kit lens vs. manual focus 24mm f2.8

hoanpham · 07-27-2011, 03:39 PM

The K24 f2.8 is one of my sharpest lens, also wide open, deliver nice bokeh around 1.5 meter/ 4 feet. Got mine at 100usd incl cleaning and service.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 07-27-2011, 04:00 PM

I had a Tokina RMC 24/2.8 for a while. I didn't find it a big leap from the kit lens. A bit sharper perhaps and a bit less distortion maybe, but nothing that you would notice without careful examination of images.

If this would be a favorite focal length, I'd consider the modern Sigma for being faster even if it is larger and heavier.

paperbag846 · 07-27-2011, 04:03 PM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

If this would be a favorite focal length, I'd consider the Sigma for being faster even if it is larger and heavier.

Yes I have considered the sigma. Pretty large lens for my purposes... and I'm not sure how useful f1.8 would be (considering how much larger it makes the lens). Thanks for the suggestion though!

I suppose I have some thinking to do. The Sigma 2.8, Kiron 2.0, and Sigma 1.8 all have their charms.

I'll keep an eye peeled and buy the cheapest one

.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 07-27-2011, 04:22 PM

Originally posted by paperbag846

I suppose I have some thinking to do. The Sigma 2.8, Kiron 2.0, and Sigma 1.8 all have their charms.

I'm not sure why I forgot to mention this, but you should also consider the Tamron SP 17-50/2.8. You not only get a 24/2.8 but also a 17, a 20, a 28, a 35, a 40, and a 50 and some other odd focal lengths in between those

.

**.a.t.** · 07-27-2011, 04:51 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by paperbag846

...I'll keep an eye peeled and buy the cheapest one

.

Good thinking.

But, in case a crude comparison might be of some help...
I shot the same (backyard) scene with my Pentax 18-55 WR and Sigma Super Wide II (manual focus) @ f/4: (full size images here - IMGP9314 c Pen f4 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!)

Pentax DA 18-55 WR @ 24mm, f/4, 1/45

Sigma 24, f/4, 1/30

Pentax f/4 crop

Sigma f/4 crop

paperbag846 · 07-27-2011, 05:51 PM

Just to thank Justonemoredave and all thumbs again! Very helpful.

The sigma looks like it renders a bit dark, but is very sharp.

There is also a converted NIkkor 24mm f2.8 for sale, but it is 200. Converted to Pentax mount. Seems rare. But also, maybe, expensive for what it is (M42 functionality)?

RioRico · 07-27-2011, 06:36 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by paperbag846

There is also a converted NIkkor 24mm f2.8 for sale, but it is 200. Converted to Pentax mount. Seems rare. But also, maybe, expensive for what it is (M42 functionality)?

That seems insanely too much. Check eBay COMPLETED LISTINGS for actual prices. I'll bet they're in the US$50-70 range, max. Converting N/AI to PK takes me 5 minutes once I know what I'm doing, 10 minutes if you follow my instructions, so the conversion is NOT worth a premium.

EDIT: I just had a break from making dinner (the risotto is simmering) so I checked and I see sale prices of US$61-$88. Over $100 is a rip.

Last edited by RioRico; 07-27-2011 at 06:47 PM.

**interested_observer** · 07-27-2011, 06:55 PM

Have you looked through the third party lens reviews at the 24mm?

Miscellaneous Lenses for Pentax: Fixed Focal Lengths - Pentax Third-Party Lens Review Database

Just pursing through the list I see possibly a couple that had 9+ ratings....

ENSINOR 24mm f 2.8 Macro
Spiratone 24mm F2.8 YS
Miranda 24mm, f2.8 MC Macro

You might want to consider writing the reviewer about the comparison to the kit lens and just how old the acquisition price that was listed is. Also, maybe how you might go about finding one, or possibly Rico could advise there...

pinholecam · 07-27-2011, 07:03 PM

I have a Cosina (Ricoh PK mount) 24/2.8 (macro) that I suspect is the same as the Tokina one. Very nice and sharp, esp stopped down from f4 onwards. Niffy close focus ability too. A bit of a bluish color rendition and less resistance to flare though.

The Pentax K24/2.8 is a really nice lens. Sharp and nice Pentax colors and contrast.

I don't think the FA*24 is that expensive compared to the DA21ltd. In fact I think I paid less for it than a new DA21. It is a good lens, but I dislike the size, since I was using the K24 before this.

I have ever considered the Sigma 24/1.8, which you are lucky to get cheap in the US (over here its $100 more). But in the end, I dreaded the focus issues with Sigma and the very large size of the lens, which defeats it purpose as a un-encumbering walk around lens.

Ironically, the kit lens is not much bigger than most of the 24mm options, though slower at f4, but most of the 24mm options would be used at f3.2 or f4 anyway for better sharpness and DOF.

paperbag846 · 07-27-2011, 07:06 PM

Originally posted by pinholecam

Ironically, the kit lens is not much bigger than most of the 24mm options, though slower at f4, but most of the 24mm options would be used at f3.2 or f4 anyway for better sharpness and DOF.

Yep, mostly (which is why I've waited so long).

But sometimes I'm willing to sacrifice sharpness for light, especially indoors.

One day I'll have a K5 (in 4 years, when they are all over ebay for 300

), but for now, I'm stuck with max ISO 1600.

aleonx3 · 07-27-2011, 07:09 PM

I have many 28mm MF lens, only one 24mm which is a Chinon MC 24mm/2.5 m42 mount lens. This lens is bit more expensive than most other ones, but it is the closest to the 24mm/2 that I can find; but certainly a lot less costly than the FA* 24/2.0. I find this lens to be quite sharp with great contrast and color. Here is a sample shot from this lens stopped down a bit (just a random shot and nothing to write home about). I also think that the sharpness is quite acceptable wide open. (NOTE: most lens can't handle red very well, and often bleed).

nextimelah · 07-27-2011, 07:30 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by gabriel_bc

another option is the Tamron Adaptall-2 24/2.5 - a very good lens for the money.

I just got myself a Tamron Adaptall 24mm f2.5 (01BB). Although I haven't done a side by side comparison with the kit lens, I found myself really loving this lens coz it's smaller, has no PF problems, sharp, good contrast and colors, can go quite close and very good bokeh (IMHO). I am pretty sure the IQ is better than the kit lens based on my experience with it. Cost is around $50.

**pacerr** · 07-27-2011, 08:06 PM

Originally posted by gabriel_bc

another option is the Tamron Adaptall-2 24/2.5 - a very good lens for the money.

I'll second that. IME, the Tamron 24/2.5 gives me results comparable to the DA 16-45 near 24mm although slightly cooler colors. Realistically it's only a stop faster as mine's a bit soft below F 3.5 but the faster aperture over the F 4's makes manual focus easy. It's a "comfortable" MF lens with the PK/A adapter.

I haven't shot the kit lens enough to have a comparitive opinion about it.

H2

bdery · 07-28-2011, 05:38 AM

Originally posted by paperbag846

21 would be very useful if I did not have the 15.

No problems, this clarifies things. I thought you implied the 21 was not an useful lens in absolute terms, and I wondered about that. That it's not useful given your current kit makes a lot of sense

paperbag846 · 07-28-2011, 08:16 AM

Originally posted by bdery

No problems, this clarifies things. I thought you implied the 21 was not an useful lens in absolute terms, and I wondered about that. That it's not useful given your current kit makes a lot of sense

Yes. If I had all the money in the world, I would certainly like to have one. But it's not in the cards for me

.

07-27-2011, 04:51 PM - 1 Like	#20
.a.t. Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: yesterday Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,261	Originally posted by paperbag846 ...I'll keep an eye peeled and buy the cheapest one . Good thinking. But, in case a crude comparison might be of some help... I shot the same (backyard) scene with my Pentax 18-55 WR and Sigma Super Wide II (manual focus) @ f/4: (full size images here - IMGP9314 c Pen f4 \| Flickr - Photo Sharing!) Pentax DA 18-55 WR @ 24mm, f/4, 1/45 Sigma 24, f/4, 1/30 Pentax f/4 crop Sigma f/4 crop Last edited by .a.t.; 08-22-2011 at 10:27 AM.

07-27-2011, 06:55 PM	#23
interested_observer Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,707	Have you looked through the third party lens reviews at the 24mm? Miscellaneous Lenses for Pentax: Fixed Focal Lengths - Pentax Third-Party Lens Review Database Just pursing through the list I see possibly a couple that had 9+ ratings.... ENSINOR 24mm f 2.8 Macro Spiratone 24mm F2.8 YS Miranda 24mm, f2.8 MC Macro You might want to consider writing the reviewer about the comparison to the kit lens and just how old the acquisition price that was listed is. Also, maybe how you might go about finding one, or possibly Rico could advise there...

07-27-2011, 07:09 PM	#26
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	I have many 28mm MF lens, only one 24mm which is a Chinon MC 24mm/2.5 m42 mount lens. This lens is bit more expensive than most other ones, but it is the closest to the 24mm/2 that I can find; but certainly a lot less costly than the FA* 24/2.0. I find this lens to be quite sharp with great contrast and color. Here is a sample shot from this lens stopped down a bit (just a random shot and nothing to write home about). I also think that the sharpness is quite acceptable wide open. (NOTE: most lens can't handle red very well, and often bleed). Attached Images

07-27-2011, 07:30 PM - 1 Like	#27
nextimelah Junior Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 48	Tamron Adaptall 24mm f2.5 (model 01BB) Originally posted by gabriel_bc another option is the Tamron Adaptall-2 24/2.5 - a very good lens for the money. I just got myself a Tamron Adaptall 24mm f2.5 (01BB). Although I haven't done a side by side comparison with the kit lens, I found myself really loving this lens coz it's smaller, has no PF problems, sharp, good contrast and colors, can go quite close and very good bokeh (IMHO). I am pretty sure the IQ is better than the kit lens based on my experience with it. Cost is around $50.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Vivitar 24mm f/2 Manual Focus Lens (CONUS)	K Logan	Sold Items	5	06-22-2011 03:35 PM
For Sale - Sold: White Pentax K-X with kit lens, remote, manual focus screen, OBO (Worldwide)	spystyle	Sold Items	16	05-12-2011 07:39 PM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 24mm f2.8 Super Wide II (Manual Focus) (Worldwide)	nandystam	Sold Items	4	03-24-2011 03:04 PM
Question about manual focus on 18-55 kit lens	Matso	Pentax K-r	6	03-09-2011 12:15 PM
Any way to hack lenses to manual focus in AutoFocus mode (like the kit lens)?	skyredoubt	Pentax DSLR Discussion	8	08-07-2010 10:36 AM

07-27-2011, 03:39 PM	#16
hoanpham Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Strand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,366	The K24 f2.8 is one of my sharpest lens, also wide open, deliver nice bokeh around 1.5 meter/ 4 feet. Got mine at 100usd incl cleaning and service.

07-27-2011, 04:00 PM	#17
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	I had a Tokina RMC 24/2.8 for a while. I didn't find it a big leap from the kit lens. A bit sharper perhaps and a bit less distortion maybe, but nothing that you would notice without careful examination of images. If this would be a favorite focal length, I'd consider the modern Sigma for being faster even if it is larger and heavier.

07-27-2011, 04:03 PM	#18
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395 Original Poster	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor If this would be a favorite focal length, I'd consider the Sigma for being faster even if it is larger and heavier. Yes I have considered the sigma. Pretty large lens for my purposes... and I'm not sure how useful f1.8 would be (considering how much larger it makes the lens). Thanks for the suggestion though! I suppose I have some thinking to do. The Sigma 2.8, Kiron 2.0, and Sigma 1.8 all have their charms. I'll keep an eye peeled and buy the cheapest one .

07-27-2011, 04:22 PM	#19
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by paperbag846 I suppose I have some thinking to do. The Sigma 2.8, Kiron 2.0, and Sigma 1.8 all have their charms. I'm not sure why I forgot to mention this, but you should also consider the Tamron SP 17-50/2.8. You not only get a 24/2.8 but also a 17, a 20, a 28, a 35, a 40, and a 50 and some other odd focal lengths in between those .

07-27-2011, 05:51 PM	#21
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395 Original Poster	Just to thank Justonemoredave and all thumbs again! Very helpful. The sigma looks like it renders a bit dark, but is very sharp. There is also a converted NIkkor 24mm f2.8 for sale, but it is 200. Converted to Pentax mount. Seems rare. But also, maybe, expensive for what it is (M42 functionality)?

07-27-2011, 06:36 PM - 1 Like	#22
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by paperbag846 There is also a converted NIkkor 24mm f2.8 for sale, but it is 200. Converted to Pentax mount. Seems rare. But also, maybe, expensive for what it is (M42 functionality)? That seems insanely too much. Check eBay COMPLETED LISTINGS for actual prices. I'll bet they're in the US$50-70 range, max. Converting N/AI to PK takes me 5 minutes once I know what I'm doing, 10 minutes if you follow my instructions, so the conversion is NOT worth a premium. EDIT: I just had a break from making dinner (the risotto is simmering) so I checked and I see sale prices of US$61-$88. Over $100 is a rip. Last edited by RioRico; 07-27-2011 at 06:47 PM.

07-27-2011, 07:03 PM	#24
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,706	I have a Cosina (Ricoh PK mount) 24/2.8 (macro) that I suspect is the same as the Tokina one. Very nice and sharp, esp stopped down from f4 onwards. Niffy close focus ability too. A bit of a bluish color rendition and less resistance to flare though. The Pentax K24/2.8 is a really nice lens. Sharp and nice Pentax colors and contrast. I don't think the FA*24 is that expensive compared to the DA21ltd. In fact I think I paid less for it than a new DA21. It is a good lens, but I dislike the size, since I was using the K24 before this. I have ever considered the Sigma 24/1.8, which you are lucky to get cheap in the US (over here its $100 more). But in the end, I dreaded the focus issues with Sigma and the very large size of the lens, which defeats it purpose as a un-encumbering walk around lens. Ironically, the kit lens is not much bigger than most of the 24mm options, though slower at f4, but most of the 24mm options would be used at f3.2 or f4 anyway for better sharpness and DOF.

07-27-2011, 07:06 PM	#25
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395 Original Poster	Originally posted by pinholecam Ironically, the kit lens is not much bigger than most of the 24mm options, though slower at f4, but most of the 24mm options would be used at f3.2 or f4 anyway for better sharpness and DOF. Yep, mostly (which is why I've waited so long). But sometimes I'm willing to sacrifice sharpness for light, especially indoors. One day I'll have a K5 (in 4 years, when they are all over ebay for 300 ), but for now, I'm stuck with max ISO 1600.

07-27-2011, 08:06 PM	#28
pacerr Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Paris, TN Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,349	Originally posted by gabriel_bc another option is the Tamron Adaptall-2 24/2.5 - a very good lens for the money. I'll second that. IME, the Tamron 24/2.5 gives me results comparable to the DA 16-45 near 24mm although slightly cooler colors. Realistically it's only a stop faster as mine's a bit soft below F 3.5 but the faster aperture over the F 4's makes manual focus easy. It's a "comfortable" MF lens with the PK/A adapter. I haven't shot the kit lens enough to have a comparitive opinion about it. H2

07-28-2011, 05:38 AM	#29
bdery Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Quebec city, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,357	Originally posted by paperbag846 21 would be very useful if I did not have the 15. No problems, this clarifies things. I thought you implied the 21 was not an useful lens in absolute terms, and I wondered about that. That it's not useful given your current kit makes a lot of sense

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-28-2011, 08:16 AM	#30
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395 Original Poster	Originally posted by bdery No problems, this clarifies things. I thought you implied the 21 was not an useful lens in absolute terms, and I wondered about that. That it's not useful given your current kit makes a lot of sense Yes. If I had all the money in the world, I would certainly like to have one. But it's not in the cards for me .