Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-16-2011, 07:30 AM   #16
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,300
Don't listen to those weak minded fools who fall for the Jedi mind tricks of the limited lenses.

03-16-2011, 08:53 AM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Wales, UK
Posts: 645
Original Poster
Thanks for the replies..to be honest I didn't tell the full story...

I also recently bought a Tamron 18-250 too & already have the DA55-300 so I'm pretty much well covered on focal range between 12-300mm.

I'm rethinking my lens lineup though as my main interest is landscape photography - my primary lens for this was the DA17-70 but the 12-24 is now likely to replace it for landscapes - I found most of my shots were between 17-24mm and the extra WA gives me even more possibilities.

I'm now looking at the following lenses for landscape use: 12-24, DA 35mm F2.4 & occasionally the DA55-300.

That leaves me with the DA17-70 & Tamron 18-250...the Tamron I bought recently for use when travelling but I need to decide which one to keep - I'll definitely be selling one or the other as it just doesn't make sense to have so much duplication. With the funds from the sale I was considering an FA28mm - the 31mm Ltd is too expensive for my needs. I may well now decide to put the funds towards a K5 instead though

Simon
03-16-2011, 08:58 AM   #18
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,166
there is a cheap gap filling option get an m 28 f3.5. super sharp easy to focus and dirt cheap compared to all the options discussed (or a tak or a k, or even an a) barely weighs anything compared to the others and gives the FOV for when you need it
03-16-2011, 11:57 AM   #19
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
The problem with this "gap filler" is that you will never use one of these 3 lenses and I'm going to bet it will be your new 28mm.

When you are out shooting, switching lenses for an extra 4 mm just does not make any sense.

03-16-2011, 12:09 PM   #20
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
When you are out shooting, switching lenses for an extra 4 mm just does not make any sense.
Exactly right. Going from 12 to 8 or 16, there's a huge difference. Going from 28 to 24 or 32, there ain't. So the reason for using any one of various lenses around 20-21-24-25-28-29-31-35-37-40mm isn't to change optics, but to exploit optics. Use just that one lens for a few hours-days-weeks. Have a selection of wide-normal lenses, each as a lens-of-the-day.

Zooms fill gaps; primes exploit them. No missing links in *this* evolutionary chain!
03-16-2011, 01:33 PM   #21
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,965
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
The problem with this "gap filler" is that you will never use one of these 3 lenses and I'm going to bet it will be your new 28mm.

When you are out shooting, switching lenses for an extra 4 mm just does not make any sense.
Cropping 24 up to the equivalent of 35 is an enlargement of 1.46X - within reasonable bounds for most purposes but maybe not for really critical situations. It'd be fine for my old eyes.
03-16-2011, 02:27 PM   #22
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by newarts Quote
Cropping 24 up to the equivalent of 35 is an enlargement of 1.46X - within reasonable bounds for most purposes but maybe not for really critical situations. It'd be fine for my old eyes.
Yes, but the perspective change from 24mm to 28mm is quite minimal.

It makes perfect sense to switch from 50mm to 85mm because you dramatically change the perspective. If you fill the frame with the subject in either case, the perspective is going to be very different. Comparing 24mm with 28mm (or 28mm with 35mm) a few steps in the right direction would create the same photo with almost no noticeable difference in perspective.

Rio explains it much better than I - a zoom should be used to fill in gaps. Primes should be used to exploit a focal length (like a fast-50, or an ultra-sharp 24mm).
03-16-2011, 03:22 PM   #23
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,965
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
Yes, but the perspective change from 24mm to 28mm is quite minimal.

It makes perfect sense to switch from 50mm to 85mm because you dramatically change the perspective. If you fill the frame with the subject in either case, the perspective is going to be very different. Comparing 24mm with 28mm (or 28mm with 35mm) a few steps in the right direction would create the same photo with almost no noticeable difference in perspective.

Rio explains it much better than I - a zoom should be used to fill in gaps. Primes should be used to exploit a focal length (like a fast-50, or an ultra-sharp 24mm).
Perspective is directly dependent on distance to the subject. For the same framing the 24:35mm perspective change is 1.46, not too different from the 50:85's 1.7. Not as big but significant.

I agree with Rio and I likely would use a zoom. However, op asked about primes & one reason to use a prime between
24 & 35mm is to avoid over cropping to get the framing you want.

Perspective control is another as you pointed out.

03-16-2011, 03:48 PM   #24
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
Yes, but the perspective change from 24mm to 28mm is quite minimal.

It makes perfect sense to switch from 50mm to 85mm because you dramatically change the perspective. If you fill the frame with the subject in either case, the perspective is going to be very different. Comparing 24mm with 28mm (or 28mm with 35mm) a few steps in the right direction would create the same photo with almost no noticeable difference in perspective.

Rio explains it much better than I - a zoom should be used to fill in gaps. Primes should be used to exploit a focal length (like a fast-50, or an ultra-sharp 24mm).
one must also take notice of perspective distortion and magnification as well. it may not seem to be much of a difference between 24mm and 28mm in terms of focal length or FOV, and one may be fine with disregarding the background as well. however, how about the flatness of the image? for something below 40mm, the focal length differences aren't that wide of gap but does show significant differences, as compared to standard 50 and longer lenses where the gap is much wider inorder to show difference in perspective. as you may recall this thread with the samples shown regarding perspective and distortion >>> https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/136455-55mm-vs...op-sensor.html.

the trouble with wider lenses is with concerns to architecture images with the foreground shot up close against the farther background, would show magnified bigger image against smaller (background). the same goes with people as well. so you see it is necessary to shoot farther away if you are using a wider lens inorder to avoid such obvious imbalance. a 28mm, although it may display a minimal perspective distortion to occur is quite a bit more forgiving. there were also some examples posted before on how a round table would look if shot with a 35mm at close range and with a 100mm lens ( distance compensated inorder to show same FOV as that of the table). the resulting images showed differences in the geometric shape of the table (the long lens showed a very obvious flatter image).
03-16-2011, 03:59 PM   #25
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Ames, Iowa, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,965
The perspective change between 24 & 35mm is a little greater than that between 55 & 77mm.
03-16-2011, 04:09 PM   #26
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by newarts Quote
The perspective change between 24 & 35mm is a little greater than that between 55 & 77mm.
Yes, this was exactly the point I was raising. if we were going to compare both comparisons, the 11mm difference between the 35mm and 24 shows a greater perspective change, eventhough the 77mm and 55mm have a 22mm focal length or larger focal length difference, the perspective gap is not that much compared to the wider lenses which only require a small difference in focal length to have a significant impact or change on the perspective.
03-16-2011, 09:16 PM   #27
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Ah, but I was discussing flatness with respect to facial features for portraiture (flattening of nose, etc). Also I wasn't asking if I should own a 70mm lens and a 77mm lens .

In any case, the difference between 24mm and 28mm is 1.16. Which is not exactly drastic.

Perhaps you are discussing the differences between 24 and 28mm on full frame? Much more relevant, then. On a crop sensor, it's not big enough to invest in *IMO*.

A third option would be to combine the lenses, or buy a wide-normal zoom, which makes a whole lot more sense than the 24-28 spread. The 28-35 spread makes more sense, but it's still close. I think a rule of 1.5x focal lengths makes good sense (24 - 35 - 55 - 85... seems logical).
03-16-2011, 10:58 PM   #28
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteQuote:
Ah, but I was discussing flatness with respect to facial features for portraiture (flattening of nose, etc).
I know. that's what I meant when I mentioned people shots. although that doesn't restrict only to portraiture, but architectures as well which I mentioned (foreground versus background). as you might already know, wider lens are tricky and are shot at an specific angle inorder to avoid weird perspective if one was to shoot your typical portrait , landscape or architecture.

QuoteQuote:
Also I wasn't asking if I should own a 70mm lens and a 77mm lens .
that wasn't my intention.

QuoteQuote:
In any case, the difference between 24mm and 28mm is 1.16. Which is not exactly drastic.
I'm not sure where you came up with that number, and if it has got to do with perspective distortion, not FOV.

QuoteQuote:
A third option would be to combine the lenses, or buy a wide-normal zoom, which makes a whole lot more sense than the 24-28 spread. The 28-35 spread makes more sense, but it's still close. I think a rule of 1.5x focal lengths makes good sense (24 - 35 - 55 - 85... seems logical).
I'm in agreement with a zoom if this was the case. however, if one would prefer using primes, the selection would be a 15 as UW, a 21 or 24 for wide, a 28 or 31 or 35 for normal wide, and a 43 or 50 for standard normal. take note that one lens for specific use. as far as a 28mm is used as a normal wide, it has to function nicely as a walk-around general purpose lens, meaning it has to be fast as well. it's too bad that Pentax doesn't have a fast 28 AF as of the moment.
03-17-2011, 12:34 AM   #29
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
the trouble with wider lenses is with concerns to architecture images with the foreground shot up close against the farther background, would show magnified bigger image against smaller (background).
Ah, this reminds me of something I forgot to consider above: a 28-31mm lens will have minimal peripheral distortion, whereas a 24mm stretches the edges of the image. 35mm would have even less distortion but a narrower FOV. All this can be very important in architecture and some 'scapes and other images where the truest rendering is desired. Use a 28 or 31 when the edges matter, a 24 when they don't.
03-17-2011, 04:17 AM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: North Wales, UK
Posts: 645
Original Poster
Thanks everyone for the indepth replies...I certainly appreciate the qualities that primes provide - the consensus certainly seems to be that a 28mm doesn't make sense so I'm now thinking that rather than carry the DA55-300 around with me when out to catch landscape shots a 50mm would sit nicely in the lineup giving me:

DA12-24, DA35mm F2.4 & 50mm

Not too much weight to lug about when hiking etc and still covering a good range. A quick 50mm (FA 1.4?) would also prove useful for travel too when low-light shots are needed...now to start all over again with the 50mm choice

Simon
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!
24mm, gap, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Gripped *ist 35mm Kit with extras & Lot of matching B&W filters (US/CAN) LowVoltage Sold Items 1 02-22-2011 06:41 PM
If Pentax goes full frame, will they promote 645 lenses to fill the lens gap? turbosaturn Pentax News and Rumors 17 07-10-2010 09:36 PM
For Sale - Sold: Big Pentax Sale! FA 77mm, FA 35mm, DA 12-24mm & Metz 48 superfuzzy Sold Items 14 02-01-2010 06:42 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K 24mm/2.8; A 28mm/2.8; M 35mm/2 for a FA 35mm/2 Curbster54 Sold Items 1 12-04-2009 12:54 PM
How to fill the gap between 14mm and 28mm? raider Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 11-15-2008 07:26 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:02 AM. | 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