[SLRPhotography]

Today I was asked to downsort from thousands of landscape shots (of a very specific geographic location) to about 35 of the best for a client presentation tomorrow. So it gave me the very real and useful exercise of determining which lenses serve me best in that way.

Bottom line: DA Ltd 21mm; followed by the DA 12-24mm; DA Ltd 35mm Macro, and an emerging favorite is the DA Ltd 15mm.

I had some issues with distortion from the DA 21mm and the DA 15mm, but the gods were kind today releasing the new Lightroom release which has built-in corrections. The improvement is tremendous, and I'm sure it will be even more apparent when enlarged to a few feet. So it feels like I obtained new and improved lenses today as well.

Prior to obtaining the DA Ltd 15mm, I thought the DA 12-24mm was the best at wider FLs. While the latter is still a good lens, the 15mm is just sharper and provides more artful color rendition. And now the distortion is a non-factor. Plus you can stick it in a pocket. Along with the 21mm and the 35mm. Might as well take the 70mm too.

So that's what I would recommend.

M

This is some very good information thanks

By far and away from all the WA lenses I've had and used, the DA 12-24 does the job beautifully. The ultra wide angle perspective at 12mm with its sharpness, colour and texture details are nothing short of impressive. Pentax AF lenses I haven't tried yet in that range are the DA 21 and FA* 24.

Thanks!

What RioRico said.

Thank you

I find I use my 15 ltd, 35 ltd and 55-300 equally for all sorts of landscapes. If I were missing any of these, I would find my creativity and compositional options severely limited.

The 15 is great for sweeping vistas, and its rendering (especially with the sun) is just amazing. The 35 is excellent for normal perspectives, giving a real sense of scale to objects (in addition to being easily the sharpest lens I own). The 55-300 is great for shooting targets miles away, and especially for being creative with perspective. And as a bonus, they're lightweight, so I can carry them hiking for miles without feeling strain. Sure, the 55-300 is not exactly the sharpest telephoto lens around, compared to say the DA* 60-250, but that lens is a monster that I wouldn't want to carry up mountains.

Anyone who says "UWA and be done with it" is limiting their creativity. You need a wide range of focal lengths to get the most out of landscapes.

DA 15 ltd:



DA 35 ltd:



DA 55-300:

Very nice, thanks for posting the shots, so when you look at your high rez the 35 would give you the "edge" you need?

Hi Sam:

Well, there are many lenses which will do that for you, but I chose the Tamron 17-50mm and have not looked back. It is wide and it is surely sharp. I have taken about 15,ooo shots with it, and like it more as I use it more. Here are a few with my Tammy:

That is what I'm talking about, I love the colors and details, so I have to ask any tone mapping or .......... single or batch HDR processing? Beautiful lens.


Thanks all
Yeah I use to shoot landscapes, but for the last few years I have been shooting fine art/glamour models, www.samrambo.com (NSFW), but I'm getting bored and a litttle tired of the high paced models world and now taking a break and I'm thinking HDR and maybe a few safari's and trips. So just trying to get back up to date with the other sides of Photography, glamour sucked me away for way too log, haha.

Sam

[Cannikin]

Very nice, thanks for posting the shots, so when you look at your high rez the 35 would give you the "edge" you need?

When viewed at normal resolution, most lenses do perfectly fine, but the DA 35 ltd is something else. I am always assured that anything it shoots will stand up to scrutiny even at nearly 100% crop:

[SLRPhotography]

When viewed at normal resolution, most lenses do perfectly fine, but the DA 35 ltd is something else. I am always assured that anything it shoots will stand up to scrutiny even at nearly 100% crop:

See now that is really good to know!

[stanic]

since I got the 35 macro ltd, I can only recommend it...also great for high quality panoramas when you want to have wide FOV without the distortion of wide angle lens and higher pixel count images

[rparmar]

When viewed at normal resolution, most lenses do perfectly fine, but the DA 35 ltd is something else

That's an excellent demonstration of how amazing that lens truly is.

[Ron Kruger]

I've used the DA 35mm macro Limited for a few years now, and it is unsurpassed at macro, close focus and mid-range, but I find it a little soft at infinity (it is a close focus lens, after all). Maybe my copy just doesn't do infinity well, or maybe most just do notice the infinity softness, concentrating on the mid-range of the shot. One of the problems is the sweet spot is f-7.1. For scenic shots, I much prefer the DA 15mm Limited, which is great at f-11.
The DA 35 is the most versatile lens on the market, and one of the best Pentax has produced, but for scenic shots, I think it is better to use a lens designed specifically for the purpose.

[mattb123]

Pretty subjective question! I like the da40 & da15 combo for a small package that really packs some IQ! Since I hike, ski, or cycle to where I take my pics much of the time a small and light package is important.

[Jewelltrail]

SLRPhotography: That is what I'm talking about, I love the colors and details, so I have to ask any tone mapping or .......... single or batch HDR processing? Beautiful lens.

Hi Sam and thanks for the complement. No tone mapping. These 5 pics were individually processed, from Raw, to jpg. The 2nd and 5th shots are basically just converted from Raw, though the 2nd shot has a Noise-Reduction software which steals a little detail from the shot. The 1st, 3rd, & 4th shots took more time. I used a few layers from the same Raw file to achieve the desired end in each case, however, the shots would have looked very nice without the added work. Best of luck to you on your quest here!

[Ron Kruger]

Really nice shots, Matt. I love my 15mm as well.

[civiletti]

sigma 8-16 is a very sweet lens.

[rparmar]

I've used the DA 35mm macro Limited for a few years now, and it is unsurpassed at macro, close focus and mid-range, but I find it a little soft at infinity (it is a close focus lens, after all). Maybe my copy just doesn't do infinity well, or maybe most just do notice the infinity softness, concentrating on the mid-range of the shot.

The issue I think is the incredibly short focus throw in the infinity end of the range. It is impossible to manually focus so we are relying on the precision of the AF mechanism.

[northcoastgreg]

For landscapes, particularly in mountains and other steep, confined scenery, it's hard to beat the 12-24. Primes may have a slight advantage in center sharpness or compact size, but they force you to zoom with your feet, which is not always possible when out in the wild, because there might be a cliff or a gorge or a lake or thick brush in the way. Plus the ability to zoom out all the way to 12mm:

[Frogfish]

A cheaper alternative - but superb lense in it's own right, is the Sigma 10-20. It has it's own thread on here so check it out but stand well back ... it sizzles !

If you are going on safaris and trips then you really should consider a WR lense : which means the Pentax DA* 16-50 - another one with it's own hot thread.

[SLRPhotography]

Pretty subjective question! I like the da40 & da15 combo for a small package that really packs some IQ! Since I hike, ski, or cycle to where I take my pics much of the time a small and light package is important.

Thanks Thats outstanding

Hi Sam and thanks for the complement. No tone mapping. These 5 pics were individually processed, from Raw, to jpg. The 2nd and 5th shots are basically just converted from Raw, though the 2nd shot has a Noise-Reduction software which steals a little detail from the shot. The 1st, 3rd, & 4th shots took more time. I used a few layers from the same Raw file to achieve the desired end in each case, however, the shots would have looked very nice without the added work. Best of luck to you on your quest here!

Wow color me impressed!

sigma 8-16 is a very sweet lens.

Thanks, Does it get very fish eyed?

For landscapes, particularly in mountains and other steep, confined scenery, it's hard to beat the 12-24. Primes may have a slight advantage in center sharpness or compact size, but they force you to zoom with your feet, which is not always possible when out in the wild, because there might be a cliff or a gorge or a lake or thick brush in the way. Plus the ability to zoom out all the way to 12mm:

Yeah I hear great things about this lens.

A cheaper alternative - but superb lense in it's own right, is the Sigma 10-20. It has it's own thread on here so check it out but stand well back ... it sizzles !

If you are going on safaris and trips then you really should consider a WR lense : which means the Pentax DA* 16-50 - another one with it's own hot thread.

Thanks

[civiletti]

Thanks, Does it get very fish eyed?

The Sigma 8-16mm has about 3% barrel distortion at 8mm and very little distortion from 12-16mm.