On Mar 6, 2009, at 3:16 PM, Cory Waters wrote:
As a purely hypothetical , lets just say you had maybe $2500 to
spend free and clear of any guilt. Lets also say you were inclined
to spend said clams on new lenses. We'll say you have a K10, the
DA 50-200 & 18-55, a FA 28-105 f3.2-4.5, and a FA 50 1.7 (there are
some other manual focus lenses but we're focusing on newer stuff).
Further, lets assume that we're going to buy new lenses from an
online retailer (probably Amazon) and they need to be available for
sale now or at least in a couple months. Assume we shoot lots of
family-type shots (kids, vacations, scenic stuff from camping
trips, etc), some sports (racing, football), and some more artsy or
flower stuff on occasion. How would you spend it?
I've been thinking:
90/100 macro (from whom?)
70-200 2.8 (Sigma? A TC to go with it?)
DA* 16-50 (it's maybe too big for walk around/vacation and I wish
it went out to 85mm)
Mmmmm Limited. But 43 or 31? 77? The new 55?
Cory
quite possibly counting unborn-chickens
Without trying to count the number of chickens that would need to
come home to roost, I would suggest:
DA21mm
DA55mm
FA77 Ltd
DA*16-50 or DA17-70
Keep the 50-200 rather than switching for the DA*50-135.
Don't buy a macro lens per se, several of the above have adequate
close focusing which, combined with judicious cropping, should
satisify a macro itch occasionally.
Alternative suggestion:
DA17-70
FA* 80-200 [there was one recently on eBay that did not sell with a
BIN of $1795 IIRC.] Yes, 'tis big and heavy, but these two lenses
would be all you need.
Stan
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
