Pentax general discussion

[Gianna'sPapa]

It really depends on your style of photography. I have an older 50mm lens (the M 1.4 version) that I almost never use. It was the primary lens on my Pentax LX film camera. Remember that the larger the aperture (smaller number) the shorter the depth of field and therefore the out of focus area behind the subject is greater. Because of the crop factor the 50 becomes a 75mm and I have found that focal length not as useful for my style. I am looking at a 30mm 1.4 because that becomes a 45mm focal length and works better on the dark rides at WDW. The f2.8 was more useful to me than a 50mm prime. Besides WDW, I do shoot some sports, therefore zooms are more valuable to me than primes. That's just me.

 

[littlekidagain]

I have had the DA 18-250 for a couple of year now. The lens has done very well for me. In the last year I have bought the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 & 24-70 f/2.8. I now find the DA 18-250 staying home! I like having the option to shoot f/2.8.

 

[Daisy14'sDH]

I have had the DA 18-250 for a couple of year now. The lens has done very well for me. In the last year I have bought the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 & 24-70 f/2.8. I now find the DA 18-250 staying home! I like having the option to shoot f/2.8.

This makes me very jealous! I am planning on buying 1 fast zoom lens before January, I have plenty of fast Primes (28mm f 2.8 50mm f1.4, 1.7, and 2) and am wondering if I would be happier getting the 70-200 or 18-70.

I'm worried that if I got the 70-200 that it might be too big to get the whole stage in at my kids school. And then I'm worried that 70mm may be to short to get any good closeups at their performances!

Decisions Decisions!!!!

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

This makes me very jealous! I am planning on buying 1 fast zoom lens before January, I have plenty of fast Primes (28mm f 2.8 50mm f1.4, 1.7, and 2) and am wondering if I would be happier getting the 70-200 or 18-70.

I'm worried that if I got the 70-200 that it might be too big to get the whole stage in at my kids school. And then I'm worried that 70mm may be to short to get any good closeups at their performances!

Decisions Decisions!!!!

That's an easy one to solve. Put the 28 on one body and let your feet zoom work; then the 70-200 on another body.

I shot a family baby shower this weekend with the 18-55 on one body for wider shots and the 28-70 on the primary camera.

 

[Daisy14'sDH]

Once the Kx plummet in price I'll grab another! Great idea!!!

 

[Groucho]

I've actually had good luck buying from Abe's of Maine for the harder-to-find-in-stock lenses. There's where I bought my DA*s (16-50, 50-135) and my 31mm, and I think at least one or two other lenses. There's a little bit of BS to deal with when ordering (the inevitable attempt to sell you UV filters, etc) but the stuff generally arrives quickly, well packed, and priced well (and there are usually $10 coupons available.)

 

[MinnieForMe]

Hi All:
I've been bombarding you with questions for months now on which lens to step up too! I was ready to hit buy on the prime 50 when I came across the Tamron 18-75mm f2.8. I think I found what I'm looking for! Do you think it's enough range for Disney as a walk around? Can I still achieve decent bokah for portraits with it? What do you think? It's $200 more than the prime 50 but the ability to zoom without using my legs (with the prime 50) might be worth it for me!

Still taking suggestions!

Michelle

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

Is that an older lens? I have looked all over the internet and can find no information on that lens. Tamron has a 28-75 f2.8, but no mention of an 18-75 f2.8. On my last trip, 90% of the time I used a 28-70 f2.8. An 18-75 f2.8 lens would have been nearly perfect for me, except for AK and dark rides. I still needed my zoom to 200 for AK and was lacking a lens for the dark rides. The 50mm prime, IMHO, just isn't wide enough for WDW.

 

[MinnieForMe]

No - I'm just an idiot who didn't proofread. Your numbers are correct. It's that one.


http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/con...aSearch&InitialSearch=yes&Q=&Ntt=Pentax+28-75


What do you think? Is it a good enough lens to jump up from the kit lens? I seriously was ready to get the 50 mm but I need my lens to do the adjusting not my handicap legs! LOL.

I really thought the 28-300mm would be nice for Disney but I'm too nervous about the speed and low light ability.

Help me spend money! I'm taking this lens stuff too seriously!

Michelle

 

[MinnieForMe]

Is it crazy to save $100 and buy it used off of Amazon or a seller on ebay? What do I need to look out for with a used lens?

 

[MarkBarbieri]

28mm is a little tight on the wide end for a walk-around on a crop sensor camera. That's about a 42mm on a film camera, which isn't really wide angle at all.

75mm is OK for longer end. Obviously, it's not far into the telephoto range. You should be able to get somewhat shallow DOF if you can control your subject placement (not too close to anything behind them). I'd prefer something significantly longer, but I've noticed that most Disney photogs tend to stay on the wide end.

Honestly, I don't think that it is a good compromise. It sounds like a better film lens rather than APS-C lens. I'd look for one of the 18-50mm ish f/2.8 zooms that seem very popular. Maybe pair that with something longer if you want a telephoto.

There really is no one lens that does everything and does it well. The more zoom you want, the less speed and more size you'll have. If you want a lens with great focal range, get an 18-135 or 18-200 and just forget about wide aperture shots or supplement it with a prime or two for low light or shallow DOF.

 

[photo_chick]

I use an older 28-105 as a walk around lens on my crop camera and I've not run into it being too long for me. It works very, very well for me. But every one shoots differently. A look into your EXIF data will help tell you how you shoot.


Getting good bokeh (which is really more about the quality of the out of focus are and not how much of that area there is) depends on a few factors... like what is actually in the background, how many blades the aperture has (more blades=smoother bokeh because circles blend better than polygons) the focal length you use, the quality of the glass and the distance to your subject and the background area.

Now for shallow depth of field... Focal length, aperture and distance to subject all affect depth of field. Just because the aperture isn't as wide does not mean you can't get a nice, shallow depth of field. Just manipulate the other factors when you need to.

 

[WDWFigment]

I know I wouldn't be satisfied with 28mm on the wide end, but maybe that's just me.

 

[MICKEY88]

I agree with Gianna'sPapa , that should be a pretty decent walk around lens for disney, I use a 28-75 2.8 for most of my shooting. for those who do a lot of wide shooting it might not work, for me it does, since I don't do a lot of wide stuff, plus having learned in the old days when the standard lens used for a high percentage of shooting, was the 50mm, it is slightly wider so I like it.

in the end it comes down to yur personal shooting style..

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

On our last trip (June, 2010), because of what I was shooting, I didn't need much more than 28 most of the time. When I shot the fireworks I didn't give a lot of thought AKA TIME to staking out a spot hours in advance. Therefore, I didn't have the best position to really shoot wide. In fact I actually cropped many of my fireworks shots because of building overhangs and people! So 28 was too wide in many of my cases. With some of my night shooting, if I needed to go wider, I threw on one of my 18-55 kit lenses. Because I was doing tripod/long exposure shots, the aperture was not as important so the variable aperture (slower lens) was not an issue. IMHO, Pentax makes some of the better kit lenses. If you don't have one you might want to pick one up because they are relatively cheap. Tom (WDWFigment) and Mark are some of the better photographers on this forum and they do some spectacular work at WDW. My style (and talent) don't match theirs so what I used was fine for me. My lens lineup for the last trip was 18-55 kit (2), 50-200 kit, 28-70 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8, 100-300 f4 (didn't use much and probably wouldn't take it back) and a M 50 f1.4 (didn't use much). I also had two camera bodies and that was the reason for some of the lens overlap.

By the way, which camera do you have? The reason I ask, is that if you have a high usable ISO camera, Pentax has just introduced a new 18-135 variable aperture lens. If you do, it may be something for you to look at. Its listed at $530. It should be available in the next couple of weeks.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/740381-USA/Pentax_21977_SMC_DA_18_135mm_F_3_5_5_6.html

 

[MinnieForMe]

Gianna'sPapa:
I have the K-X with the two kit lenses (18-55 kit, 50-200 kit). I'm happy with them for the most part but would like a little more zoom when my 18-55 is on which is why I was looking at the 28-70. I'm almost always zoomed in although I don't particularly think I have a style yet. I'm still reading everything I can get my hands on! There is so much to know!

Michelle

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

I have to laugh because you are looking at doing exactly what I did. Your camera has better high iso than mine (K10), so with the K10 I really needed a lowlight (f2.8) walkaround and I came up with the Sigma 28-70. It had been recently discontinued for the 24-70 and I was able to get it for $369. I thought that was a steal. As I said earlier, 90% was shot with that lens. I only had to break out the 70-200 f2.8 on a few occasions for inside dark shows from the back rows and when the DW had the 50-200 mounted on her camera for the outside shows. The 50-200 worked well on the Safari because it is very light and the ride very bouncy. I think that lens will work well for you, mine did for me! The only caution is that lens will be heavier than your 18-55 and 50-200. The only lens that I absolutely will have before going back is the Sigma 30 f1.4 for the dark rides. I tried my old M50 f1.4 (from my film days) with little success. If the ride every stopped I think I could have done some good, but I didn't get that lucky.

 

[MinnieForMe]

I have to laugh because you are looking at doing exactly what I did. Your camera has better high iso than mine (K10), so with the K10 I really needed a lowlight (f2.8) walkaround and I came up with the Sigma 28-70. It had been recently discontinued for the 24-70 and I was able to get it for $369. I thought that was a steal. As I said earlier, 90% was shot with that lens. I only had to break out the 70-200 f2.8 on a few occasions for inside dark shows from the back rows and when the DW had the 50-200 mounted on her camera for the outside shows. The 50-200 worked well on the Safari because it is very light and the ride very bouncy. I think that lens will work well for you, mine did for me! The only caution is that lens will be heavier than your 18-55 and 50-200. The only lens that I absolutely will have before going back is the Sigma 30 f1.4 for the dark rides. I tried my old M50 f1.4 (from my film days) with little success. If the ride every stopped I think I could have done some good, but I didn't get that lucky.

Since I'm always impressed with your pictures than I guess you are a good person to follow! LOL! I have no intentions of taking inside ride pictures but I thought the 28-70 would be good for Tae Kwon Do tests. The lighting is terrible and I can only get good pictures now with my flash on.

What would be the advantage to the new Pentax lens you posted? Just the convenience of the zoom?

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

If you are going to shoot indoor sports then I would go with the 2.8. With the higher usable ISO cameras, of which the Kx is, by cranking up the ISO then your lenses are usable in a wider range of lighting conditions. But with f5.6 of the 18-135 at max, even with the ISO cranked up, you may not be happy with the results. The reason I purchased my 2.8 lenses (28-70 and 70-200) was because I shoot night auto racing. With the max ISO of 1600 for the K10, it sometimes is a struggle. By spring I'm hoping to upgrade to the new K5, which has an ISO range of 80-51,200 and better AF.

 

[AlbertZeroK]

I enjoyed the 18-105 kit lens on my d90 at disney last year, I would think 28mm is too wide. This year, I go with my Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/2.8. I would love to see how the new 18-135mm lens works in disney, that sounds great!