[Alex00]

Send me some of what you are smoking. I could use some mind numbing that doesn't involve whisky. I just finished a shoot of an apartment interior using mostly my 12-24, with a few shots done with the 15LTD, and some shot with the 21 as well.

The only lens that gave me fringing was the 15.



You should try backing your opinions with knowledge. It will serve you better in the long run.

I don't think anything is strong enough to numb you properly.You must have a defective 15mm. Message me and i will send you tons of 12-24mm shots all which have fringing. I ended up returning both sigma 10-20mm and pentax 12-24 to amazon before i got DA 15mm. I urge you to post some untouched 12-24mm shots and I'll find CA in your images. I back up opinions based on threads in this forum, photozone, dpreview and slrgear. What are you backups.

---

Last edited by Alex00; 05-18-2010 at 06:11 PM.

[Wheatfield]

I don't think anything is strong enough to numb you properly.You must have a defective 15mm. Message me and i will send you tons of 12-24mm shots all which have fringing. I ended up returning both sigma 10-20mm and pentax 12-24 to amazon before i got DA 15mm. I urge you to post some untouched 12-24mm shots and I'll find CA in your images. I back up opinions based on threads in this forum, photozone, dpreview and slrgear. What are you backups.

I take pictures and look at them. I find it more reliable than trusting people who regurgitate half truths and half baked opinions that they pick up off the internet.
I suspect you will find CA in any image not taken with a 15LTD.

BTW, CA, on the rare occasions when it is an issue is, like distortion, correctable in post, or do you think all the camera makers who are building this stuff into their cameras don't know what they are doing?

[Alex00]

I take pictures and look at them. I find it more reliable than trusting people who regurgitate half truths and half baked opinions that they pick up off the internet.

I have nothing against the 12-24mm, it's a great lens with great IQ. But For my taste Fringing is too much to deal with. For users who do not pixel peel will have no issues with the 12-24mm, and that's why the lens exists.
I didn't really go with what others said about 12-24mm CA until i tried it myself. CA may not be important to you, but it can be for others. As a photoshop expert, i can assure you fringing is not easily correctable in many cases. There's no magic tab that will get rid of fringing without affecting other colors of your photo. For photos with less colors such as taking a picture of a tree against a sky, fringing may be easier to correct then others photos with busy and colorful subjects. In most cases It all has to be done manually and can take a good 15 minutes per photo to correct. The process will get tedious overtime specially when fringing appears in many areas of the photo and knowing that you have to do this for every photo.

Finally when you say 15mm has more fringing then 12-24mm, you're not making sense.
Everyone here seems to only favor the lens they have regardless to how other lenses compare.

I still think you should post an untouched 12-24mm photo. I doubt you you will find one without CA. I took many shots with the 12-24mm and every single one had fringing in it.

I suspect you will find CA in any image not taken with a 15LTD.

Not necessary.

BTW, CA, on the rare occasions when it is an issue is, like distortion, correctable in post, or do you think all the camera makers who are building this stuff into their cameras don't know what they are doing?

Some people like distortions, that's why fisheye exists.

[jpoint]

My lenses are pentax 21mm* 40mm* sigma 10-20mm pentax 18-250mm and pentax m 50mm 2.0

I was wondering since I already have a 10-20mm and my 18-250, do you think I should just get rid of my 21mm limited and buy something else? Let me know your thoughts please.

I think pancake lens will make it easier for travel.

[rparmar]

You must have a defective 15mm. Message me and i will send you tons of 12-24mm shots all which have fringing.

You must have a defective DA12-24mm.

[Alex00]

I don't have a 12-24. this thread is also not about the 12-24. In any case, I suggest you read the reviews to learn more. The 15mm most certainly does not have fringing like the 12-24mm. If you say otherwise, i suggest you recheck your records.

[rparmar]

I don't have a 12-24. this thread is also not about the 12-24. In any case, I suggest you read the reviews to learn more. The 15mm more certainly does not have fringing like the 12-24mm. If you say otherwise, i suggest you recheck your records.

I don't need to read reviews to learn more. All I need to do is shoot perfectly good shots with my DA12-24mm. I realise this thread is not about the zoom and neither was I the first to mention it. I was merely responding to your illogic: you say someone else must have a "bad" lens but do not consider the possibility that you might also.

I am sure the DA15 is a good lens for those who need to travel light and are willing to be limited to one focal length in the wide end. I am equally sure the DA12-24mm is an admirable lens for those who want to travel fairly light and not be so limited. It has better than average distortion and resolution characteristics and is usable from wide open, even to the corners (especially wide open). The poor CA characteristics you go on about are not show stoppers. Otherwise thousands of top notch photos would not be possible with this lens... and they are.

To the OP: Personally I would have little use for a 21mm prime. 24mm is the widest I need to go for prime use. But your shooting style is no doubt different from mine.

[Alex00]

I don't need to read reviews to learn more. All I need to do is shoot perfectly good shots with my DA12-24mm. I realise this thread is not about the zoom and neither was I the first to mention it. I was merely responding to your illogic: you say someone else must have a "bad" lens but do not consider the possibility that you might also.

I am sure the DA15 is a good lens for those who need to travel light and are willing to be limited to one focal length in the wide end. I am equally sure the DA12-24mm is an admirable lens for those who want to travel fairly light and not be so limited. It has better than average distortion and resolution characteristics and is usable from wide open, even to the corners (especially wide open). The poor CA characteristics you go on about are not show stoppers. Otherwise thousands of top notch photos would not be possible with this lens... and they are.

To the OP: Personally I would have little use for a 21mm prime. 24mm is the widest I need to go for prime use. But your shooting style is no doubt different from mine.

That's exactly what i said. Read above. I said the 12-24 is a good lens with good IQ but CA just doesn't work for me and it might work for you. don't be offended i never started the 12-24mm conversation either. If you have a a 12-24mm, go outside take a photo and post a link to the untouched image. I'm not asking anything difficult. If you can't do that, i suggest you stop arguing about CA. I also asked Wheatfield to post an untouched image of 12-24mm. Never heard back from him, maybe he just couldn't find an image without CA to show.

The reason i responded that the user must have a defective 15mm is because it doesn't make sense to say 12-24mm has less fringing then 15mm. We all know it's vise Versa.

[rparmar]

Have you heard the one about beating a dead horse?

[creampuff]

I have the DA 12-24mm and with my copy I don't appear to have the CA issues that seem to be mentioned here. This lens is sharp and the distortion and flare control is excellent. So I don't know where you got the notion that CA is bad. If anything it betters the DA21 in terms of barrel distortion imo. It helps if you actually own and use a lens before making snap comments.

[Wheatfield]

I have the DA 12-24mm and with my copy I don't appear to have the CA issues that seem to be mentioned here. This lens is sharp and the distortion and flare control is excellent. So I don't know where you got the notion that CA is bad. If anything it betters the DA21 in terms of barrel distortion imo. It helps if you actually own and use a lens before making snap comments.

I suspect he gets his disinformation from websites that go out of their way to find problems with lenses and then vilify said lenses for being less than perfect.

The last interior shoot I did, I was quite pleasantly surprised by the 12-24 because it didn't give me CA in situations where I wouldn't have been surprised to see it.
OTOH, the 15 did give me some CA in similar situations, which annoyed me since I had specifically changed over from the 12-24 on the presumption that the prime would do better than the zoom.
So it goes.
Nothing major, and it was fixed easily with the CA sliders in Lightroom.
What I do find more annoying about the 15LTD is the very high degree of vignetting. Having to stop down past f/8 to remove it is more than a bit limiting to the usefulness of the lens.
However, it is an easier carry than the 12-24, so I forgive it this fault.

I think what Alex has done is hit on one fault that he found on the 21 (2% distortion) and so wrote the lens off as useless, and found that he was able to torture the 12-24 into giving him some CA so he wrote that one off as well.
What I do find odd is that he didn't write the 15 LTD off as useless with it's 1.5% of distortion, it's very bad vignetting problem and it's apparent ability to give up some CA.
I suspect that he has a horse in the race and this is coloring his judgment in a big way.

[Alex00]

I suspect he gets his disinformation from websites that go out of their way to find problems with lenses and then vilify said lenses for being less than perfect.

The last interior shoot I did, I was quite pleasantly surprised by the 12-24 because it didn't give me CA in situations where I wouldn't have been surprised to see it.
OTOH, the 15 did give me some CA in similar situations, which annoyed me since I had specifically changed over from the 12-24 on the presumption that the prime would do better than the zoom.
So it goes.
Nothing major, and it was fixed easily with the CA sliders in Lightroom.
What I do find more annoying about the 15LTD is the very high degree of vignetting. Having to stop down past f/8 to remove it is more than a bit limiting to the usefulness of the lens.
However, it is an easier carry than the 12-24, so I forgive it this fault.

I think what Alex has done is hit on one fault that he found on the 21 (2% distortion) and so wrote the lens off as useless, and found that he was able to torture the 12-24 into giving him some CA so he wrote that one off as well.
What I do find odd is that he didn't write the 15 LTD off as useless with it's 1.5% of distortion, it's very bad vignetting problem and it's apparent ability to give up some CA.
I suspect that he has a horse in the race and this is coloring his judgment in a big way.

I tested the 12-24 for a whole week and found CA to be very bad. Trying to explain yourself is in such way is not going to help much. You still haven't posted an image to look at.....

[Alex00]

I have the DA 12-24mm and with my copy I don't appear to have the CA issues that seem to be mentioned here. This lens is sharp and the distortion and flare control is excellent. So I don't know where you got the notion that CA is bad. If anything it betters the DA21 in terms of barrel distortion imo. It helps if you actually own and use a lens before making snap comments.

Post an untouched image. Prove me wrong. Too much talk and no action.

[Pentaxor]

Ok guys, just to be fair, here is my say regarding the DA12-24.

all of you guys, Alex, creampuff, robin, and Wheatfield are partially correct with regards to CA.

in some situations, CA does appear, and in some, Don't appear. it can be horrible, especially against subject with backgrounds with strong highlights.

I had some shots taken with my 18-55 WR and DA12-24 at 20mm taking the same objects ( outside the Vancouver Museum on a sunny day) and displaying a different degree of CA. the kitlens was ok with regards to CA control but horrible with distortion, sharpness and contrast. the DA12-24 however got some strong CA, especially in the blue channel (most times).

I'm not saying that the kitlens nor DA15 dont have nor display CA. but what I'm saying is that the DA12-24 is more easily succeptible to CA as far as my use of it most of the time goes. there are steps however to avoid, minimize, or correct CA. it can be troublesome for some and can be negligible or easily solved by others.

honestly, I love my DA12-24 and rather disappointed with my kitlens. it is because I can work my way easily thru the CA that my DA12-24 displays. and NO, I dont have a defective copy (lol).
kitlens may have better CA control, but it failed my standard for architectures and landscapes.

if you want to work your way around CA, as I had mentioned several times, shoot at f8 and over or try to avoid shooting at wide open at the wider focal range (12mm-16mm but still very workable), shoot carefully (angle and positioning), avoid shooting objects with strong highlights and over and finally use some pp CA correction tools if you want to use it at faster apertures under harsh conditions.

btw, here is an example that I took with the DA12-24 shot at 12mm with an f5.6 opening.
I did some excellent CA corrections on the image. notice the highlight reflections on the bumper, those were full of CA's initially before I made the corrections afterwards. it only took me a few steps to remove 'em (less than a minute I think). as far as concerns with desaturating the other colors, judge for yourself if there is really a need to worry about it.




lastly, if you think that CA correction is a tedious work for you, just shoot B&W.

[Pentaxor]

and a shot with no CA nor any corrections, shot at 24mm with an f5.6 opening.



so in summary, not all images display CA. it depends on what and where you are shooting at. the question would rather be the level of the CA that the lens is able to control, which the DA12-24 is not excellent in doing.