiture. You'd do good to buy a 70mm or 77mm prime for portraits. Or a telezoom of course, like the 50-135 or the 55-300. The former is outstanding in quality and speed (constant f/2,8, SDM, weatherseals, famous for image quality) but has a pricetag to it, the latter obviously has a bigger range, a lighter weight and comes at a lower price. A Pentax 50-200 might be a cheaper alternative. It's no more than a decent lens, but compact, light and cheap.

The Sigma 17-70 is a good choice as well. It's a more versatile lens than the 16-45 as the 70 mm end allows you to do some portraiture as well. Image quality is simply good and I can't think of any real downsides to the lens. No SDM and weatherseals though, just like on the 16-45. You'd have to harvest your moneytree and buy a 16-50 if you want those features.

Estimated prices (no checks done; prices in US$ are usually not much different from the European prices in €):
Pentax DA 16-45 € 300 (mid-end lens with top-end quality)
Sigma 17-70 € 350 (mid-end)
Pentax DA* 16-50 € 700 (top-end; quality varies a bit)
Pentax DA* 50-135 € 750-800 (top-end, stunning quality)
Pentax DA 55-300 Dunno, probably around € 300-350 or so. (low/mid-end)
Pentax DA 50-200 € 200 (low-end)

Good luck on deciding!

 

[Jon Schick]

I'd definitely recommend the Sigma 17-70 - it's a bargain at just over £200 in the UK. For longer zoom, the Pentax 55-300 is good and affordable. With the Sigma it would make a pretty good two lens kit.

Given these are relatively affordable, you could then supplement with a few well chosen primes depending upon what focal lengths you use most.

--

http://jonschick.smugmug.com/

 

[boorko]

More I study less know... theer are so many possibilities. I decided not to be in a hurry - I will start with basic Pentax lens 15-55 that will come with K20D. I will acquaint myself with my 1st SLR firs and later I will decide what to buy. My favs actually are:

• Sigma 17-70

and

• Pentax smc D FA Macro 100mm F2.8 for macro (and portraits?)

-------
Panasonic FZ-30

 

[filip kublin]

DA 16-45mm f/4
FA or DFA 100mm macro
Thats all you need for travelling and serious macro work.

If you need to go longer DA 55-300mm is good way to go (later you can add DA*300 if needed).
filip

 

[Gerry Winterbourne]

Any macro lens around 100mm will be excellent for the type of work you do. The DFA100 won't be wasted no matter how many other lenses you eventually buy, so why not buy is as part of your first 2-lens lineup? It will almost double the range of the kit lens.

One of the benefits of the K20 is its croppability, provided the original has sufficient resolution. What this means is that for pratical purposes the 100 will be as good as a lower spec 100-200 zoom, so you may not need to buy anything longer for some while.

--
Gerry


First camera 1953, first Pentax 1983, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne

 

[boorko]

Any macro lens around 100mm will be excellent for the type of work
you do. The DFA100 won't be wasted no matter how many other lenses
you eventually buy, so why not buy is as part of your first 2-lens
lineup?
Gerry

Thanks Gerry,

I just saw some pictures with Pentax DFA Macro 100/2.6 here in the forum ... and I was amazed. Anyway a tried to learn st. about lenses, I still do not understand lens problematic, so I am happy I have made quite good selection
-----
Panasonic FZ-30

 

[topgun2007]

Sigma 105mm, f/2.8 Macro
FA 35mm, f/2.0 (good all around prime, very reasonable cost)

If you don't order the kit lens, I also have and like the DA 16-45mm zoom. Very good short zoom.

Regards, Jim

 

[Russell Evans]

I will start with basic Pentax lens 15-55 that
will come with K20D.

Since you bought the 18-55mm there is no reason to buy the Tamron/Pentax 18-250mm.

Being on a budget, I shop ebay for older AF lenses.

I don't have anything to do with the listing below, but I own the same lens and for the price it is a very nice lens to have. The BIN on the lens is $99 + shipping

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=220369333228

This thread is about the lens.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=31054779

Every once in a while, I come across an older lens for a very nice price on ebay. My latest lens purchase was a $35 used Sigma AF 70-210mm f3.5-4.5 with a 1:2 macro at 210mm. Now I have a hard time deciding whether the 75-200mm f3.8 or this lens goes in the bag.

The 75-200mm is faster focusing and I love the push/pull zoom. The other issue is the 75-200mm only has a 1:4.5 macro. There are times when I think I will want the 1:2 of the 70-210mm.

Back to my point, if you are on a budget, are willing to shop ebay, and buy used, you can find some nice lenses at very low prices. You can also find some used deals on Craigslist or your local paper.

Thank you
Russell

--

'It is impossible to reason a person out of positions they have not been reasoned into'

--Walter Cunningham

 

[boorko]

My K20D with basic 18-55 lens will come in 10 days. Now I have 4 lens and need to decide next step. Finaly I choosed 4 lenses and now I have to decide which obne to choose. As I said, this will be my first (D)SLR and I repeat my needs:

• holiday/trip photographing of everything
• macro
• portraits (I would like to start)

1) SIGMA 75-200mm f/3.8 AF from ebay - Russel's advice. Old lens, but seems good quality for a reasonable price (100$ + ship.)

Pros: price, telezoom which I miss, macro (but omly poor), weight - good universal lens for traveling
Cons: macro only (1:4,5)

2) Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 APO EX HSM - simmilar as 1) but new. Price cca 550$ ebay or 660$ new
Pros: quality, faster than 1)
Cons: price, macro only (1:3,5)

3) Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro - cca 500$ new
or
Pentax smc D FA macro 100mm f/2,8 - 55$? new
Pros: macro 1:1, very good for portraits
Cons: price (but pros balance it)

As for budget is an issue, I tend to buy 1) as universal long lens and 3), but which one? Sigma or Pentax? Or am I wrong?

Thanks for comments and explanations.

boorko
----------------------
Panasonic FZ-30

 

[Gerry Winterbourne]

I think your reasoning is right - the kit lens plus 100ish macro is the best 2-lens compromise for you as a starter kit. I don't think it makes much diference if you choose the Pentax or Sigma macro - Photozone gives them both four stars for optical quality; the Pentax is slightly worse for CA but otherwise they look close (Photozone tests the Sigma on Nikon and Canon but not Pentax so the test results aren't exactly comparable).

It would be worth searching for other reviews because Photozone doesn't really say much about colours and rendering, which are just as important as these things. Photozone gives the Sigma 4 stars for mechanical quality, the Pentax only 2.1/2 but I doubt if they are really that different.

The Sigmaa takes 58mm filters while the Pentax takes 49mm - as do a great many Pentax lenses, so in the long term you may make economies on accessories if you go with the Pentax.

--
Gerry


First camera 1953, first Pentax 1983, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne

 

[Lukasz J Trzebinski]

If I would have to choose one lens for everything I would go with DA* 50-135, yes it's not the chepeast one but a nice lense to have. (BTW it seems that you use your camera similar way to my) I am amature that loves pics of his family, dog (GSD Rock), and on trips, so based on our similar needs I would choose DA*50-135 and later add one wider prime or even better DA* 16-50). Good luck
--
*ist DL, K20D
DA* 50-135
DA* 16-50
FA 50 1.4
FA 35 2
and few others.

 

[ilya80589716]

Judging from your needs i can see a K20D kit (dont be fooled and get the kit lens. For $80 it adds to the body price - its a hell of a bargain) and a Tamron 90mm F2.8 in your future.

They say Tamron can also be used for portraitrue.

--
Thanks, Ilya.