Originally posted by NaClH2O In this whole thread I saw only one mention of this lens. It's a very nice lens, with only one big flaw, it's big. It's also a bit flare prone but if you equip it with a good "normal" hood that problem is pretty much eliminated. The IQ is excellent, my onliest complaint in that dept is the quality of the bokeh, but that is a subjective judgement in any event. If you are pining for a fast 24mm here is one that is in production, good to excellent IQ, and can be had for about 500USD.
NaCl(but it ain't small)H2O
I had the chance to compare it to FA*24. It was the same as comparing K/A24/2.8 and Sigma 24/2.8 Super Wide. The Sigmas are sharper but contrast and overall rendering lacks compared to SMC glass. Now throw the bigger size into the mix and winner is clear. IMHO
Originally posted by Pentaxor it's a very good lens, but not excellent. surely it is an alternative for the missing 24mm Pentax prime. the reasons for not cutting it for me is it's pointless wide open performance and color. and the IQ rendering all over the image. I prefer some solid rendering at the corners at this focal length as well. complaint I have with the Pentax 24/2 is it's weak performance at wide open. this is why I think that a 24/2.8 would be most likely more logical, because producing the same lens with a blah wide open performance wouldn't make any sense.
the wide open performance of FA*24 is something that has kept me off the lens for a while. Now that I have it, I can conclude it's a myth or bollocks at best! This lens is just fine wide open. It's the same as 50/1.2. Many say it's soft, but the lens perfectly usable. And 24 is no different, when correctly focused the lens is great. Corner softness? Well you would expect it at 24mm and shallow f stops, so yes at f2-2.8 the corners are soft(er) but not horribly so. Still usable, and by corners I really mean corners (on APSC) I'm not fan of a brick wall tests but I think I'll have to do one to address this "badmouthing"
on a quick note, these are all at f2, so that much for the weak performance wide open:
now before you say they are web sized images so it's hard to judge anything, just ask yourself how often you watch, publish, print or do whatever bigger than web size....let's be real here, I don't print or show pics at 100% but if you want I'd happily provide some samples
Originally posted by creampuff The reality is most people nowadays opt for the convenience of zooms over primes. If Pentax were to ever produce a superlative wide angle zoom like the Nikon 14-24mm f/2.8G ED, most of us wouldn't even be discussing about a 24mm prime of f/2.8. There is the DA* 16-50mm f/2.8 SDM that covers the focal range but given that many are spooked by the SDM gremlins (whether real or not) means limited options.
yes we would, why? Zooms are big (or at least bigger than primes) are let's face it, zoom still needs to make compromise in optical performance between different focal lengths, prime DOESN'T....
Originally posted by creampuff If
affordability was not the issue, most of those who would opt for a 24mm prime lens wouldn't really be interested in anything at f/2.8 but would steer towards a fast lens of stellar optical performance best exemplified by the
Nikon 24mm f/1.4G ED. I dare say this lens easily trumps the discontinued FA* 24mm f/2. Unfortunately even if one were to be a rich Pentaxian (a misnomer if ever I saw one
), you can't buy such a lens because Pentax doesn't make one. Simply put, Pentax has not rolled out any professional grade fast maximum aperture lenses for the longest time. Even with the increase in the user base, I have my doubts that Pentax will ever do a 24mm f/2 or faster lens. But I would be happy to be proved wrong.
It's the same as DA*55. If the new 24 would be DA*24/2 (ok I'd settle for 2.4) I'd happily pay the same of £50-100 more than for FA*. Why? WR, SDM, and WARRANTY! with old lenses you are on your own. I just have K50/1.2 at repairers because the filter ring just fell off, literally! With new lens I'd take it back to shop, wave my warranty card around, problem sorted... besides, looking at 55/1.4 currently going for £550, I don't think the 24 would be all that much more... I'd say it would be around £550-600 mark.... which is not a bad price IMHO, let's face it, the days of cheap Pentax are over
Originally posted by Nick Siebers .....snip..... The Sigma Super Wide II AF, (24/2.8) on the other hand, is a little gem. ...snip.....
Unfortunately I can't agree on this one, I used to have it, contrast is not great, colours are too green, flare resistance is very bad.... Small size, fast AF and relatively good build quality are all pluses but if IQ is just not there than it's not worth it IMO... but maybe I just had faulty copy....
---
all in all, I think despite different POVs there is one consensus in this thread!
Pentaxians want new SMC 24. Whether f2/2.4/2.8, * or not, SDM or screw or DC, WR on not, ideally metal mount. But we want new 24. The focal length is very desired and very practical/useful. If you look at Sigma 24/2.8 SW II AF, it's not big, it has metal jacket, metal mount and is AF with only 52mm filter thread. I mean if Sigma could do it 20-15 years ago, Pentax could easily do it now and it doesn't necessarily have to cost arm and leg... I hope same day soon Pentax will listen, I mean they showed they do by releasing DAL35 so I hope they will answer this call too....
my 2p