Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 3, 2008, 4:13 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,095
Default

Here are my choices:

1 - DA 16-45mm f4 ($400). is there enough improvement over the kit lens to warrant this expense?

2 - DA 12-24mm f4 ($750). Expensive and I have read too many accounts of focus errors, but a good range.

3 - DA 10-17mm f3.5-4 fisheye ($500). Very tempting, is it difficult to de-fish the images?

4 - SIGMA 10-20MM 4-5.6 EX DC PENTAX ($600). Has an excellent reputation as a very sharp, low distortion lens, Sigma's quality control can be spotty though (I was one of the few lucky ones with the 24-135mm f2.8-4.5).

I am not averse to a little pp to fix some distortion so right now the DA Fisheye is at the top of this list although, the 16-45 may be all I really need since I justneed better images than the kit lens is giving me but I want a wider view for the vertical landscapes I like. If you have the 12-24mm then give me an unbiased opinion (if you think it is great, tell me, if you think you made a mistake, tell me, we all have made mistakes before.) the price is a little high compared to the rest of this group.

If I could be certain I would get a good copy then the Sigma has everything I need and want. I know there are a number of very happy Bigma owners here as well as 75-300mm owners and of course my own excellent 24-135mm so Sigma is not taboo, just a little iffy.

I need help in spending my money wisely.

Ira
Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 3, 2008, 5:35 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Black Knight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Oxford, CT
Posts: 1,309
Default

Hi Ira

If You have not Already Done So. Check Out My post on My New K200D. The first 3 pictures are taken With the DA16-45 F4. Those Were Straight from the camera With Just a little ADJ. As to how it Compares to the kit Lense not sure. I have had the lense less than a week. And Rarely Used the kit lense. So i have no basis for Comparision
No Promises Because of my work schedule, But If i have time this Week I will take both and Do a Comparision. And post It.


Phil
Black Knight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2008, 5:50 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 20
Default

I have had the 12-24 for about 2 years and consider it to be an excellent lens. I have used it on both the DS and K10D without problems.
Ron C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2008, 5:56 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,095
Default

Black Knight wrote:
Quote:
Hi Ira

If You have not Already Done So. Check Out My post on My New K200D. The first 3 pictures are taken With the DA16-45 F4. Those Were Straight from the camera With Just a little ADJ. As to how it Compares to the kit Lense not sure. I have had the lense less than a week. And Rarely Used the kit lense. So i have no basis for Comparision
No Promises Because of my work schedule, But If i have time this Week I will take both and Do a Comparision. And post It.


Phil
Phil

The 16-45mm really is the bargain of the bunch and a 24mm (film equivalent) is certainly as wide as I would probably ever use. I have read mixed reviews on this lens BUT, they all say it is better than thekit lens, they just argue over whether it is good enough to warrany the price difference. In terms of actual usefullness it is at the top of the list.

Anyone else using the 16-45mm?

Ira
Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2008, 6:00 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Monza76's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 4,095
Default

Ron C wrote:
Quote:
I have had the 12-24 for about 2 years and consider it to be an excellent lens. I have used it on both the DS and K10D without problems.
Thanks Ron, I like the range of that lens and I would prefer to purchase genuine Pentax. The 12-24mm is the most expensive item on my list but it probably fits well with my 35mm, 50mm and 100-300mm zoom, no overlapping. Used with my 24-135mm Sigma I have an excellent two lens kit for travelling light.

Ira


Monza76 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2008, 7:21 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
NonEntity1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lake Placid Florida USA
Posts: 2,689
Default

Hi Ira,
I am a pretty new owner of a 10-17, just got it last month, but I am liking it so far. Using it is very different than any other lens in my kit. The fish eye affect is interesting. It diminishes quite a bit past 14mm, especially if the straight lines are further away. How you compose the shot really seems to allow the photographer the choice of a pronounced fisheye or almost unnoticeable effect.

It seems sharp enough to me, but sharp really is not as big an issue with this lens (and "sharp is my major criteria for judging any lens). Unless you are standing right on top of something or using it as a near macro lens, your subject are not going to be occupying the majority of the frame. I used it quite a bit on vacation this past week, let me resize some shots and I will post them for you to look at. Interested Observer/Jim has posted quite a bit using his if you look through the older threads, especially in the Lens forum too.

This one is 13mm, the horizon was not defished, just centered in the frame.

Tim
Attached Images
 
NonEntity1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2008, 7:36 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
NonEntity1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lake Placid Florida USA
Posts: 2,689
Default

Playing with perspective at 11mm.
Attached Images
 
NonEntity1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2008, 7:38 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
NonEntity1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lake Placid Florida USA
Posts: 2,689
Default

It seems pretty sharp and the close focusing ability is really nice for my type of photography, 17mm.


Attached Images
 
NonEntity1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2008, 7:39 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
NonEntity1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lake Placid Florida USA
Posts: 2,689
Default

Finally one at 10mm showing the maximum FE effect:

Hope that helps you in your decision. I have not done any work with defishing yet.

Tim


Attached Images
 
NonEntity1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 3, 2008, 7:50 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Driver3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 481
Default

Ira,

I have had the DA 16-45 for almost 2 years and love it but I did want something wider. I didn't want to spend the money for the DA 12-24 so I got a Sigma 10-20. I haven't had it 2 weeks yet but I think I like it.

This is from the EX 10-20 @10mmf9, iso200 1/80 sec. I dida little work on it but it was quick and easy general stuff-levels and contrast and bumped the saturation very little. I've heard about a yellow cast from this lens buthaven't seen it so far.



It takes a little getting used to because it is SO wide but that would be the same with the 12-24, too.

It doesn't distort as much as alter perspective, and it is sharp.
Driver3 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:47 AM.