Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-02-2011, 08:16 PM   #76
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,812
18-55mm Mk 1:

ISO200, f/6.3, 1/250, 43mm, +0.3EV
(EXIF should be attached - but PhotoBucket can mysteriously drop metadata)

01-03-2011, 03:54 AM   #77
Senior Member
kari's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 149
I must say I was disappointed with the image quality of the kit lens as well. There is nothing really bad about it, but the microcontrast just isn't there. Whilst there are some nice shots in this thread, they haven't really done anything to convince me of the supposed high IQ of the kit lens. I upgraded after about 6 months with the kit lens, got the 16-50 and the difference is so night and day, that now I can't see any use for the older lens. Maybe if it was WR.
01-03-2011, 04:25 AM   #78
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,679
And that's where I've come with the lens - from 18-55 to 16-45 to 28-75/12-24 to 16-50 and now back to 18-55 WR. Deciding to keep to primes and having a WR capability just in case, I went back to the 18-55 just for those f/8 and be there type of shots, which I'm sure it will do reasonably well with. Of course, I *love* the results from my 16-50, but I love those from my primes more.
01-05-2011, 01:32 PM   #79
Forum Member
papillon_65's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Berkshoire, England
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 72
I am new to this forum and new to Pentax and maybe I can add a comment on this. I am not a newbie and own some very nice zooms and kit lenses in other brands. I think part of the problem is expectation for people joining Pentax. I had the same expectation after reading so many "18-55mm is the best kit lens out there" comments. I bought the K-x as a lightweight kit fully expecting good things from the 18-55mm. I have to say I was extremely disappointed with this lens. So much so that I bought the WR version in the hopes that this would be a better copy. The second copy was no better. The main issue I have with the lens is it's softness. It is soft to me at all focal lengths and the detail is just not there.
I gave up on using this lens and purchased the 16-45mm. The difference is night and day, the 16-45mm is far superior, and here in the UK, not a lot more expensive.
The kit lens is what it is, a cheap budget lens. If Pentax users eased up on the "best in class" rhetoric then I don't think there would be any debates such as this. In terms of kit lenses, the Zuiko 4/3's 14-42mm and Panasonic 14-45mm M4/3's kit lenses are far superior to this one.
The kit lens that is actually pretty good is the 50-200mm DAL, that is a lens that is sharp and usable for me.
Incidentally, many images posted to defend the 18-55mm only serve to highlight it's weakness, but like I said, it is what it is and if you are happy with it then that's fine as well.

01-05-2011, 01:45 PM   #80
Ira
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,218
Papillon:

Under what premise...what you read or heard...would make you think that the WR was any different?
01-05-2011, 01:50 PM   #81
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,166
QuoteOriginally posted by papillon_65 Quote
In terms of kit lenses, the Zuiko 4/3's 14-42mm and Panasonic 14-45mm M4/3's kit lenses are far superior to this one.
.
Big Plus one to this, My Zuiko is far better than my 18-55. the camera is even better than my ds in a lot of ways (e300) but the Oly just didn't do it for me no matter how much i tried to like it, I gave it to my wife and she never uses it, at some point it will get sold off and the proceeds put towards more lenses for the Pentax cameras, or towards another medium format camera
01-05-2011, 02:11 PM   #82
Forum Member
papillon_65's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Berkshoire, England
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 72
QuoteOriginally posted by Ira Quote
Papillon:

Under what premise...what you read or heard...would make you think that the WR was any different?
I bought it in the hope that my first lens was just a poor copy, I know that optically they should be the same. If it had worked for me I would have a better copy with WR, unfortunately it didn't. I have no use for either now and will sell them.
01-05-2011, 02:34 PM   #83
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eureka, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,829
QuoteOriginally posted by papillon_65 Quote
Incidentally, many images posted to defend the 18-55mm only serve to highlight it's weakness
That's very true. It makes me suspect that some of the defenders of the kit lens have never used better glass and just don't understand what they're missing. Someone earlier post some nice squirrel shots taken by the kit lens. But those shots, as nice as they were, suffered from a distracting background and a less than optimally sharp squirrel; nor was the color rendition and contrast much to brag about. A sharper, faster lens with a narrower DOF, better contrast, and superior color rendition would have produced a significantly better photograph.

01-05-2011, 02:46 PM   #84
Forum Member
papillon_65's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Berkshoire, England
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 72
QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
That's very true. It makes me suspect that some of the defenders of the kit lens have never used better glass and just don't understand what they're missing. Someone earlier post some nice squirrel shots taken by the kit lens. But those shots, as nice as they were, suffered from a distracting background and a less than optimally sharp squirrel; nor was the color rendition and contrast much to brag about. A sharper, faster lens with a narrower DOF, better contrast, and superior color rendition would have produced a significantly better photograph.
I can live with lack of contrast and poorer colour rendition because they are all easily rectified in PP. The worst quality a lens can have (unless it's for portraits or similar), is a high degree of softness through it's range. For small prints this lens can suffice but that's it for me, over-sharpening in PP just destroys IQ. Displaying small images on the web to demonstrate it's sharpness is also pointless as well, you have to use a lens to really know whether it's any good or not.
01-05-2011, 03:03 PM   #85
Ira
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,218
QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
That's very true. It makes me suspect that some of the defenders of the kit lens have never used better glass and just don't understand what they're missing.
Not true at all, as the lenses in my signature...and hundreds of others here...can attest to.

I think you're missing the wonderful work shown in The Kit Lens Club here, and the fact that "better" glass does not necessarily make for better pictures. That's where the skills come in, and it's a lot easier to criticize the lens for a bad a photo than criticize ourselves.

I just have problems finding fault with a lens that did this:





Or this...




Or this...




Or this:





The proof is in the pudding, and if you want to go through all of the pages on that thread and discuss specific images, I would be happy to do that.
01-05-2011, 03:56 PM   #86
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
Isn't it time to either close this thread, or start a separate KIT.LENS.DEBATE sub-forum? The DA18-55 (varied versions) will have its supporters, detractors, casual users, and questioners, and the debate will *never* be settled. Neither will the flame wars, er I mean debates over PP/RAW, street-shooting ethics and etiquette, the best possible digicam features, and whether BatBoy is real. This is Holy War territory, folks. Oh yeah, PCs are better than Macs.
01-05-2011, 04:50 PM   #87
Ira
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,218
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
Oh yeah, PCs are better than Macs.
Well, you just lost all credibility right there.

01-05-2011, 05:42 PM   #88
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,679
Haha!
Let me pour more fuel on the fire just for fun:
15 reasons Macs are still better than Windows PCs
8 reasons why a Mac is better than a PC News - PC Advisor
10+1 Undeniable Reasons Why I Consider Mac Better Than PC
Why Mac is better than PC - Computer Buying Tips - Helium

But who cares about the debate? Go with the tools that get the job done for you the way you want!

This is not the same as the kit lens vs upgrade lens debate.
There are obvious situations the kit lens doesn't excel in, and we're trying to judge it for those situations. It's time to stop this. Again, consider the kit lens an 'f/8 and be there' lens. It does very well in this setting. Need more speed than f/5.6? The kit lens is not for you.
01-05-2011, 09:14 PM   #89
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
Haha!
Let me pour more fuel on the fire just for fun:
15 reasons Macs are still better than Windows PCs
8 reasons why a Mac is better than a PC News - PC Advisor
10+1 Undeniable Reasons Why I Consider Mac Better Than PC
Why Mac is better than PC - Computer Buying Tips - Helium

But who cares about the debate? Go with the tools that get the job done for you the way you want!

This is not the same as the kit lens vs upgrade lens debate.
There are obvious situations the kit lens doesn't excel in, and we're trying to judge it for those situations. It's time to stop this. Again, consider the kit lens an 'f/8 and be there' lens. It does very well in this setting. Need more speed than f/5.6? The kit lens is not for you.
true. and some should stop making excuses regarding lens variation. no matter which kitlens copy you have, it's no good at 18mm, much so at 55, especially if you are looking for that detailed sharpness and contrast that you are looking for.

you are right about the kitlens being an f8 lens and no argument about that.

if given the same scene and composition of the image using a kit lens and an upgrade, surely there would be noticeable differences especially with regards to the specifics of a lens' capability and thus one could say one lens is better than the other. otherwise, everyone would be happy using only a PS cam if compositional skill alone makes up for the equipment.
01-06-2011, 02:53 AM   #90
Forum Member
papillon_65's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Berkshoire, England
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 72
QuoteOriginally posted by Ira Quote
Not true at all, as the lenses in my signature...and hundreds of others here...can attest to.

I think you're missing the wonderful work shown in The Kit Lens Club here, and the fact that "better" glass does not necessarily make for better pictures. That's where the skills come in, and it's a lot easier to criticize the lens for a bad a photo than criticize ourselves.

I just have problems finding fault with a lens that did this:





Or this...




Or this...




Or this:





The proof is in the pudding, and if you want to go through all of the pages on that thread and discuss specific images, I would be happy to do that.
Any of those images posted at smaller sizes, and frequently heavily PP'ed, don't really prove anything but the Photographers abilities. Many of the images are soft, even at small sizes, and could just as easily be taken with a P&S, except they would be sharper.
For smaller image sizes posted on the net the 18-55mm should be fine, but that in itself doesn't make it a good lens really. For the price of the DAL I guess it's fine for those that are happy with it's performance, no argument there.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
18-55mm kit, detail, k-mount, kit, lens, lot, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
k-x lens , kit 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 AL , what 50mm f1.4 can do over kit lens? crossing Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 19 01-15-2010 03:23 PM
DA 18-55mm AL II vs DAL 18-55mm (kit lens) vs DA 18-55mm WR rustynail925 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 10 01-08-2010 02:06 PM
18-55mm WR compared to the original 18-55mm kit lens HogRider Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 11-26-2009 12:01 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:17 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top