Will this upgrade over the kit lens on a K50 provide a noticeable difference in image quality for a beginner?
416124
You can be both a "free to adjust + professional-ish blur sense of composition by the zoom". Brightness and lack of zoom lens, supplemented well the shortcomings of both of the difficulty of making composition of single focus, It is easy-to-use lens.
1298995
The K-3 is an upgrade from a K-x, which I'd had for three years. I've been very happy with it. I had considered the K-5IIs, but the improved features of the K-3 swayed me. I'm using the kit lenses that came with my K-x, plus a 50mm 1.4 FA that I already had, though I recently purchased an 18-55mm DA WR so I could gift my K-x with the kit short zoom to my son. I have no immediate plans to purchase more lenses. In fact, having purchased LightRoom at the same time I got the K-3, the quality of images I'm getting from my budget lenses is amazing. The K-3 has wonderful shadow detail which LightRoom pulls out very well. The K-3 is an upgrade from a K-x, which I'd had for three years. I've been very happy with it. I had considered the K-5IIs, but the improved features of the K-3 swayed me. I'm using the kit lenses that came with my K-x, plus a 50mm 1.4 FA that I already had, though I recently purchased an 18-55mm DA WR so I could gift my K-x with the kit short zoom to my son. I have no immediate plans to purchase more lenses. In fact, having purchased LightRoom at the same time I got the K-3, the quality of images I'm getting from my budget lenses is amazing. The K-3 has wonderful shadow detail which... » Read More The K-3 is an upgrade from a K-x, which I'd had for three years. I've been very happy with it. I had considered the K-5IIs, but the improved features of the K-3 swayed me. I'm using the kit lenses that came with my K-x, plus a 50mm 1.4 FA that I already had, though I recently purchased an 18-55mm DA WR so I could gift my K-x with the kit short zoom to my son. I have no immediate plans to purchase more lenses. In fact, having purchased LightRoom at the same time I got the K-3, the quality of images I'm getting from my budget lenses is amazing. The K-3 has wonderful shadow detail which LightRoom pulls out very well. « Show Less
2135706
I see no reason why it shouldn't because the k50 and k30 are Pentax dslrs that come with the DA 18-55 mm lens which has the same mount.
809690
There is definitely a noticeable difference. The 56 has most definitely been my go to for portraits. On top of the sharpness there is also a creamy character to the bokeh. Overall this lens brings a magical quality to the images.
1820412
The 1.8 is similar in build quality to the kit lens--probably a slight bit below the XSI kit. If you're happy with the kit lens, you should be happy with the 1.8.There's a reason why 93% of the reviews here are 4 or 5 stars--this lens takes great pictures. For $80, what do you have to lose?
1774791
As a user of both lenses, you will get possibly better bokeh with the 50mm f1.4 if for no other reason than the wider aperture on the 50mm.
1974652
I haven't used the 35mm but i can assure you the image quality is better than the 50 f1.8 or the kit lens. This sigma will serve you well as a starter lens and actually shouldn't be something you immediately feel like upgrading. Primes are well and good if you are ready for them but zooms are better for starting out. if you test out different focal lengths you can find out what prime lenses will work best for you. you don't want to buy a 35mm just to find out you'd rather have a 24, etc.
1422783
I have used the old K1000 lenses (pentax 50mm lens it came with and an off brand telephoto) on my pentax k-3 with no issue. It is all manual, so I have to take a guess at metering, and of course no auto focus, but it works, it mounts and produces nice results. You will have to have knowledge of manual metering to produce the results you want.
1801157
The Macro can give some fun perspectives foreground to background. As for if it is an upgrade the aperture difference alone is an upgrade as it will allow you to take more pictures with only available light instead of using flash. I love this lens and the glass is great.
1729201
The camera came with they call a "kit" lens. I purchased a 50mm lens additionally. I haven't even used the kit lens yet, because I was really longing for the 50mm! I should probably try it out. I'm pleased with my older model, used camera - don't know why I didn't think of it sooner!
867743
Neal, that lens is not real that optically good for that body (although it's fully compatible). I own a D300 and it deserves better lenses...like a fixed f2.8 zoom (e.g. from Sigma or Tamron), not very expensive.This kit lens was very good on a D50, but just so so on the D300!
306198
All of these are on the low-end of lenses and so I don't know if you'll see an appreciable difference in image quality, especially on a budget (D)SLR. The most direct comparison that can be made is to the kit lens. Assuming you've already decided that a zoom lens is necessary, both will have similar image quality, but the advantage of this model is that the widest aperture does not change with zoom - it will stay at f/2.8 over the entire length. Moreover, this has a wider maximum aperture than the kit, enabling for shallower depth of field and more light reaching the sensor. The question becomes, are these aspects necessary/important to you? If image quality is more important than the ability to zoom, then, in general, prime lenses tend to produce sharper images than budget zoom lenses.
1135875
IMO no. The 35mm or Zeiss 24mm would be much better. If you are outdoors, the 50mm is ok, but if someone is right near you, or you want a landscape/building shot, the focal length of the 50 will be too long. (I own the Zeiss 24 and this 50)
1298988
Its a better experience in every aspect. I stepped from the K5 and the AF and clarity on all my high end lens now shines. Color depth is fantastic and the details are just better. I am glad I upgraded.
1907928
I am sorry - I did not even investigate the kit lens. I had a 24-70 f2.8 and a 70-200 f2.8 which I was going to use with the camera. (But I opted for the 24-70 2.8 rather than the f4 because I do a lot of indoor work (I am NOT a pro), and am VERY happy. I recently shot at a conference with high ISO and both these lenses, without a flash. Very pleased with the results).
364835
Basically just more distance. In my opinion, i never ever use the kit lens, so get the cheaper one and get a couple primes with much much better quality. Thats just my opinion. Honestly, just watch some reviews and based off what kind of photography you're doing its your call!
1794473
Without it being available yet it's hard to say just what exactly will be different quality wise. The new one will improve bokeh out of focus highlights at a price though. You will lose T-Stops (light transmission) For example 1.2 might give you the same light as f1.8-2. This is because the filter is a type of Neutral Density filter. For me I shoot low light and having that extra stop is important. The trade off combined with price just doesn't work. So what's more important to you? Bokeh quality or low light shooting? The 56mm is a fantastic lens in either version. Highly recommended!