On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:18:40 -0500, Butch Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Guys; > > It looks like the tax return fairy will provide enough to allow the purchase > of a ist-Ds. I am debating whether to get it with the Kit lens, or whether > to get another lens later. My current kit 28, 35, 50, 100, 135, 200, 300, > only the 300 is AF. I do not shoot wide angle often and am not a big wide > angle fan. A 35mm lens on a film camera is usually wide enough for me. > > My questions. How good/bad is the 18-55, especially in the sub 28 range? How > is it on a film camera? How well do the 16-45 and 20-35 compare to each > other and to the 20 and 24mm primes? (I know the 16-45 is digital only) > > My general thought is if the 18-55 is not bad it might suffice for awhile, > as it only adds $100 over the body alone and I can use it with my Z-1p (if I > keep my Z-1p). But I'm used to the sharpness and contrast of my primes, so > if it's a dog am I better off putting the money towards a better lens? > > TIA for any thoughts on the matter. > Thanks for asking this question, Butch. I've been weighing buying one with the kit lens or going with the 40mm DA. I've decided to do both. Butterfly has the DS kit for about $20 more than the body elsewhere. http://www2.butterflyphoto.com/shop/product.aspx?sku=PEN-IST-DSWLENS&dp=1&bsk=1 Steve's also says the 18-55 isn't bad. Anyway, how often do you come across a Pentax lens that's not even good enough for a walkabout?
-- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com
