On 2011-01-22 17:33 , Larry Colen wrote:
At the top of my shortlist is the K-5.
me too; i am often pushing my exposures and find myself sometimes
surprising myself at 1/6 second handheld, but that's pretty rare (and it
tends to hurt ...), plus the shadows are crap at ISO 400 on my K200d; my
logic is that a K5 would give me more than the couple of stops any lens
changeup would give me, and without the extra weight of said lenses;
more depth of field in low light would be a plus too; a K-r would be a
risk because i am often in the rain or snow, though i might try one
anyway because i can afford it sooner than a K-5
Something wider than 16mm.
i used to shoot 20mm a lot on 35mm film, and i miss it; i guess i should
either get a 12-24 or i should buy an old Canon "full frame" digital
body to go with the EF 20mm 2.8 i still have; the alternative seems to
be getting really nerdy about panorama technique, which would slow me
down a lot
beyond that ...
a bargain autobellows for my 100/4 macro (i have only a shoddy barely
workable bellows)
a good printer and a mat cutter
an "always with me" camera with excellent optics; my K200d with 50mm is
not compact enough, and 50mm is too long; a K-5 with a wider prime would
be more capable, but still too big; i've enjoyed the Panasonic LX3, but
i don't enjoy composing on the screen and its low light qualities are no
better than my K200d; so something like a Fuji X100, is sparring with
the K-5 in my budgeting for the next year or so
on the "maybe" list would be the 60-250 for more ease with wildlife
shots (i use a Vivitar 70-210 now), the 16-50 (or a 24-something if i
had the 12-24), a Pentax WR 100 Macro instead of my Sigma 105 macro
(non-WR), and maybe some off-camera flash and a dustproof room
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
