Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-02-2007, 08:40 AM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 346
What wide angle lens?

I'm doing a project that requires a super-wide POV, preferably something under 21mm. I'm aware of the DA 14 and the Sigma 10-20 (which I've owned in the past), but I only really need this lens for one project and as a student I can't currently afford the 14 or 10-20.

Quality is important, of course, but for the purposes of this project it doesn't need to be a top performer. A little vignetting is fine, and it needn't be the sharpest lens in the world. I don't need auto-focus, either. However, it would be great if barrel distortion wasn't too bad since I will be taking pictures with a lot of straight lines in them.

Finally, it would be a bonus if the lens was smaller in size and weight than the 14 or 10-20.

I don't know much about Pentax film lenses or what my options are, so your advice is appreciated. As I need it for a project now I can't really troll eBay for a year waiting for one to turn up. I realize this probably limits my options severely, but I thought I'd ask your opinion anyhow.

Thanks.

11-02-2007, 08:55 AM   #2
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,312
QuoteOriginally posted by switters Quote
I'm doing a project that requires a super-wide POV, preferably something under 21mm. I'm aware of the DA 14 and the Sigma 10-20 (which I've owned in the past), but I only really need this lens for one project and as a student I can't currently afford the 14 or 10-20.

Quality is important, of course, but for the purposes of this project it doesn't need to be a top performer. A little vignetting is fine, and it needn't be the sharpest lens in the world. I don't need auto-focus, either. However, it would be great if barrel distortion wasn't too bad since I will be taking pictures with a lot of straight lines in them.

Finally, it would be a bonus if the lens was smaller in size and weight than the 14 or 10-20.

I don't know much about Pentax film lenses or what my options are, so your advice is appreciated. As I need it for a project now I can't really troll eBay for a year waiting for one to turn up. I realize this probably limits my options severely, but I thought I'd ask your opinion anyhow.

Thanks.
I assume you are using DSLR. Do you mind telling what lenses you have.

If this is the case, perhaps the best option is to use the widest oens you currently have, on a film body. that way, if you have for example a 16-50 it will behave like a 11-35. You would need to check about coverage, but this may be a way out.

When I bought my *istD it came with an 18-35 lens that did cover a 35 mm frame, and when I wanted ultra wide, before I bought the 10-20, I used the 18-35 on my PZ-1 and shot film.

Of course, this assumes you have access to a film body that can use the lenses.

Last edited by Lowell Goudge; 11-02-2007 at 09:33 AM.
11-02-2007, 09:24 AM   #3
and
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,471
tough question if you are talking 21mm effective. is the pentax fisheye in your budget? you can shoot with it and correct with pt lens. that should be wide eanough... how about the zenitar? also a fisheye and needs correction.
11-02-2007, 09:44 AM   #4
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,599
I'd go with the Zenitar. 16mm fisheye, f2.8. Quite small and inobtrusive. Can be found new for about $150, so it's a great bargin. The fisheye distortion is not really pronounced on a dslr, with careful framing it's just about unnoticable.

NaCl(I'm a great fan of my "Z" )H2O

11-02-2007, 09:49 AM   #5
Veteran Member
FotoPete's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,710
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
If this is the case, perhaps the best option is to use the widest oens you currently have, on a film body. that way, if you have for example a 16-50 it will behave like a 11-35. You would need to check about coverage, but this may be a way out.
The 16-50 is labeled in 35mm terms. So you will get the native (albeit cropped for APS sensor) 16mm on full frame and only a 24mm equivalent view on dSLR.
11-02-2007, 10:02 AM   #6
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,312
QuoteOriginally posted by FotoPete Quote
The 16-50 is labeled in 35mm terms. So you will get the native (albeit cropped for APS sensor) 16mm on full frame and only a 24mm equivalent view on dSLR.
Your thinking backwards.

I started off by assuming he needed something wider than 21 mm on digital.

He will get a wider angle of view on film, and this is why I suggested staying with the widest he has, and using a film body. When I said a 16-50 will behave on a film body like an 11-35, I meant compared to the 16-50 on digital. I know it sounds confusing, but now days a lot of people think the ASP-C sensor is the only format.
11-02-2007, 10:06 AM   #7
Veteran Member
FotoPete's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,710
k just making sure. lol

How was the FAJ 18-35 btw? Is it any better than the DA 18-55 @ 18mm?
11-02-2007, 10:47 AM   #8
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,312
QuoteOriginally posted by FotoPete Quote
k just making sure. lol

How was the FAJ 18-35 btw? Is it any better than the DA 18-55 @ 18mm?
I honestly can't answer, as I dont have the 18-55. I took my K10D with no lens and then got the 10-20 because I always wanted an ultra wide.

I just found that on a DSLR that 18 wasn't wide enough, and until I got the 10-20, if I needed the field of view, the FAJ 18-35 worked very nicely on my PZ-1

11-02-2007, 11:28 AM   #9
Not Registered
Guest




I am looking also for a wide lens for architecture and found the Carl Zeiss Flektogon 20mm f/4 the most interesting. It is said to dont have distortion. The problem is that it is m42 (I dont see it as a problem) and that it is hard to find. There a few of them in e-bay but shipping is really expensive. I was going to buy one today but it dissapeared so I guess that I will have to fight for one. Also consider that there are several versions. Only one of them is multicoated and they are black (if I am not wrong). The most common are the zebra (I think they are monocoated and they usually goes somewhere between 225-300 USD).

Hope it helps
11-02-2007, 11:37 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 346
Original Poster
Thanks to everyone for your replies. I have a Pentax K10D, with the DA21, FA43 & FA77.

Lowell, thanks for your suggestion to use a film body. Interesting idea. I guess the thinking there is that I could pick up a PZ-1 and use my DA21 for less than buying a new super-wide lens? I wonder how the DA21 would work on the PZ-1?

Although I must admit, I'm just too lazy (and busy, actually) for film these days. Takes way too long to scan myself and I can't really afford to get it scanned by a lab. I'd prefer to go the digital route.

And yes, I did mean less than 21mm effective. The DA21 is obviously 31.5mm EFL, and that's not wide enough. Best would be 15mm effective (like with the Sigma 10-20), but I don't want to shell out $450 for a lens I'll probably only use for this project (even though the project will last several months).

Not interested in the fisheyes because I don't want to spend all my time correcting them in post. I'm on a Mac and PTLens is Windows-only. So far I haven't found a worthy Mac alternative.

I do have a Ricoh GX100 with a 24mm wide lens. It's almost wide enough, but the barrel distortion is so bad when there are a lot of straight lines in the picture that it's just not a good choice for this project. I can correct it with the "Lens correction" filter in Photoshop, but it takes a while.

I guess I really don't have many options besides a film body or the Sigma 10-20 or DA14.
11-02-2007, 11:53 AM   #11
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,312
QuoteOriginally posted by switters Quote
Thanks to everyone for your replies. I have a Pentax K10D, with the DA21, FA43 & FA77.

Lowell, thanks for your suggestion to use a film body. Interesting idea. I guess the thinking there is that I could pick up a PZ-1 and use my DA21 for less than buying a new super-wide lens? I wonder how the DA21 would work on the PZ-1?

Although I must admit, I'm just too lazy (and busy, actually) for film these days. Takes way too long to scan myself and I can't really afford to get it scanned by a lab. I'd prefer to go the digital route.
I know of a local shop that will process your neg's and for a reasonable price $6.00 cdn for the CD and $1.00 per strip (this means any strip up to 36+ exposures) will scan to CD. That is not too bad.
QuoteQuote:

And yes, I did mean less than 21mm effective. The DA21 is obviously 31.5mm EFL, and that's not wide enough. Best would be 15mm effective (like with the Sigma 10-20), but I don't want to shell out $450 for a lens I'll probably only use for this project (even though the project will last several months).
after you use the 10-20 for serveral months, you will probably want to keep it. I used it for about 80% of a trip to france this summer
QuoteQuote:
Not interested in the fisheyes because I don't want to spend all my time correcting them in post. I'm on a Mac and PTLens is Windows-only. So far I haven't found a worthy Mac alternative.
I don't blame you
QuoteQuote:

I do have a Ricoh GX100 with a 24mm wide lens. It's almost wide enough, but the barrel distortion is so bad when there are a lot of straight lines in the picture that it's just not a good choice for this project. I can correct it with the "Lens correction" filter in Photoshop, but it takes a while.

I guess I really don't have many options besides a film body or the Sigma 10-20 or DA14.
go for the sigma
11-02-2007, 12:17 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,713
QuoteOriginally posted by NaClH2O Quote
I'd go with the Zenitar. 16mm fisheye, f2.8. Quite small and inobtrusive. Can be found new for about $150, so it's a great bargin. The fisheye distortion is not really pronounced on a dslr, with careful framing it's just about unnoticable.

NaCl(I'm a great fan of my "Z" )H2O
Didn't you hear Salty,

They just stopped importing the Zenitar

You got one of their last great lenses.
It WILL be a collectors item some day
11-02-2007, 12:26 PM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 346
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by little laker Quote
Didn't you hear Salty,

They just stopped importing the Zenitar

You got one of their last great lenses.
It WILL be a collectors item some day
Actually, there are still a few around for sale. However, I don't think 16mm (24mm on DSLR) is quite wide enough for this project. Especially when I'd have to do a lot of correction. I'd just use my Ricoh GX100 at the 24mm end.

At this point I'm thinking of picking up either a 12-24, 10-20 or DA14 for my project and just selling it afterwards. That's what credit cards are for, right? I basically pay a fee to "rent" the lens while I'm using it for my project.
11-02-2007, 12:52 PM   #14
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,312
QuoteOriginally posted by switters Quote
At this point I'm thinking of picking up either a 12-24, 10-20 or DA14 for my project and just selling it afterwards. That's what credit cards are for, right? I basically pay a fee to "rent" the lens while I'm using it for my project.
with this approach, let me know when you want to "rent" a 300mm F2.8 or other long fast lens
11-02-2007, 01:14 PM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Virginia Beach VA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,364
QuoteOriginally posted by NaClH2O Quote
I'd go with the Zenitar. 16mm fisheye, f2.8. Quite small and inobtrusive. Can be found new for about $150, so it's a great bargin. The fisheye distortion is not really pronounced on a dslr, with careful framing it's just about unnoticable.

NaCl(I'm a great fan of my "Z" )H2O
Or just grab PTLens and defish the image. The Z sounds like it will do what you want. It has an effective POV of about 13.5mm when defished. also, stopped down it is very sharp.
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!
k-mount, lens, options, pentax lens, project, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
looking for a wide angle lens lazyeye Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 05-12-2009 02:51 PM
Which wide angle lens? Darius4522 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 03-20-2009 07:12 PM
Wide angle lens? needtime2scrap Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 02-25-2009 09:29 PM
Wide Angle lens Jimbo Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 05-16-2008 11:58 AM
Wide Angle Lens Toshi Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 09-26-2006 03:04 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:54 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