uday_maripalli

<p>Thank you folks. Decided not to buy this. I got tempted looking at pics on flickr but as many of you said, it performs well only in certain situations. Whereas I am looking for a general purpose portrait lens. I will probably end up buying Samyang/Rokinon version.</p>

<p>What do you guys think about Helios 40-2 85mm f1.5 for a portrait lens? Reviews on internet are mixed. Some people love this lens and some people strictly recommend staying away from it. I understand that this lens renders a unique bokeh. I seem to like a lot of images on flickr that were taken with this lens. But I also read in some reviews about the need to do quite a bit of PP to achieve good results. I do some PP work but generally would like to keep it to a minimum.<br> Has any one personally used this lens and liked it? Is this more of a collectors item or can this be a regular portrait lens? Also, any idea how Helios 40-2 differs from Helios 40? Do you think it is worth $350?<br> Thanks.</p>

<p>Thank you Michael. I ended up buying a Kiron 105 mm macro. It was not cheap. Got it for $265. I know I could have gotten a used auto focus macro lens for slightly more but I really liked the photos taken by Kiron/Lester A Dine. For now I am interested mainly in flowers and/or other still life. So all manual will not be an issue. Plus I like having a legacy lens. Depending on how easy/difficult it is to take photos using all manual lens (this will be my first), I might look for AF one sometime soon.</p>

<p>Hello,<br> I am looking to buy a macro lens and did some research here on Pentax Forums and other online resources. I am overwhelmed with the number of good (and varied) options available out there. All of them seem to have very good reviews and some have cult following. Here is a list of macro lenses I am considering:<br> 1. Pentax 100mm f/2.8 WR D FA smc - Latest and greatest. Good reviews on Amazon. Used one is selling for about $450-$500<br> 2. Tamron 90mm f/2.8 - Cheaper alternative to #1. Used one is selling for about $350-$400<br> If the choices were limited to these two, it would have been so much easier to pick one.<br> 3. Pentax A/M 100mm f4 Macro - Can buy these for about $100-$200 online. Both A and M lenses have good reviews everywhere.<br> 4. Kiron 105mm f2.8 1:1 Macro - Seems to have cult following. Many people swear this to be the best macro lens. Sells for about $300 online.<br> 5. Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG - Also has good reviews. Sells for about $200 used.<br> The last three have equally good reviews and are considerably cheaper than the first two. I understand that the last three are manual lenses. I do not mind using manual aperture/focus lenses as long as I am getting good quality optics for a bargain price. I also did a flickr search to see photos taken by each of these lenses. All of them seem to take good pictures. This will be my first macro lens. Any suggestions? Any thing else to look for other than reviews and prices (technical specifications etc.,)?<br> Thank you.</p>

<p>Thank you all. Really appreciate your input. I finally decided to buy both DA 50mm f1.8 and SMC-A 50 mm f1.4. Found a great deal on both lenses. Getting the latter one for a really good price. </p>

<p>Thanks for the comparison Bill. Seems like the SMC A 50mm renders slightly warmer tones. For some reason I find A lens sharper than the DA lens. </p>

<p>Hello all,<br> I am looking to buy a 50 mm lens for basic portraits. I have been reading reviews about various 50mm lenses and seems like there are quite a few options.<br> SMC Pentax A 50mm f 1.4 - Legacy lens and has very good reviews. Sells for about 80-100 on ebay. <br />FA 50mm f 1.7 - Auto focus and sells for about 150-175<br />DA 50mm f 1.8 - Latest version. Sells for about 120-130<br> I am used to manual focus lenses do I do not mind using SMC-A lens. How do the optics compare for above three lenses? All three lenses have very good reviews but I am having a hard time comparing optics and IQ between these lenses.<br> Any recommendation as to which one to buy? Any help is appreciated.<br> Thank you.</p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

<p>I am looking to buy a used Sigma 17-50 for my new K-3 (amazon/ebay/keh/adorama etc.,). I noticed that there are two lens models that are very similar. For example, I took these two items for same from Fredmarinda store:<br> <a href="http://astore.amazon.com/salesfredmira-20/detail/B003A6NTIG">Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM FLD Large Aperture Standard Zoom Lens for Pentax Digital DSLR Camera</a><br> <a href="http://astore.amazon.com/salesfredmira-20/detail/B006IQ3W0U" target="_blank">Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC HSM Lens for Pentax SLR Cameras</a><br> Does Sigma makes both with OS and without OS lens for Pentax mount? Will there be any difference in IQ with either of these two?<br> Thanks.</p>

<p>Hello all,<br /><br />I am new to the Pentax world. In fact, I just ordered my <a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-k-3-review/introduction.html?src=al" target="_blank">K-3</a> body a few days ago waiting for its arrival. Now it’s time to shop for lens(es). I mainly plan to use my camera for travel photography - shooting landscapes (90% of the time) and some portraits. As an all-purpose lens, I am planning to buy <a href="http://www.pentaxforums.com/userreviews/Sigma-Zoom-Lenses-for-Pentax.html?src=al" target="_blank">Sigma</a> 17-50 f/2.8 as it has really good reviews and the price is within my budget. I am also interested in buying Samyang 14mm f/2.8 and my question is mainly regarding this lens. Many reviewers and users mention that it is an excellent lens for landscape and wide-angle astro-photography. Although I have never used a manual focusing or manual lens before (or a prime lens for that matter), I am looking forward to learn manual focusing techniques.<br /><br />How easy (or hard) is it to focus for landscapes and night skies with this lens? Is it as simple as setting it to infinity focus and just keep shooting? Or do I have to use live view and focus peeking every time I take a picture? Also, please feel free to suggest any other similar focal range lenses if you think they are better or more useful.<br /><br />Thanks.</p>

<p>Thank you all for your responses. As I mentioned before, I got a pretty good deal on D5300 body (just a little over $500). The kit lens on its own costs about $200+ but with a little extra I can get better glass and a fast lens. So why not? Moreover, the kit lens just does not cut it sometimes, specially in low light situations. I mostly use my camera only when I travel and I would hate not being able to capture good pictures because I don't know when I would go back (ruined a lot of pics during my trip to Iceland because it was cloudy the entire time). Also, budget is not my main concern. I was even contemplating going full frame but its just to heavy and big to carry around when you are travelling. So I am trying to accomplish multiple things here:<br> 1. Portable and light (relatively speaking)<br> 2. Fast lens<br> 3. Good quality images with good sharpness overall.</p> <p>So I finally ended up with Nikon D5300 as it has a good 24MP sensor in a compact body(after weeks of looking for a good A6000 lens, Alas, its a great camera without a good all purpose lens). I went with D5300 instead of D7100 because D5300 is lighter and if needed, I can carry a heavier lens (better lens > better body?). Now when it comes to standard zoom, these three (18-35 and 17-50) had the best reviews and image quality (according to DXO). <br> I even considered Sigma 35mm f1.4 for I heard that it has a stellar image quality. But it might not be a well suited lens for travel due to fixed focal length. I am thinking of buying a Sigma 17-50 and probably rent the 35mm from time to time. </p>

<p>Hello,</p> <p>I am looking to replace the kit lens for my D5300 with better glass (within the same zoom range as kit lens). I intend to use it as a general purpose travel lens. I mostly like shoot landscapes and some landscapes of people in foreground (to share on social networking). I usually don't like to change the lens as I do not have any specific purpose to do that. I just want to take better pictures to share online and may be couple of prints for my living room. So I just bought just the body (found a good deal) and now I am looking to buy a decent lens that wont cost me arm and leg. The obvious choices were:<br> 1. Sigma 17-50 f/2.8<br> 2. Tamron 17-50 f/2.8<br> 3. Nikon 17-55 f/2.8<br> 4. Sigma 18-35 f/1.8</p> <p>Did I miss any other $500 range decent zoom lenses? The first place I looked for reviews was DXOmark and I dismissed Nikon 17-55 as it scored the least and costs more. Sigma and Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 have very similar scores. Here is the link comparing them:</p> <p><a href="http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/17-50mm-f-2.8-EX-DC-OS-HSM-Nikon-on-Nikon-D5300-versus-AF-S-DX-Zoom-Nikkor-17-55mm-f-2.8G-IF-ED-on-Nikon-D5300-versus-Tamron-SP-17-50mm-F28-Di-II-XR-VC-LD-Aspherical-IF-Nikon-on-Nikon-D5300___377_919_173_919_498_919" target="_blank">http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/17-50mm-f-2.8-EX-DC-OS-HSM-Nikon-on-Nikon-D5300-versus-AF-S-DX-Zoom-Nikkor-17-55mm-f-2.8G-IF-ED-on-Nikon-D5300-versus-Tamron-SP-17-50mm-F28-Di-II-XR-VC-LD-Aspherical-IF-Nikon-on-Nikon-D5300___377_919_173_919_498_919</a></p> <p>Although, DXO says that Sigma performs best at 50mm 2.8 and Tamron at 17mm 2.8. Can some one explain what it means? The difference between overall scores and sharpness ratings seem negligible. I did not read too much into scores other than sharpness and overall ratings. So my question: Is there any discernible difference between Sigma and Tamron? Is one better than the other from any real life/practical points of view? Technically both of them seem to be very similar.</p> <p>The other lens that peeked my interest is the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8. This lens seem to garner a lot of praise from many reviewers and photographers. I also love f/1.8 for low light conditions. But the limited zoom range is my main concern. Its also expensive (although not out of my budget) and relatively heavy to be a travel lens. I am still undecided about it and would love your opinion about using this as an all-purpose lens. I do use a tripod when I want to capture a good picture and without image stabilization, I am not sure if it has any advantages (for my preferences stated above) over 17-55 f/2.8. Unless you think that the IQ of this lens is considerably better than 17-55s.</p> <p>Any input/opinion/suggestion is highly appreciated. Thanks.</p>

<p>Hello all,</p> <p>I am pretty new to mirror-less world. I have been using Canon XSi (450D) with kit lens for past 4 to 5 years. I mainly use my camera for travel pics, enthusiast level landscapes and sometimes use my cheap 50mm 1.8 for basic party/portrait pictures. I recently started to get a little serious and started learning proper techniques to capture good pictures. I am no pro by any means. Photography is still a hobby for me. So I stared to rent better lenses during my travel. </p> <p>I am now looking to upgrade my camera and the two best options (in terms of budget and my purpose) in my mind were Canon 70D and Nikon D7100. When I started to do more research, I stumbled up on A7 and A6000. I even went to Best Buy to check out these cameras and was thoroughly impressed. They have all the features of big DSLRs in a compact factor, which is PERFECT for me. I almost decided to buy A6000 but I could not find any decent "all/general purpose" lens that has good optics. For example, if I were to buy Canon 70D, I was planning to pair it with Canon 17-55 f2.8 (or Sigma 17-50 f2.8). Both of them cost less than $1000, with good focal range for landscapes and travel photos, are fast enough for low light conditions. In addition, their optics are much better than the kit lens. </p> <p>When I looked for something similar for E-mount, I could not find anything. At least not for under $1000. Am I missing/overlooking something or these type of lenses do not exist for E-Mount? All the articles/reviews online talk about the awesome prime lenses but no one seem to quote a good walk around lens. The kit lens that comes with A6000 does not have quality optics by any means. Is this the general case for mirror less world?</p> <p>Thanks.</p>

<p>Rick,<br> I never made an issue. It is clear AFTER every one replied that DXO scores make very little difference. That was my question to begin with. So now I agree with everyone who said so.<br> You are entitled to your opinion but you need not be condescending. It would have been better if you replied straight to my question rather than writing useless stuff (like "mouse dropings"). It would have been more helpful if you had contributed something substantial rather than rambling. What would I get by making an issue? <br> I simply wanted to know if one was clearly better than the other as mentioned by a professional website. If I knew everything I would never have started this thread. <br> Thank you for your time.</p>

<p>Thank you all for your responses. Now I am convinced that its not intelligent to make a decision purely based on DXOmark scores. Other factors considered, both these cameras might end up with same image quality eventually.</p> <p>Matt and Wouter: I think you guys have a very valid point which I ignored. I am used to using Canon cameras but never handled Nikon before. I assumed that I would eventually get used if I get a new system. Its probably a good idea to go to Best Buy to check them out.</p> <p>Rick: You might be rich enough to consider these things as mouse droppings. For me it is a BIG deal investing $1500 to $2000 for a "hobby". New camera and lenses are not something I would buy/change every year. I wanted to do my due diligence so I would not have any regrets in the future..... and I would like to have the best product for the money I spend. For a noob like me the only sources of seeing practical information is via reviewers (websites and youtube, DXOmark being one of them) and awesome photo communities like this one. I can get all the "technical" numbers from online sources but only a community like this can give me some practical advice. And I never remember mentioning that I was heavily invested in any one of the systems.</p> <p>Jeff and Dick: Thanks for confirming that DXO scores are just one part of the equation. I did like the swiveling screen and the auto focus system in Canon 70D. Although I never do videos or sports photography, these are still pretty useful during travel and parties.</p> <p>Thank you all. I got so much engrossed into reviews and articles that I was up all night reading. Now I am interested even in Sony A6000 mirror less camera as it seems to have a really good sensor with some awesome features. So I am back to comparing DSLR vs compact mirrorless cameras. That might be a discussion for a different thread though.</p> <p>Again, I would like to thank all of you for your valuable time and advice. I now have a much better frame of mind compared to when I started this thread.</p>