One lens for budget digital

[michael_barkowski]

My budget's extremely limited, but I am saving up so I can buy the

~$900 USD Pentax digital SLR they are going to release in the fall.

What are your thoughts on this: I plan to keep the manual 50mm lens

from my K1000 and use this as the only lens for a year or two until

I can afford another one. (The lens feels solid, and is one of the

faster ones). Would that be a waste of the features of a digital

SLR? Am I going to wish I bought a kit with a lens? I've seen a

lot of comments about using manual lenses on the *ist D, but can

someone summarize what I'd be missing? Thanks.

 

(I plan to sell the K1000 and my cheap Sigma 28-200mm to help pay

for the digital).

[markci]

Depends on how you feel about your only lens being a short telephoto (which is what the 50 will become on a digital camera).

[stemked]

Hi Michael.

 

First of all, Mark is 100% correct. You now have a fantastic short telephoto. Well worth keeping regardless of whatever other lens you pickup.

 

As to the "What do you need next?" what you likely get with the kit is a lens that offers flexability in form of focal length which you pay for in speed and a slightly deminished optical properties (a tad less shap and likely some distortion). I think what you should do is evaluate your shooting. For most folks who are casual snap shooters, wider is where they need more focal length. If you are nuts about flowers, then a macro might be more to your likeing. It all depends on your photographic interests.

[kai_teufel]

I`d think twice before doing that. wait until the first test results. what is with dust on the sensor? is this problem soluted? And dont forget, most of the quality of the pictures depends on the lens! if you have only one lens, there are lots of things you wont be able to photograph. no church in the full size, even no house. youll only have detail pics. Is it so important for you to have a digicam?what about buying a nice 28mm and 135mm lens, will cost about 100-150 bucks and youll have very good fotos of nearly all motives on 35mm film. or try first a newer cam, with the k1000 snapshot is difficult, because you no automatic there. even a me super will help there, or a autofocus camera. if you use the usd with only 50mm youll be restricted. its like buying a ferrari chassis but spending only the money for a volkswagen motor. But i understand having dreams. i`ll fulfill mine now and buy a leica. i`ll be able to afford the 50mm lens only too in the next time, but its my dream...

so fulfil your dream if the usd is your dreams, because dreams need not to be sensible

Kai

[Jochen_S]

1st I disagree totally with Kai. Go digital if you like; it's great fun. Cleaning a sensor is somehow possible and at least you can spot dust easier in a digital than a wet darkroom.

What I really doubt (from comparing with Canons policy) if the new affordable body will at least work as poor as the *istD with plain k-mount non"A" lenses? - I have some and don't use them without great need. O.K. if your 50mm is a "A", keep it use it, it's great! - 2nd lenses either a 18 - X mm "kit" zoom - Sigma? or you go the classic way of primes: a 24mm should be good or a 20mm better (but unluckily not optical...) Sigma seems worth consideration, fast f1.9 and good test results. (the 24mm)

I can't summarize what you'll be missing because I know nothing about the new DSLR til now. Surely they'll cripple the *istD in some way. Nobody knows when the 1st russian hacker will publish the cracked firmware...

[michael_barkowski]

I'm definitely going digital - it is too creatively limiting for me, with little time and budget, to have to pay money for every shot I take before I get to see the result.

It's a K-mount with aperture ring. While I wait I have to shoot with a compact digital zoom which I will also trade-in. So it's a question of waiting longer and buying the kit, or buying the body as soon as possible and buying DA or DA J lenses later.

From some of the comments here I'm leaning towards the latter option as it sounds like I can still have lots of fun with the ~75mm equivalent. I'll be missing zoom, autofocus and shutter-priority, and metering will take a second longer, right? I think I can live with that temporarily. Anyway I'll think more about this after the tests and specs come out - that was a good point.

[michael_barkowski]

By the way I mis-typed - my lens is a 55mm/1.8. It is good for precise focusing as the focus ring has a lot of travel. It may not be worth a lot, but I like it.

[william_au]

I'd recommend checking out the <a href="http://dpreview.com">dpreview forum</a> to get some user feedback on kit lenses. From what I can tell, a lot of the non-pro shooters were quite happy with the Sigma lens kits that came with their istD. I have the Pentax 18-35 lens that originally was packed with the Pentax kit - it's an okay lens and very light, but it's slow and my primes are far better in build and optical quality. The Pentax 16-45 f4 (24-70 equivalent) is apparently a very good one, but it's also moderately expensive and hard to track down. I'm starting to move away from my zooms, and am aiming to pick up a 24mm f2 lens - which becomes a fast 35 equivalent on digital. This plus my fast 50 would make an ideal people/street coverage set for me.

[new hampshire john]

Michael --

 

It's a good question -- I have to say that using K and M lenses (i.e., the manual focus, non-smc-A lenses) is sorta painful with the *ist-D, but maybe they'll address that in the new body. It's not impossible by any means, but it's not nearly as quick and spontaneous as using A lenses (let alone AF lenses). I use a 135/2.5 "M" lens and a 200/4 from time to time, but only in a pinch. So the take-home message is that it's a little cumbersome, but if budget is a real issue, it's do-able.

 

I also wanted to chime in that the 24-90 zoom is pretty great. It's only moderately-wide to short-tele on the *ist-D, but it's a real performer, and it's cheap -- picked mine up used for $250, and that's about going rate last I saw. Couple it with a superwide prime and you can really cover a lot of ground.

 

You also mentioned "using manual lenses," and I would urge you to do so -- depending on your style, being able to compose on the ground glass and control the speed/momentum of focusing is spectacular. I use my 50mm "A" lens all the time when either I don't want the noise of AF or don't want to be forced to "point-shoot-recompose." Look for any of the 50s in "A" mount, they're spectacular.

 

I guess my advice is to save until you can get a good wide AF zoom.

 

If you can't do that, think about picking up a cheap 28/2.8 "A" -- they're plentiful and cheap, and it'll be just about normal perspective with a 1.5 crop. You should be able to pick one up for about $25 if you hunt.

[michael_barkowski]

Thanks for the thoughtful replies. Doing some calculations online, it seems that if I want to maintain the shallow depths of field I had with film I need faster lenses not slower. It looks like I'll probably be saving up for a faster, wider auto focus lens and using my existing lens in the meantime. I doubt that the kit lens will be fast enough for my liking. This is assuming that the new DSLR won't have any more difficulty than the *ist D does with the manual K-mount lens type. Hurray for the advent of entry-level digital SLRs!

[conrad_drake]

Why buy a US$900 digital body if you're short on cash? That's somewhere between one and two hundred processed rolls of C41 at todays prices (depending on where & how you get it done) Many more B&W if you DIY. (Regardless of format, prints cost money)

 

Budget digital is sub US$100 - particularily if you have only one focal length!

 

And, so far, no-one knows if the non-A lenses will even work on the "budget" DSLR.

[michael_barkowski]

Ya know Conrad, you've got a point there. Perhaps I should go out with both cameras. I guess I'm sort of addicted to the instant review and other conveniences. Thanks for the perspective.<br>

I have no interest in 4x6 prints.<br>

In a day of shooting outdoors, I'd probably shoot about 4 rolls of 36.<br>

Thats about $20 CDN for film, $25 for C41 processing, even more if I want Photo CDs.<br>

If I do that once a month for 10 months I've spent $400 and am no closer to owning the equipment I really want.<br>

If I were making money from my hobby it would be different.<br>

So I'd rather save those $45 and use my digital compact for free.<br>

(I bought the digital when I had more disposable income, and it's not worth selling now.) Then I can take 300 pictures a month, instantly reviewing them and developing a creative process that will grow. It's always a compromise, and that's why it's always interesting to peruse alternatives.

[michael_barkowski]

By the way I considered B&W DIY too, but it doesn't cost nothing, I have so little time, and the effort it takes to learn and adjust the process at this point would not be a long-term investment. Besides, I'm interested in colour. Plus I'm still producing negatives, and scanning is a slow and inaccurate process with the scanner I was able to afford. I still think it's another way to go. But I have to choose one way and I have chosen digital. The only major downsides of digital is not being able to afford something with a big sensor with it's accompanying depth of field control, and the dinky controls, especially manual focus.

[paul_quirk]

If I had to pick one and only one lens to start with and own forever with any Pentax camera, it would be my 50mm/F1.7 lens. With it, some stunning photographs can be taken, and it's extremely versatile. Then, if I was on a tight budget but wanted to buy a 2nd lens, a 28mm would probably be the best value for my dollar. I'd stick with primes, and I wouldn't worry much about automated features since the most important part is the quality of the glass.