In my humble opinion, you don't "need" any particular amount of lenses. You've got a good one on your camera to begin with. The type of photography you want to do will dictate how many and what focal length lenses you need. Henri Cartier-Bresson managed pretty well, and he used only three lenses: 50mm (or whatever the "standard" Leica lens is), 90mm and, occasionally, a 135mm.
You can always use your feet (step back, walk forward) if need be. I would probably start with maybe a 35mm and a 135mm. They are plentiful and relatively reasonable in price. That way you'll have a moderately wide-angle and telephoto capability. From there, you'll get a feel as to whether you need anything longer, wider, or whether you need to "fill in any gaps". Indeed, you may decide to get a zoom (or zooms) to do that (as I've done). The type of pictures you want to take will dictate what you need. regards, frank "Sandmann, Silke" wrote: > I read that already. And I agree with you. But to start I need at least a > certain > amount of lenses, don't I? At least 2? One for the close and one for the > distance. > And exactly that is what I am trying to find out. But I certainly don't want > to spend > money just to get an equipment I am not able to use (yet). > -- "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
