I have a Pentax K-X with the 18-55 kit lens.

I'm awful at it.


MSM at backroads crossroads by concealer404, on Flickr


Dirt Road in desert with Miatas by concealer404, on Flickr

 

I've got a Canon mount Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 on its way. I'm going ultra-wide. Anyone else use this lens?

 

I use a Toyo 45CF 4x5 large format camera for my important stuff. Either Kodak Ektar 100 for color or Ilford HP5 for my B&W developments. Keep it in dat darkroom!

 

I prefer lightroom for my B&W developments:

 

I use lightroom for my digital stuff, but I don't do much digital anymore. I have access to a darkroom, and ME GUSTA.

 

Don't know if I ever posted up here, but shoot (pretty infrequently these days) with a 7D. Good glass is the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 IS.

 

Picked up some new gear. My grandfathers old Pentax K1000 and a Pentax-M 50mm f/2, Super Takumar 50mm f/1.4 and a Takumar SMC 135mm f/2.5 lenses. I've never been a film camera guy, so this is new territory for me, but I think I'll like it. Most of this gear probably straight up JDM shizzle since my grandfather was a pilot over Japan during the Korean war. He has all kind of Japanese stuff.

I was surprised to see that the Takumar 135mm is still considered a very high end piece of glass, and sells for around $300 on the used market. They surely don't make lenses like they used to. All 3 of these lenses are full metal and have silky smooth focus with excellent detent, snug and rattle free operation of all rings and mechanics, and no internal noise when shaken.

 

hmmm... maybe i should sell all my pentax stuff then:




I sold my d3100 and got a D5100, but I'm about to take the leap and go with a d600.

 

Digital:
Canon 60D
Canon T3 (modified for full spectrum)

Film:
Canon Elan iie
Minolta X370
Voigtländer Vitomatic IIb
Cambo SCX (4x5 large format)

Lenses:
Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L
Canon EF 85mm f/1.8
Canon EF 135mm F/2L
Tokina 11-16mm F/2.8
Various M42 and Minolta lenses adapted for canon mount
I haven't been able to take as many photos as I wanted lately because grad school. Looking to dabble in (digital) full frame next.










image stack of 25 exposures

 

Is that a KM? It's more valuable than I would have thought. Just the K1000 and 3 lenses are worth almost $700 going by typical ebay prices. I'm for sure not selling the 135mm 2.5 and the 50mm 1.4, as they are both considered to be such great lenses. The only close Nikon equal to the 135mm costs at least $1200, and the 50mm Nikon equal is $350 and all plastic, and not as sharp as the Takumar. An M42 to Nikon adapter is only $5.

I'm almost considering moving to the lonely world of Pentax, and pick up a K-3. It has everything I need, and a lot of things comparable Nikon and Canon don't. Fully weather sealed, internal image stabilization, 8.3fps burst, and a few other pretty nifty features. Better low light af than a lot of Nikon, and good low light performance and an 80 ISO max

 

Somebody tell me what lens(es) i need to get for my Pentax K-X next.

Thinking i need a 50mm of some sort, maybe a 1.8. Willing to spend $300ish, give or take a little. Currently only have the 18-55 kit lens piece of ****.

 

All depends on what kind of stuff you like to shoot. For me, my favorite focal length will always be a 50mm. A 50mm 1.8 is a great lens to have in your collection. I can't vouch for Pentax, but Nikon makes a great modern 50mm 1.8G. I read reviews on the Pentax forum that say their equivalent is very good. Averaging a 9/10+ across the board.

For double the price you can get the 50mm 1.4. All depends on how much you care about low light performance and depth of field. And for $100 more than that one, you can get the 50mm 2.8 Macro, which focuses at 7" for those really nice up close shots. Again, all depends on what you shoot.

 

Kindof looking for jack of all trades at the moment. Car things, objects.

It's been recommended to me in the past same as what you said: A 50mm is a great thing to have in general.

I'm guessing that in my budget, a 1.8 is all i'll be able to swing, not a 1.4, correct?

 

The 50mm 1.8 is under $200, the 1.4 is around $425.

The 50mm I guess could be considered jack of all trades. It's certainly not wide enough to capture large groups of people, or wide nature scenes, but it is good for a lot of general things, given you have enough space to get it all in frame. I come across a lot of situation where my 50mm just isn't wide enough and I wish I had something else on my camera, but I get by. There really isn't anything else worth getting in my opinion, until you get down to something like a 20,24 or 28mm prime. 35mm prime is sort of a waste of money in my opinion. It just falls into a weird hole where it's not really needed. Anything in the wide or tele range worth buying is going to be out of your current price range (20, 24, 28, 85, 105, 135, ect.). You could also cover all bases with a range of zoom lenses. You already have a good lens to cover 18-55 range, and you can find pretty good 50-200 approximate range lenses that are decently good in most situations, but don't perform very well in low light. Then all you would need would be one good ultra wide, that 50mm 1.8, and then ideally something between 85 and 135mm, fast lens. Those get a bit $$$ unless you buy older, non AF lenses like I have. You can pick up an awesome 135mm 2.5 Takumar that is hard to beat by anything modern, at any price range. BUT, it wouldn't be AF.

 

One of the first lenses I buy once I get my D600 will be a 50mm 1.4D. But that's because it's $200 vs. $100 for the 1.8D, but that body has an in-body focus motor, so I can drive old lenses.

I have the 85mm 1.8G and it's an amazing piece of glass:


Pookie in Autumn Sun 3 by The Braineack, on Flickr

 

85mm is one of my favorite focal lengths. I wish my grandfather had pitched in for the Takumar 85mm while he was at it. The cost of those is $500-$800, for a 30-40 year old lens.

I loved my 50mm 1.8D when I had my D50. Got my D5100 and had to get the 1.8G.

 

Brain, I tried to get rid of the leash. It was hard.

 

******* dilemma! To Nikon D7100, or to Pentax K-3!? Almost identical cameras in every way. Spec sheets read nearly dead even in everything. I've always been a Nikon guy, but lately I've had the Pentax itch, and the K-3 and the awesome Pentax lens lineup has been calling me. Plus I like that Pentax has so much weather sealed options, since a lot of my photography is done in less than sanitary and clean locations (woods, caves, ect.)... And for almost the same money I could either get a D7100 and a 18-200 VR for a do it all start up, or the K-3 and the 18-135... The Pentax is weather sealed, but with less reach... BAH! I'm almost sold on the K-3, but I still have a little voice calling me to the D7100. Those Pentax lenses though! HNG!

Plus, I kind of like being an outcast. No better way to do that than to be a Pentax guy.

 

If you already have Nikon lenses, I would get the Nikon.

 

All of my lenses are gone, or soon to be gone. I sold a lot of my lenses months ago, and all I have left now is the kit lens 18-55 and my 50mm prime. Those hopefully will be sold in the next few days. So I have nothing holding me to Nikon except for a soft spot and experience.