Going wider (DA14, DA15, DA21)

bdery · 03-07-2011, 07:54 AM

If you like the focal length of your 28, then the 21 will feel natural.

For test shots, I suggest you look at the in-depth review I made of it, and look at the user reviews too. It can focus to 0.17x (close to 1:5).

When looking at wide primes, many tend to like the extreme wide. For me, the most extreme I want is the 17mm of my Siggy, but for comfortable prime use, the 21mm of the DA is perfect, it never felt cramped or too narrow. YMMV.

**Michaelina2** · 03-07-2011, 08:07 AM

Here's a 21 thread you may find interesting....

DA 21mm Limited appreciation thread: the versatile pancake

I shoot the 15 and 21. In urban settings, there are times I find the 15 too wide and the 21 perfect. I love using them and have no plans to rid myself of either..

Best wishes... M

**NaClH2O** · 03-07-2011, 08:27 AM

The FA 20mm is a very good close focuser. Not quite in the DA range, but not too shabby at 25cm (about 9.8 inches) There also seems to be very little distortion close up. Good landscape lens too.

NaCl(almost ltd quality)H2O

Cambo · 03-07-2011, 10:18 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by paperbag846

I think the 14 is the close focus king (and 2.8 to boot).

IMHO the draw of the 15 is it's tiny size and flare resistance. The 14 should be a closer focuser.

The 14 is a big, heavy bugger...GREAT lens though, but I think the 15 may be slightly better...much smaller filter diameter, as well, but you'd HAVE to use slim lines...filters for the 14 are massive and VERY expensive.

Originally posted by bdery

If you like the focal length of your 28, then the 21 will feel natural.

For test shots, I suggest you look at the in-depth review I made of it, and look at the user reviews too. It can focus to 0.17x (close to 1:5).

When looking at wide primes, many tend to like the extreme wide. For me, the most extreme I want is the 17mm of my Siggy, but for comfortable prime use, the 21mm of the DA is perfect, it never felt cramped or too narrow. YMMV.

Yeah if what you're shooting now is a 28 (=40), a 14 or 15 is going to be a very rude awakening for you, and will be difficult to use until you realize you have to get low and dirty to use them effectively. I always bring knee pads and a plastic tarp - garbage bag for use with mine, because you've got to get down in the muck frequently to get really great shots and exploit the 'near/far dichotomy', to quote Ansel Adams.

Good luck. Fortunately, Pentax have some GREAT wide angle lenses...now if they only made a decent 135 or a 150 again...they HAD a great one, the 2.8, just bring it back. Fabulous discreet portrait lens.

Here's one with my 14, handheld, of a Canadian hero, Mr. Walter Petkau, who operates the Circle F horse rescue ranch...a VERY tough undertaking...

http://www.circlef.ca/

Cheers,
Cameron

benjikan · 03-07-2011, 12:27 PM - **1 Like**

In your position, I would purchase the DA 12-24 in a heart beat.

philbaum · 03-07-2011, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by benjikan

In your position, I would purchase the DA 12-24 in a heart beat.

Originally posted by Cambo

Yeah if what you're shooting now is a 28 (=40), a 14 or 15 is going to be a very rude awakening for you, and will be difficult to use until you realize you have to get low and dirty to use them effectively. I always bring knee pads and a plastic tarp - garbage bag for use with mine, because you've got to get down in the muck frequently to get really great shots and exploit the 'near/far dichotomy', to quote Ansel Adams.
.............
Here's one with my 14, handheld, of a Canadian hero, Mr. Walter Petkau, who operates the Circle F horse rescue ranch...a VERY tough undertaking...

Circle F Horse Rescue

Cheers,
Cameron

This turned out to be a very good thread. This question seems to come up a lot.

I liked Benjikan's comment. I now have in order of frequent use: a DA-21, a Sigma 10-20, a M 24 f2.8, and a F 28 f2.8. Looking back 2 years on this collection of WA, I'd choose the DA 12-24. Why? because i could walkaround and use that 24 long end of the DA and still have access to UWA.

I liked Cambo's comment about a 14 or 15 being a rude awakening. That is so true from my experience. Unless one is willing to "get up front and personal" or "get down on your knees or stomach and close" these UWAs are a definitely rude awakening. If you are a normal standup guy, be prepared for some tiny figures and subjects in your pics.

There are some talented guys/gals in this forum that can use the 14/15 to best effect, but its a different kind of shooting that doesn't come quickly to one, or at least to me.

Out of my assortment of above lenses, my thinking now for the ideal 2 lenses in this area, would be the DA12-24 and the DA21. Nothing wrong with the Sigma 10-20, but as soon as i get done with the UWA shooting, i want to remove it and get back to a normal lens. The DA-21, because its so discrete in a crowded area. Wisdom comes with hard experience i guess.

lance · 06-29-2011, 02:36 AM

I am also confused by these 2 pancakes.
The DA15 NOT able to fit the big GND filters(such as lee, hitech...), that may be a disadvantage for my landscape shoot.

reeftool · 06-29-2011, 06:59 AM

I don't use the DA 15 for close ups generally but I did a few when I first bought it just to see how it would perform. Some lilacs from this spring.
[IMG]

[/IMG]

Jochen · 06-30-2011, 12:48 AM

I'v got 14/2.8 but sold it because of the weight and dimensions. Then I bought 15/4.0 and was happy. Now I'm happy with 15/4.0 too, but I well understood that 15/4.0 is better for outdoor (low CA, very good at backlighting, low distortion), but for indoor 14/2.8 is much better because of the angle and amazing perspective. But 14/2.8 is so big...

ferals_m38 · 08-16-2011, 08:54 PM

TOUGEFC, is that the 40mm Bofors anti-aircraft gun thats near the maritime museum at southbank? or the one at the Morningside RSL?

ive just purchased a 14/2.8 from the marketplace here for landscape and stormscapes on my K-7.. and cant wait for it to arrive before our storm season kicks off here as im hoping that this lens will give me an awesome Wide perspective of some of the more spectacular structure we get around here...and being able to shoot at 2.8 should aid in low light conditions..

anyone here use this lens for similar work?

Soap · 08-17-2011, 04:41 AM

Originally posted by ntx

Hi all,
I'm about to spend some money on a new wide angle lens for my K200D but I find so hard to make a choice between the Pentax' gems available.

The DA 15/4 Limited is interesting for the field of view but I can't figure how much it can go close to the subject: I need some example shot. Its small size is also interesting.

What's your opionion?... I would end up in a choice... I'm still confused

.

Thanks.

Bye
Jenner

Well....it can get close. Did a quick test myself for it.
Good luck with your decision.

**Clinton** · 08-18-2011, 11:35 AM

What about the sigma 8-16mm?

RonHendriks1966 · 08-19-2011, 04:15 AM

I have 14mm and 21mm. I can recommend them both.

If you want small, then take the 15mm.

If you want a zoom then 12-24 or 8-16 are the lenses to go for.

So actually no help from my side (unless holding a gun at me, I would say buy 15mm!).

03-07-2011, 08:27 AM	#18
NaClH2O Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bronx NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,631	another suggestion FA 20mm f/2.8 The FA 20mm is a very good close focuser. Not quite in the DA range, but not too shabby at 25cm (about 9.8 inches) There also seems to be very little distortion close up. Good landscape lens too. NaCl(almost ltd quality)H2O

03-07-2011, 10:18 AM - 2 Likes	#19
Cambo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Vancouver, BC Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,016	Responses.... Originally posted by paperbag846 I think the 14 is the close focus king (and 2.8 to boot). IMHO the draw of the 15 is it's tiny size and flare resistance. The 14 should be a closer focuser. The 14 is a big, heavy bugger...GREAT lens though, but I think the 15 may be slightly better...much smaller filter diameter, as well, but you'd HAVE to use slim lines...filters for the 14 are massive and VERY expensive. Originally posted by bdery If you like the focal length of your 28, then the 21 will feel natural. For test shots, I suggest you look at the in-depth review I made of it, and look at the user reviews too. It can focus to 0.17x (close to 1:5). When looking at wide primes, many tend to like the extreme wide. For me, the most extreme I want is the 17mm of my Siggy, but for comfortable prime use, the 21mm of the DA is perfect, it never felt cramped or too narrow. YMMV. Yeah if what you're shooting now is a 28 (=40), a 14 or 15 is going to be a very rude awakening for you, and will be difficult to use until you realize you have to get low and dirty to use them effectively. I always bring knee pads and a plastic tarp - garbage bag for use with mine, because you've got to get down in the muck frequently to get really great shots and exploit the 'near/far dichotomy', to quote Ansel Adams. Good luck. Fortunately, Pentax have some GREAT wide angle lenses...now if they only made a decent 135 or a 150 again...they HAD a great one, the 2.8, just bring it back. Fabulous discreet portrait lens. Here's one with my 14, handheld, of a Canadian hero, Mr. Walter Petkau, who operates the Circle F horse rescue ranch...a VERY tough undertaking... http://www.circlef.ca/ Cheers, Cameron

06-29-2011, 06:59 AM	#23
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,554	I don't use the DA 15 for close ups generally but I did a few when I first bought it just to see how it would perform. Some lilacs from this spring. [IMG][/IMG]

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
DA15 & DA21 or DA12-24 or SIG 10-20	ntrao	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	13	07-13-2010 10:31 AM
DA15 vs DA14 vs Sigma10-20/4-5.6 (9 shots)	tcom	Post Your Photos!	11	04-19-2009 11:00 PM
About DA14	vizjerei	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	03-18-2008 08:31 PM
So, which is wider? And does it matter?	azcavalier	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	10-17-2007 01:27 PM

03-07-2011, 07:54 AM	#16
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,357	If you like the focal length of your 28, then the 21 will feel natural. For test shots, I suggest you look at the in-depth review I made of it, and look at the user reviews too. It can focus to 0.17x (close to 1:5). When looking at wide primes, many tend to like the extreme wide. For me, the most extreme I want is the 17mm of my Siggy, but for comfortable prime use, the 21mm of the DA is perfect, it never felt cramped or too narrow. YMMV.

03-07-2011, 08:07 AM	#17
Michaelina2 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: SE Michigan USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,300	Here's a 21 thread you may find interesting.... DA 21mm Limited appreciation thread: the versatile pancake I shoot the 15 and 21. In urban settings, there are times I find the 15 too wide and the 21 perfect. I love using them and have no plans to rid myself of either.. Best wishes... M

03-07-2011, 12:27 PM - 1 Like	#20
benjikan Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,308	In your position, I would purchase the DA 12-24 in a heart beat.

03-07-2011, 01:13 PM	#21
philbaum Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA Posts: 3,659	Originally posted by benjikan In your position, I would purchase the DA 12-24 in a heart beat. Originally posted by Cambo Yeah if what you're shooting now is a 28 (=40), a 14 or 15 is going to be a very rude awakening for you, and will be difficult to use until you realize you have to get low and dirty to use them effectively. I always bring knee pads and a plastic tarp - garbage bag for use with mine, because you've got to get down in the muck frequently to get really great shots and exploit the 'near/far dichotomy', to quote Ansel Adams. ............. Here's one with my 14, handheld, of a Canadian hero, Mr. Walter Petkau, who operates the Circle F horse rescue ranch...a VERY tough undertaking... Circle F Horse Rescue Cheers, Cameron This turned out to be a very good thread. This question seems to come up a lot. I liked Benjikan's comment. I now have in order of frequent use: a DA-21, a Sigma 10-20, a M 24 f2.8, and a F 28 f2.8. Looking back 2 years on this collection of WA, I'd choose the DA 12-24. Why? because i could walkaround and use that 24 long end of the DA and still have access to UWA. I liked Cambo's comment about a 14 or 15 being a rude awakening. That is so true from my experience. Unless one is willing to "get up front and personal" or "get down on your knees or stomach and close" these UWAs are a definitely rude awakening. If you are a normal standup guy, be prepared for some tiny figures and subjects in your pics. There are some talented guys/gals in this forum that can use the 14/15 to best effect, but its a different kind of shooting that doesn't come quickly to one, or at least to me. Out of my assortment of above lenses, my thinking now for the ideal 2 lenses in this area, would be the DA12-24 and the DA21. Nothing wrong with the Sigma 10-20, but as soon as i get done with the UWA shooting, i want to remove it and get back to a normal lens. The DA-21, because its so discrete in a crowded area. Wisdom comes with hard experience i guess.

06-29-2011, 02:36 AM	#22
lance New Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: China Posts: 20	I am also confused by these 2 pancakes. The DA15 NOT able to fit the big GND filters(such as lee, hitech...), that may be a disadvantage for my landscape shoot.

06-30-2011, 12:48 AM	#24
Jochen New Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Moscow Posts: 19	I'v got 14/2.8 but sold it because of the weight and dimensions. Then I bought 15/4.0 and was happy. Now I'm happy with 15/4.0 too, but I well understood that 15/4.0 is better for outdoor (low CA, very good at backlighting, low distortion), but for indoor 14/2.8 is much better because of the angle and amazing perspective. But 14/2.8 is so big...

08-16-2011, 08:54 PM	#25
ferals_m38 Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: south east queensland, Australia. Posts: 37	TOUGEFC, is that the 40mm Bofors anti-aircraft gun thats near the maritime museum at southbank? or the one at the Morningside RSL? ive just purchased a 14/2.8 from the marketplace here for landscape and stormscapes on my K-7.. and cant wait for it to arrive before our storm season kicks off here as im hoping that this lens will give me an awesome Wide perspective of some of the more spectacular structure we get around here...and being able to shoot at 2.8 should aid in low light conditions.. anyone here use this lens for similar work?

08-17-2011, 04:41 AM	#26
Soap Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Pijnacker Posts: 79	Originally posted by ntx Hi all, I'm about to spend some money on a new wide angle lens for my K200D but I find so hard to make a choice between the Pentax' gems available. The DA 15/4 Limited is interesting for the field of view but I can't figure how much it can go close to the subject: I need some example shot. Its small size is also interesting. What's your opionion?... I would end up in a choice... I'm still confused . Thanks. Bye Jenner Well....it can get close. Did a quick test myself for it. Good luck with your decision.

08-18-2011, 11:35 AM	#27
Clinton Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,910	What about the sigma 8-16mm?

08-19-2011, 04:15 AM	#28
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	I have 14mm and 21mm. I can recommend them both. If you want small, then take the 15mm. If you want a zoom then 12-24 or 8-16 are the lenses to go for. So actually no help from my side (unless holding a gun at me, I would say buy 15mm!).