Seems like both apparently.
Seems like both apparently.
I heard the 550D has alot of lens to choose from.
Firstly, I don't think I will want to get a 2nd hand DSLR.
I'm afraid it is faulty.
I'll rather pay abit more to get a Brand New one.
But between the 550D & KX, Plus Price, think everyone would agree that the KX is more worth it?
And KX has colours!! LOLS
Think I've already settled for the White KX.
Just waiting for end of this month when I get the money then I'll purchase it.
As for what kind of lens (2nd hand), budget 100 - 300 is good for a good DOF pic, I don't know much.
I don't even understand the many numbers you guys are fighting about.
TS, you may want to check out the Pentax subforum ahead of the purchase :
I was from Nafa too... So u would have probably used their 30D's right. Why not go for a 50D then. Or a Nikon D90 would also make a lovely choice. I personally would pick either canon or nikon. But not the entry models...
Yeah good choice, me too had a Red pentax K-x. been with me for almost two month on complain at all. Please do get the dual lens(but too bad, for dual len i don't think there's color to choose from.
Anyway if you wanna buy the camera you can try SLR revolution, through my reseach i found out that they are the cheapest in singapore already. And you may also like to buy the Tamron 70-300mm f4.5-5.6, although this len is quite slow, but it's cheap and can produce good image.
For more info about Pentax K-x please do go to the pentax forum, in the forum you will find more experts and they are really very helpful too.
Pentax K-x, Pentax Super A, Tamron 17-50 f2.8, Tamron AF70-300mm, Pentax-M 50mm f1.7
Essentially , to make a good decision to buy , you probably want to disregard brand for a moment , and start to look at specifically the type of lenses and the general characteristics of lens.
To aid you , you will probably want to get fast lenses with constant aperture from 1.4 to 2.8. Earlier on , these numbers has surfaced when the series of pentax lenses was shown. The down side of fast lens is that they tend to be pricier.
The next decision to make is how wide or how much narrow you want to shoot. 18mm-24mm , considered to be wide lenses. 50mm to , 70mm are considered normal to long , 200mm and beyond tele.
Lens with fixed length are known as primes , they tend to be lenses with big apertures , that produce very milky bokeh wide open.
Lens with varying lengths are known as zooms ( 11-14 Ultra wide zoom, 18-24 wide zoom , 18-50mm normal zoom , 50-200mm telezoom)
for general shooting , 17-55mm , should be good for scenery and group pictures. 200mm onwards mainly for shooting far away objects , like birds , animals .
To get shallow DoF , you can get the fast prime lenses ,but you might need to get different primes to suit difference suitable needs from wide to tele. Fast zoom lenses ( zoom lens with big apertures 2.8 ) are convinent but are very expensive and heavy.
Alternatively , you can also get a long lens around 70mm to 200mm lens with variable aperture F3.5-5.6 , you will get the shallow DoF effect when used appropriately.
Long lens with smaller apertures are generally cheaper than fast primes.
Hope that helps.
Alpha and Omega
Seriously to use the lens in zooming operation: shake your left leg to zoom in, and shake your right leg to zoom out.
A true photograph need not be explained, nor can it be contained in words.
And also look at this http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showt...520858&page=19
Colour Kx is always so nice
So has the TS come to a conclusion of what to get?
There is no such thing as 'good' or 'bad' Depth of Field. It is usually described as thin/narrow or large/deep.
If you're talking about photos where the subject stands out from the background because the subject is sharp whilst the background is very blur, then you're referring to photography with thin DOF to isolate the subject.
If all else is consistent (eg. focal length, camera--->subject distance) and you take 2 photos at f/1.8 and f/2.8, the f/1.8 photo will have a thinner DOF, so the background will be more blur than that taken at f/2.8
Clear enough? HTH...