Geez is the Pentax 12-24 sharp!!

benjikan · 12-08-2007, 06:44 PM

I have never used this as a portrait lens, but wow, in a tight spot it is amazing...

Shot at 24mm f11.0 at 1/8 th of a second 100 iso.

Ben

Attached Images

Duplo · 12-08-2007, 06:52 PM

I am unable to comment on the lens from personal experience, but darn nice work Ben...
Then again I have the feeling that you would be able to do great with just about any lens

roy · 12-08-2007, 07:46 PM

WOW
i covet this lens, it would just about finish my kit. my problem is it's a DA lens and i'm not going to get it..

roentarre · 12-08-2007, 08:57 PM

I had a closer look at the shot, were there tears over her right cheek?

Steve is so lucky to be your assistant

I thought the shot was taken by Da* 16-50?

benjikan · 12-08-2007, 08:59 PM

Originally posted by roentarre

I had a closer look at the shot, were there tears over her right cheek?

Steve is so lucky to be your assistant

I thought the shot was taken by Da* 16-50?

Yup sure were tears...
This hasn't yet been retouched...Deep in post prod right now.
Nope it was the DA 12-24. I'll post the 16-50 shortly of which 60 percent of the shoot was done with the rest the 12-24...

Steve is awesome...

Thanks
Ben

daacon · 12-08-2007, 09:00 PM

I have it - I like it - it is one of the lens I always take with me

Gregory · 12-08-2007, 09:01 PM

Originally posted by benjikan

Yup sure were tears...
This hasn't yet been retouched...Deep in post prod right now.
Nope it was the DA 12-2. I'll post the 16-50 shortly of which 60 percent of the shoot was done with the rest the 12-24...

Steve is awesome...

Thanks
Ben

Do you do retouching/post production yourself or have another team/someone else doing it?

benjikan · 12-08-2007, 09:05 PM

Originally posted by Gregory

Do you do retouching/post production yourself or have another team/someone else doing it?

I set up all of my layering stuff and "Freddy Baby©" Paris does all of my retouching, always has. I can retouch, but she is much better than I am. I have done on occasion...

Ben

**Ex Finn.** · 12-08-2007, 09:06 PM

I use it 90% of the time at work and love it.
Would like to have one for myself, it is on my wish list.

.

Cheers.
Mike.

**Canada_Rockies** · 12-08-2007, 11:07 PM

Ben, you make me happy with my decision to purchase the 12-24 as the first lens with my K10d. I will really be giving it a workout when it warms up a bit from -20 C (-4 F). The K10d doesn't seem to mind, but the guy behind it really gives the SR a workout shivering.

benjikan · 12-09-2007, 09:41 AM

Originally posted by Canada_Rockies

Ben, you make me happy with my decision to purchase the 12-24 as the first lens with my K10d. I will really be giving it a workout when it warms up a bit from -20 C (-4 F). The K10d doesn't seem to mind, but the guy behind it really gives the SR a workout shivering.

I was really taken a back by the resolution of this lens. It reminds me of my good old and now gone 17-40 L Canon lens. I will be getting the newest version of the 16-50 shortly from Pentax and give it a real work out. I am convinced that it will also be a keeper. As most of my stuff is usually shot between 14 and 50 mm these will be my most used lenses, even more than my primes.

ben

m8o · 12-09-2007, 03:59 PM

I'll add some real world experience of mine with for eveyone's benefit, both good and bad. So anyone getting it knows what to expect.

I had it and replaced it for a 2nd, thinking the CA and purple fringing I was getting with it made it a bad copy (5 to even 10 pixels width; real bad). 2nd lens was identical however (though, $100 less from that seller then the seller I bought the 1st one from). Ok that stinks. Gotta watch out for that.

I tried it inside for interior shots of my home with available light , and was disappointed with that result too (handheld). Even tho it was a sunny day, and I have a lot of skylights, and the entire back of my house is glass, there wasn't enough light and I had to bump-up the ISO, and was still underexposed (so a lotta noise). But, that was handheld. With supplamental lighting, or tripod, it would have been ok I imagine. I never tried to re-do it since Summer.

Anyway, I wasn't even going to take it to Tanzania. I was very dissapointed. However, I did take it. And once I used it outside in Tanzania to take landscape shots... Holy Cow! You can see the best example of shots in my "In and Out of the Dust Bowl" album in my photo gallery on Fotki, under the Tanzania folder (that being shots taken driving to the Entrance of Ngorongoro crater, into it, and out of it). Click here to go to it: 070815 - [In&Out o/t Dust-Bowl] Ngorongoro Crater Conservation album | m8o | Fotki.com . You really have to look @ the full-rez originals to understand what I'm saying (some montion blur in the foreground of some of them notwithstanding) especially when you notice the huts in the first few and take a look @ them in full-rez 100% crop.

So just saying to all, now that I know you -must- have a lot of light and must stop it down a good deal (needing more light even more important with that), I'm able to get real winners and feel confident that it wasn't money wasted on this gem (yes, I'll even call it a "gem" now).

benjikan · 12-11-2007, 06:31 PM

I really think that to understand a lens one must understand the latitude of the sensor in relation to the lens. One must also understand metering and lighting. These all have an effect on the performance.

Ben

button · 12-12-2007, 05:28 PM

Originally posted by benjikan

I was really taken a back by the resolution of this lens. It reminds me of my good old and now gone 17-40 L Canon lens. I will be getting the newest version of the 16-50 shortly from Pentax and give it a real work out. I am convinced that it will also be a keeper. As most of my stuff is usually shot between 14 and 50 mm these will be my most used lenses, even more than my primes.

ben

Ben, what do you hope to gain in performance when you receive the newest DA* 16-50 with respect to the one you currently possess?

m8o · 12-14-2007, 09:03 PM

Somewhat OT, but related. I learned only just now that there is a FA*24mm f/2.0 ... Hoping someone can answer a question. Ignoring that it can go two stops faster then the 12-24mm f/4, if used from f/4 on, how would they compare? (on a digital sensor btw, not film).

I heard (read) it's 'soft' @ f/2, but pretty sharp @ f/2.8 already; Really fantastic @ f/5.6 on. Wondering if you Ben, or anyone, has experience with both lenses?

Anyone also know if @ f/2, is it softer then the FA 50mm f/1.4 used @ 1.4? Why I'm asking , is I got some fantastic Milkyway shots w/the 50mm f/1.4. But I so wished I had the extra FOV. The 12-24mm f/4 really won't make is as an astronomy lens. I'm hoping the 24mm f/2 can.

Sorry for the OT'ed-ness if anyone thinks this doesn't belong here ... maybe I should have just made a new thread.

12-08-2007, 06:44 PM	#1
benjikan Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,308	Geez is the Pentax 12-24 sharp!! I have never used this as a portrait lens, but wow, in a tight spot it is amazing... Shot at 24mm f11.0 at 1/8 th of a second 100 iso. Ben Attached Images

12-08-2007, 08:59 PM	#5
benjikan Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,308 Original Poster	Originally posted by roentarre I had a closer look at the shot, were there tears over her right cheek? Steve is so lucky to be your assistant I thought the shot was taken by Da* 16-50? Yup sure were tears... This hasn't yet been retouched...Deep in post prod right now. Nope it was the DA 12-24. I'll post the 16-50 shortly of which 60 percent of the shoot was done with the rest the 12-24... Steve is awesome... Thanks Ben Last edited by benjikan; 12-09-2007 at 04:08 PM.

12-11-2007, 06:31 PM	#13
benjikan Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,308 Original Poster	Applications I really think that to understand a lens one must understand the latitude of the sensor in relation to the lens. One must also understand metering and lighting. These all have an effect on the performance. Ben

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Question on how to get photo as sharp as this with Pentax ?	shadowbecomeswhite	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	22	03-24-2010 06:18 AM
What Pentax gear will help me get this sharp ?	shadowbecomeswhite	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	03-20-2010 07:49 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax F 50mm 1.7 Very Sharp	jjdgti	Sold Items	11	10-23-2009 05:53 PM
Cinnamon Teal and a..."Geez! I messed that up!" shot.	scott-devon	Post Your Photos!	0	07-30-2009 08:13 PM
Ah geez - I'm a noob again...sheesh...	doggydude	Welcomes and Introductions	4	11-24-2006 07:35 AM

12-08-2007, 06:52 PM	#2
Duplo Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Copenhagen Photos: Gallery Posts: 924	I am unable to comment on the lens from personal experience, but darn nice work Ben... Then again I have the feeling that you would be able to do great with just about any lens

12-08-2007, 07:46 PM	#3
roy Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: D/FW area, Tx. Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,710	WOW i covet this lens, it would just about finish my kit. my problem is it's a DA lens and i'm not going to get it..

12-08-2007, 08:57 PM	#4
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783	I had a closer look at the shot, were there tears over her right cheek? Steve is so lucky to be your assistant I thought the shot was taken by Da* 16-50?

12-08-2007, 09:00 PM	#6
daacon Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Alberta,Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 20,914	I have it - I like it - it is one of the lens I always take with me

12-08-2007, 09:01 PM	#7
Gregory Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sydney Posts: 27	Originally posted by benjikan Yup sure were tears... This hasn't yet been retouched...Deep in post prod right now. Nope it was the DA 12-2. I'll post the 16-50 shortly of which 60 percent of the shoot was done with the rest the 12-24... Steve is awesome... Thanks Ben Do you do retouching/post production yourself or have another team/someone else doing it?

12-08-2007, 09:05 PM	#8
benjikan Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,308 Original Poster	Originally posted by Gregory Do you do retouching/post production yourself or have another team/someone else doing it? I set up all of my layering stuff and "Freddy Baby©" Paris does all of my retouching, always has. I can retouch, but she is much better than I am. I have done on occasion... Ben

12-08-2007, 09:06 PM	#9
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	I use it 90% of the time at work and love it. Would like to have one for myself, it is on my wish list. . Cheers. Mike.

12-08-2007, 11:07 PM	#10
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Ben, you make me happy with my decision to purchase the 12-24 as the first lens with my K10d. I will really be giving it a workout when it warms up a bit from -20 C (-4 F). The K10d doesn't seem to mind, but the guy behind it really gives the SR a workout shivering.

12-09-2007, 09:41 AM	#11
benjikan Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Paris, France Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,308 Original Poster	Originally posted by Canada_Rockies Ben, you make me happy with my decision to purchase the 12-24 as the first lens with my K10d. I will really be giving it a workout when it warms up a bit from -20 C (-4 F). The K10d doesn't seem to mind, but the guy behind it really gives the SR a workout shivering. I was really taken a back by the resolution of this lens. It reminds me of my good old and now gone 17-40 L Canon lens. I will be getting the newest version of the 16-50 shortly from Pentax and give it a real work out. I am convinced that it will also be a keeper. As most of my stuff is usually shot between 14 and 50 mm these will be my most used lenses, even more than my primes. ben

12-09-2007, 03:59 PM	#12
m8o Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI] Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,092	I'll add some real world experience of mine with for eveyone's benefit, both good and bad. So anyone getting it knows what to expect. I had it and replaced it for a 2nd, thinking the CA and purple fringing I was getting with it made it a bad copy (5 to even 10 pixels width; real bad). 2nd lens was identical however (though, $100 less from that seller then the seller I bought the 1st one from). Ok that stinks. Gotta watch out for that. I tried it inside for interior shots of my home with available light , and was disappointed with that result too (handheld). Even tho it was a sunny day, and I have a lot of skylights, and the entire back of my house is glass, there wasn't enough light and I had to bump-up the ISO, and was still underexposed (so a lotta noise). But, that was handheld. With supplamental lighting, or tripod, it would have been ok I imagine. I never tried to re-do it since Summer. Anyway, I wasn't even going to take it to Tanzania. I was very dissapointed. However, I did take it. And once I used it outside in Tanzania to take landscape shots... Holy Cow! You can see the best example of shots in my "In and Out of the Dust Bowl" album in my photo gallery on Fotki, under the Tanzania folder (that being shots taken driving to the Entrance of Ngorongoro crater, into it, and out of it). Click here to go to it: 070815 - [In&Out o/t Dust-Bowl] Ngorongoro Crater Conservation album \| m8o \| Fotki.com . You really have to look @ the full-rez originals to understand what I'm saying (some montion blur in the foreground of some of them notwithstanding) especially when you notice the huts in the first few and take a look @ them in full-rez 100% crop. So just saying to all, now that I know you -must- have a lot of light and must stop it down a good deal (needing more light even more important with that), I'm able to get real winners and feel confident that it wasn't money wasted on this gem (yes, I'll even call it a "gem" now).

12-12-2007, 05:28 PM	#14
button Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 241	Originally posted by benjikan I was really taken a back by the resolution of this lens. It reminds me of my good old and now gone 17-40 L Canon lens. I will be getting the newest version of the 16-50 shortly from Pentax and give it a real work out. I am convinced that it will also be a keeper. As most of my stuff is usually shot between 14 and 50 mm these will be my most used lenses, even more than my primes. ben Ben, what do you hope to gain in performance when you receive the newest DA* 16-50 with respect to the one you currently possess?

12-14-2007, 09:03 PM	#15
m8o Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: 40°-55'-44" N / 73°-24'-07" W [on LI] Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,092	Somewhat OT, but related. I learned only just now that there is a FA24mm f/2.0 ... Hoping someone can answer a question. Ignoring that it can go two stops faster then the 12-24mm f/4, if used from f/4 on, how would they compare? (on a digital sensor btw, not film). I heard (read) it's 'soft' @ f/2, but pretty sharp @ f/2.8 already; Really fantastic @ f/5.6 on. Wondering if you Ben, or anyone, has experience with both lenses? Anyone also know if @ f/2, is it softer then the FA 50mm f/1.4 used @ 1.4? Why I'm asking , is I got some fantastic Milkyway shots w/the 50mm f/1.4. But* I so wished I had the extra FOV. The 12-24mm f/4 really won't make is as an astronomy lens. I'm hoping the 24mm f/2 can. Sorry for the OT'ed-ness if anyone thinks this doesn't belong here ... maybe I should have just made a new thread.