Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

dgaies · 09-05-2010, 08:13 AM

Originally posted by Muse

I have a K-x. Has anyone tried the in-camera lens distortion correction feature? What is your experience? I know, this may be another thread or maybe I should run a search on it first. However, I think it's appropriate to ask here at this point. I have the 2 lens kit now (with 55-300mm), and maybe it would be useful there, but I'm especially curious about this vis a vis choosing between the Pentax and Tamron 18-255mm. This could be among the deciding factors when I acquire a lens, very possibly in the next few days. Or if the consensus is that it's more trouble than it's worth to turn on the feature, I'll not consider this a factor in making my decisions.

I have both a K7 and Kx and I have never used that feature (other than just trying it once to see what it was like). I think most people don't bother with it either. For one, it slows things down quite a bit when shooting (from what I recall). Second, it only works on JPEGS, not RAW files. Finally, I think the consensus is that taking care of distortion, all things equal, is better to do in PP.

Other people can chime in with their opinions as well, but I don't know that I would make that a huge factor in my decision.

audiobomber · 09-05-2010, 09:23 AM

Originally posted by Muse

I have a K-x. Has anyone tried the in-camera lens distortion correction feature? What is your experience?

I use lens correction with the DA 18-250 and 18-55 only. The K-x does a great job of eliminating barrel distortion and decreasing CA. The superzoom particularly benefits from and needs correction. Most of my photos with the superzoom don't merit fussing with raw, so I shoot jpegs with lens correction. For serious photography I change lenses.

dgaies · 09-05-2010, 09:27 AM

Originally posted by audiobomber

I use lens correction with the DA 18-250 and 18-55 only. The K-x does a great job of eliminating barrel distortion and decreasing CA. The superzoom particularly benefits from and needs correction. Most of my photos with the superzoom don't merit fussing with raw, so I shoot jpegs with lens correction. For serious photography I change lenses.

Fair point. I had forgotten how much barrel distortion there was on the wide end of a super-zoom. I've been shooting mostly with primes and the 60-250 lately where the amount of distortion is pretty minimal.

Out of curiosity, does the extra time it takes to "process" the shot (in-body) after you take it affect you ability to take another shot? In other words, does it slow down consecutive shooting or does it just take longer to display the picture you just took.

Muse · 09-05-2010, 11:34 AM

Originally posted by dgaies

Fair point. I had forgotten how much barrel distortion there was on the wide end of a super-zoom. I've been shooting mostly with primes and the 60-250 lately where the amount of distortion is pretty minimal.

Out of curiosity, does the extra time it takes to "process" the shot (in-body) after you take it affect you ability to take another shot? In other words, does it slow down consecutive shooting or does it just take longer to display the picture you just took.

From memory, I think the barrel distortion of the 18-55 kit lens is about 2.5%, that of the 18-250mm about 3.5%. Edit: That's at the 18mm end!
- - - -
I'm curious too, of course, what the answer is to your question. I have heard that it does slow down burst mode shooting.

Last edited by Muse; 09-05-2010 at 07:50 PM.

audiobomber · 09-05-2010, 05:37 PM

Originally posted by dgaies

Out of curiosity, does the extra time it takes to "process" the shot (in-body) after you take it affect you ability to take another shot? In other words, does it slow down consecutive shooting or does it just take longer to display the picture you just took.

Forget about continuous shooting with lens correction turned on. It takes two or three shots at high speed and then stops. I rarely use continuous shutter release ,and I would not use lens correction for rapid-fire shooting (e.g. sports and wildlife)

audiobomber · 09-05-2010, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by Muse

From memory, I think the barrel distortion of the 18-55 kit lens is about 2.5%, that of the 18-250mm about 3.5%.

The 18-55 is 2.5% at 18mm, the 18-250 is 4.3% according to Photozone.

**tomwil** · 09-06-2010, 06:49 AM

Originally posted by Muse

Is the Pentax 18-250mm better than the Tamron?

There are numerous threads on this subject, including a poll. I usually consider the Pentax DA 18-250, because I want to assure compatibility with the K-x, K-7, and future Pentax models. Tamron does offer the 6-year warranty, though.

Pentax or Tamron 18-250 Poll

Pentax-DA 18-250mm Zoom Lens Announced

Pentax vs. Tamron 18-250

Pentax 18-250 always same as Tamron 18-250?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Which Zoom Lens? "Tamron AF 18-250mm", "Pentax-DA 18-250mm" or "Sigma 18-250mm"	hoomanshb	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	07-30-2010 09:50 AM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron 90mm, Tamron 18-250mm, Pentax AF-540 Flash	jumbuc	Sold Items	5	04-21-2010 12:49 PM
18-250mm - Pentax or Tamron	cbaytan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	58	01-13-2010 07:16 PM
Tamron Di II 18-200mm vs. Tamron or Pentax 18-250mm vs. ???	PaddyB	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	08-23-2008 09:33 AM

09-05-2010, 08:13 AM	#16
dgaies Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Maryland / Washington DC Posts: 3,917	Originally posted by Muse I have a K-x. Has anyone tried the in-camera lens distortion correction feature? What is your experience? I know, this may be another thread or maybe I should run a search on it first. However, I think it's appropriate to ask here at this point. I have the 2 lens kit now (with 55-300mm), and maybe it would be useful there, but I'm especially curious about this vis a vis choosing between the Pentax and Tamron 18-255mm. This could be among the deciding factors when I acquire a lens, very possibly in the next few days. Or if the consensus is that it's more trouble than it's worth to turn on the feature, I'll not consider this a factor in making my decisions. I have both a K7 and Kx and I have never used that feature (other than just trying it once to see what it was like). I think most people don't bother with it either. For one, it slows things down quite a bit when shooting (from what I recall). Second, it only works on JPEGS, not RAW files. Finally, I think the consensus is that taking care of distortion, all things equal, is better to do in PP. Other people can chime in with their opinions as well, but I don't know that I would make that a huge factor in my decision.

09-05-2010, 09:23 AM	#17
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Muse I have a K-x. Has anyone tried the in-camera lens distortion correction feature? What is your experience? I use lens correction with the DA 18-250 and 18-55 only. The K-x does a great job of eliminating barrel distortion and decreasing CA. The superzoom particularly benefits from and needs correction. Most of my photos with the superzoom don't merit fussing with raw, so I shoot jpegs with lens correction. For serious photography I change lenses.

09-05-2010, 09:27 AM	#18
dgaies Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Maryland / Washington DC Posts: 3,917	Originally posted by audiobomber I use lens correction with the DA 18-250 and 18-55 only. The K-x does a great job of eliminating barrel distortion and decreasing CA. The superzoom particularly benefits from and needs correction. Most of my photos with the superzoom don't merit fussing with raw, so I shoot jpegs with lens correction. For serious photography I change lenses. Fair point. I had forgotten how much barrel distortion there was on the wide end of a super-zoom. I've been shooting mostly with primes and the 60-250 lately where the amount of distortion is pretty minimal. Out of curiosity, does the extra time it takes to "process" the shot (in-body) after you take it affect you ability to take another shot? In other words, does it slow down consecutive shooting or does it just take longer to display the picture you just took.

09-05-2010, 11:34 AM	#19
Muse Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: SF Bay Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 211 Original Poster	Originally posted by dgaies Fair point. I had forgotten how much barrel distortion there was on the wide end of a super-zoom. I've been shooting mostly with primes and the 60-250 lately where the amount of distortion is pretty minimal. Out of curiosity, does the extra time it takes to "process" the shot (in-body) after you take it affect you ability to take another shot? In other words, does it slow down consecutive shooting or does it just take longer to display the picture you just took. From memory, I think the barrel distortion of the 18-55 kit lens is about 2.5%, that of the 18-250mm about 3.5%. Edit: That's at the 18mm end! - - - - I'm curious too, of course, what the answer is to your question. I have heard that it does slow down burst mode shooting. Last edited by Muse; 09-05-2010 at 07:50 PM.

09-05-2010, 05:37 PM	#20
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by dgaies Out of curiosity, does the extra time it takes to "process" the shot (in-body) after you take it affect you ability to take another shot? In other words, does it slow down consecutive shooting or does it just take longer to display the picture you just took. Forget about continuous shooting with lens correction turned on. It takes two or three shots at high speed and then stops. I rarely use continuous shutter release ,and I would not use lens correction for rapid-fire shooting (e.g. sports and wildlife)

09-05-2010, 05:42 PM	#21
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Muse From memory, I think the barrel distortion of the 18-55 kit lens is about 2.5%, that of the 18-250mm about 3.5%. The 18-55 is 2.5% at 18mm, the 18-250 is 4.3% according to Photozone.

09-06-2010, 06:49 AM	#22
tomwil Site Supporter Join Date: May 2009 Location: Maryland USA Posts: 778	Originally posted by Muse Is the Pentax 18-250mm better than the Tamron? There are numerous threads on this subject, including a poll. I usually consider the Pentax DA 18-250, because I want to assure compatibility with the K-x, K-7, and future Pentax models. Tamron does offer the 6-year warranty, though. Pentax or Tamron 18-250 Poll Pentax-DA 18-250mm Zoom Lens Announced Pentax vs. Tamron 18-250 Pentax 18-250 always same as Tamron 18-250?