Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > What Camera Should I Buy?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 7, 2010, 11:26 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 629
Default

The kit I trying is the 2 lens kit. The second lens is 50-200 DAL.

I can upgrade to a 55-300 DA lens for around $100. Is that something I should consider? Some forums speak well of this lens. Some say the optics are better too. It is about 1 1/2" longer and 'the sales woman says isn't weather sealed like the 50-200..I mentioned to her that the KX isn't either. (the K7 is tho)

So your comments are welcome..thank you...
littlejohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2010, 11:33 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

I would go with the longer lens, it will give you more coverage, as you note, the k-x is not weather seal so having a seal lens would not mean much.

From the online price the 55-300mm is selling for around 720, while the 55-200 is selling for about 650, the extra 70 dollar gives you allot of reach. If you were to get a 55-300mm later, it will cost you over 400 bucks.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2010, 11:37 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

Also zooms have an inherent problem with distortion when you get to about the last 5% of the long end. So the longer lens you will have the issue closer to 290 then at 190 with the 55-200mm. So the 55-300 was the lens kit I recommend to my brother. I will give him a large range of coverage.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2010, 8:16 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
TCav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Washington, DC, Metro Area, Maryland
Posts: 13,572
Default

The 55-200 isn't very good. The 55-300 is worth the extra $100.

I will add that the Tamron 70-300 Di LD is also good, and it's inexpensive. If you can get the Pentax K-x plus the Tamron 70-300 Di LD for less than the K-x and the 55-300, that wouldn't be a bad idea.
__________________
  • The lens is the thing.
  • 'Full Frame' is the new 'Medium Format'.
  • "One good test is worth a thousand expert opinions." - Tex Johnston, Boeing 707 test pilot.
TCav is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2010, 1:02 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

littlejohn-

A big thumbs up for the Pentax 55-300mm lens. My only complaint with the Kx is that it does not show in the optical viewfinder where the camera is actually focusing. Yes, you can set it to center point focusing, but that defeats, at least for me, the usefulness of multi point focusing.

Sarah Joyce
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2010, 2:40 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 629
Default

Sarah...yes that's a concern for sure...I noticed the K-7 is the same??? I wonder what the thinking is?

I am also wondering the value of knowing that. For close ups yes..but I have a tendency to focus on what I want the camera to focus on then compose my pix. Which seems to me to be more efficient then checking and seeing where it's focusing and then making changes.

In the long shots..I would think at multi focus would be helpful in speed of focusing more then anything else.

Other then that, my brain hasn't wrapped around the advantages of multi point focusing...but what the hell do I know...

Has anyone ever asked Pentax why they did this???

That said..IF I can get the T1i at the price I'd like then....
littlejohn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2010, 2:47 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

If you were going with the t1i the rebates end the 16th of this month, and I think we will see a price hike on the t1i again
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2010, 2:57 PM   #18
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529
Default

Removing the mechanism for displaying the focus points allowed for a smaller camera. That is Pentax' reasoning.

There are several advantages to mutliple focus points:

1) allows for the ability to properly frame a shot in-camera without focus/recompose. Focus / Recompose can lead to some focus issues when dealing with extremely shallow depth-of-field type shots. Also, in some situations a person might not have time to focus / recompose. For example I take shots of people moving - sports. I like the face to be in focus so I want a focus point that is on the face. If I choose center focus point then my composition is bad - so I like to use a non center focus point. Obviously I can't focus/recompose when tracking a moving subject.

2) Sometimes it's good to have a couple focus points on your subject - in difficult shooting situations it's good for the camera to get that redundancy.

3) when tracking small moving subjects. While many sports shooter use a single focus point (or focus expansion in professional focus systems) when shooting small wildlife it can be tough to keep a single point on the target. So using all points allows the focus to be 'passed' from one point to the others.

So, just like every other feature, the usefullness of multiple focus points depends in large part on the types of photography you do and your style.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2010, 3:23 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

I hate turning on multi-focus points for most uses. I can't tell you how many times the camera has chosen to focus on something other than the subject that I'm trying to focus on, causing focus errors. And that's when I can see the focus points lighting up, indicating the wrong point was chosen - so often things are moving fast enough that I don't have time to not push the shutter, or figure out how to get the camera to focus on what I want without designating a focus point.

On the other hand, it is very useful to select an off-center point and then use that for your focus point, which is what JohnG was talking about in his 1st point. That's useful for still-lifes and some tourist pictures (though often with vacation/tourist pictures your DOF will be big enough to compensate for any off-set due to focus/recompose. I understand that it's not difficult to scroll through the various focus points and know which one you have selected, even without indicators but I don't know. The K-7 does have the focus points indicated in the viewfinder.

The other thing about focus points - they aren't exact even when they are indicated in the viewfinder. I was adjusting the focus on one of my lenses (it front focused quite a bit) and found out that the center focus point was quite a bit bigger than the little square indicated in the viewfinder. I had never noticed the size of the focus point until I started shooting focus charts, and from what I've read, this is the norm regardless of what camera you are using. I never noticed it before because it doesn't seem to impact the type of photography I do.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2010, 3:27 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 629
Default

hmmm...john...I see...

I guess I was thinking that say you wanted the subject on the side of the pix to be infocus and when you pressed the shutter 1/2 way you see that it chose a different point..so now you have to quickly change points. I thought that focus recompose would be faster..

I can see the advantages of tracking a moving target tho..and that's a very valid point..thank you..
littlejohn 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 1:17 PM.