Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 7, 2011, 6:55 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
NMRecording's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eastern Appalachains
Posts: 866
Default

im jealous, id pretty much keep em all and in time youll decide what you dont use, whether its inferior quality because u obviously have overlapping or just that u dont use certain focal lengths (yet) Biro is right, you will kick urself if u let any of the good glass go and fortunately there is a lot of good glass in there. I second keeping the two cameras, but if u really need to sell somethin, id personally keep all the star lenses and primes, sell off the kit lenses and the macro lens and buy urself a tamron 90 for much less if u really need cash, i have one and I cant imagine asking for better IQ. The pentax macro 100 has a higher resale value so itd be a nice trade unless u need WR. I personally wouldnt keep the 18-250 and sell rest, I'd do the opposite. Sure the 18-250 is nice but no way it can outshoot those primes and 18-50 and 50-135
NMRecording is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2011, 9:59 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: East Central Vermont
Posts: 1,890
Default

You have already received a lot of good suggestions, but I'm going to take a slightly different approach. There's no way I can suggest what to keep and what to sell without knowing more about your style of photography. The K10D is weather sealed and built like a tank. It is very well suited for outdoor, rugged applications. But it's not ideal for low light situations. In a dimly lit setting (night club performances, high school basketball games, etc.) The Kx will be a better choice than the K10D. I believe the Kx also has a faster burst rate than the K10D. Whether that matters or not I can't say.

As others have pointed out there have been some quality control issues with the DA* 16-50 lens, but if you have a good copy, it is reputed to an absolutely stellar lens. But, it's big, bulky, and heavy. That would be a big deal to some, irrelevant to others. The cheaper, lower quality lenses might not have the superb optics of the DA* 16-50, but they are lighter and smaller. Does that make a difference?

Others on this forum know much more about the particulars of each lens than I do, and they have already offered some excellent advice. My point is that you need to consider more than simply which lens has the best optical qualities. You need to think about how you will use your photo gear before you decide what to keep and what to sell. And by the way, I'm seriously envious. You got dome really great gear!
mtnman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2011, 5:09 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 105
Default

I seriously am considering a bump up in body from the Kx to a Kr or greater. I know that the Kx does not AF while on movie mode. I was wondering if the Kr or K7 do this, and if so do they do it well?

Also wondering what the main differences are between the 3 bodies, Kx, Kr and K7.

I can compare specs, bit never using a Kr or K7 I'm not sure what the real life gains are. I would love a WR body, but I really would like to stay with a single camera body.
mackloon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2011, 5:17 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 105
Default

I totally agree with you mtnman. I am not a pixel peeper, and I don't mind if I could have got a better shot with better optics.

Until this past year I was shooting with a Canon G9, so just about ant lens and any shot is superior to what I was coming from.

I will give them all a tour before I make any rash decisions, however I would like to sell off a few of these to offset the cost. I would love to keep them all, but I would never carry them all, so what good are a bunch of lenses sitting on the shelf?
mackloon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2011, 6:31 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Posts: 1,381
Default

Good Morning,

It looks like you hit the mother load of lens auctions. Congratulations!!! From reading the thread, it looks like you would like to recoup your initial investment, while keeping what you are and / or might be interested in over time. The comments you have received as others have said, are good opinions. Most everyone would have loved to score a haul such as this - with some of the best lenses Pentax has available.

That said, there are so many ways you could slice and dice this, its really impossible to know how to approach this with out knowing what you like shooting. For instance .....
  • Landscapes - If you like landscapes, you want wide, however you would not really need fast. f4 would certainly be fast enough, thus you could keep the 12-24 and possibly the 16-45, letting the faster f2.8 lenses go - 16-50. Also the second kit lens would probably be the first to go - instantly, as you really do not need two. You might even consider selling both kit lenses, since depending on what you decide to keep.
  • Changing & hauling lenses - if you dislike changing lenses or if you just want a single lens kit for travel and vacation, the 18-250 would be a keeper.
  • Low light - if your focus is to have low light lenses, then you have the core here, at least in zooms. Thus, you would keep the 16-50 and 50-135, selling the 16-45 and kit lenses. The 70 and 100 Macro would be keepers here also, along with the 50/f1.4. But you already indicated that you could part with it, if you were able to acquire another less expensive f1.7 or something along those lines.
  • Primes - if your interests range to primes, then the 70 and 100 are keepers. However, this is only the start, so you would want to acquire other in the focal lengths of interest, which would force you to sell the other zooms.
  • Image Quality - If you are into increased image quality - well you really have a problem, as most all of these would be keepers. Both of the kit 18-55s could go along with the 18-250.
  • Portraits - Keep the 50, 70 and 100, sell the wide angles - 12-24 and 16-45 along with maybe the 16-50. The 50-135 would be a keeper, however that duplicates the ranges of the primes.
  • Physical Size - Large vs Small - Sell the large heavy ones, keeping the small light ones.
  • Telephotos - If you are in to the longer range, then sell the short range - 12-24, 16-45 and 16-50 along with one of the kit lenses.
  • Screw Drive vs SDM - If you are looking for simplicity and longevity in your lenses, then sell the SDM lenses and keep the simpler ones.
The Sigma TC is the odd one here. If you do not need to boost your focal lengths, and if it does not operate with any of the lenses, that would be an easy candidate to go.

The K10 body I believe has really plateaued in price in the mid $300. With the low shutter count, there will always be folks interested in one. Other than the new K5, it's the only body that you can turn off dark frame subtraction on so folks looking to do Astrophotography would be interested. I would tend to sell it, so as to keep more glass. Plus, the Kx is not a bad camera at all.

It all comes down to what you are interested in, thus keeping. If you do not have an interest, then I see it going - even if its a great lens. Also, it would appear to be dependent on the price that you purchased the lot for.

For selling, I would also consider the Market Place over on the Pentax Forums. If you do not get your price there then off to evilbay.

What would I do? Gee - that is really a difficult problem...
  • Keep - 12-24, 16-45, 50-135, 70. This would keep the quality and sell the items that may exhibit problems, plus I am not that interested in Macro (just me). I also have a 50/1.7 and do not use it all that much, so I could let the 50/1.4 go. Also, I am not into flashes. I might even be able to sell either of the 50-300 or the 250 (maybe even both), in order to keep some of the above lenses. But - that is just me.
  • Sell - both kit lenses, 16-50, 100, 18-250, 50, Sigma TC, K10, the flash.
You problem is the problem everyone wishes that they had...


Last edited by interested_observer; Jan 8, 2011 at 6:46 AM.
interested_observer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2011, 8:56 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 105
Default

Holy schnikies...

Thanks for the good information... Let me digest, do a little research on market value. I definitely want the 12-24 and the 18-250, plus I will probably keep the 55-300. The TC is going to go along with the K10. I will probably off the kits and then see where we stand. I wanted the 50 1.4, but was going to settle a while back for the 35 2.4 as my lowlight. Picking up this motherload has given me some options and I am already making decisions on a package that has not arrived yet.

Hmmmm...?
mackloon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2011, 1:37 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Posts: 1,381
Default

Hi mackloon,

The reason why you see so many 50mm lens and their popularity is that they were the standard kit lens for the old 35mm film cameras. This was the case since a 35mm film camera had a diagonal measurement of around 50mm and for the film format medium was a "normal" view. Also, due to the volume, they were able to be produced at a high quality rather inexpensively.

Today, with the APS-C sensor, its diagonal measurement is around 30mm (actually 28mm I think), so in essence, the 30 to 35mm focal length is the "normal" range for the digital sensor.

The 50mm focal length lens on the APS-C sensor is a bit of a telephoto - a slightly longer lens.

Overall, due to the sheer numbers of 50mm lens, you can find them a bit more inexpensive than other focal lengths - especially in the f1.2, f1.4, f1.7, f1.8 and f2.0 apertures.

Also, on the 50/f1.4 yes its low light, however at f1.4 to f2 its depth of field is very thin, and its bokeh is a desirable feature. You can get an A 50/f1.7 (its a manual focus lens) for about $100 that performs almost as well - probably a bit sharper but less bokeh (the out of focus background).


Last edited by interested_observer; Jan 8, 2011 at 1:43 PM.
interested_observer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2011, 2:58 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 105
Default

I like the bokeh and the shallow depth of field, however the 50mm is a little long at the 35mm EQ of 75mm. That is the reason I had IDed the 35mm f2.4 DA that was recently released. That lens was going to be my round the house lens for kid chasing.

With 2 kids under 3 I need to have a fast wider lens for kid chasing. If the 17-50 f2.8 is enough then I don't have to worry about the 35mm.
mackloon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2011, 7:21 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Wingman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Hebron, Kentucky (northern Kentucky/Greater Cincinnati):KCVG
Posts: 4,319
Default

That's a mighty fine stable of lenses! I'd hang on to them and trade in the bodies for a K5. BTWM the 18-250mm is a great walk around lens--best for travel becuase it is compact and makes great images as well.
Wingman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2011, 7:35 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 105
Default

Why thank you...I have been looking at the K5...looks great...just the price holding me back. The K7 is appealing as the Kr is too at their price points...

What is the best price on the K5 body?

Last edited by mackloon; Jan 8, 2011 at 10:25 PM.
mackloon is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:21 PM.