Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-13-2007, 04:58 AM   #1
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2007
Location: WW community of Pentax users
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,128
16-50 versus 12-24?

From 16 to 24, obviously.
Can anybody comment on the optical qualities for these lenses?
And perhaps some examples?

Price wise, they are very close where I live (710 vs 666 EUR).
I'm looking for something on the wide side from 28mm but I do believe 16mm might be wide enough for me.
Perhaps there is less of a QC issue with the 12-24 as well?

Any ideas would be appreciated.

Thanks.

12-13-2007, 06:44 AM   #2
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
My Input

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/16150-geez-pen...-24-sharp.html

Ben
12-13-2007, 08:55 AM   #3
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40-55'-44" N / 73-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,102
There's a -big- difference between 12mm and 16mm, so if you need/want the extra FOV, it's the way to go. The 16-50 is the 'superior' lens otherwise from my understanding; based on readings, since I only own one of them. You can read my own evolution from discontent to content in the thread linked-to above.
12-13-2007, 09:10 AM   #4
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,599
Hi Bart,

I don't own either lens but just going from what I've read here and elsewhere, it seems that most of the owners of the 12-24 are more "content" with that lens than the owners of the 16-50 are with theirs.

NaCl(but no "hands on" experience to back this up)H2O

12-13-2007, 09:13 AM   #5
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,294
QuoteOriginally posted by Bart Quote
From 16 to 24, obviously.
Can anybody comment on the optical qualities for these lenses?
And perhaps some examples?

Price wise, they are very close where I live (710 vs 666 EUR).
I'm looking for something on the wide side from 28mm but I do believe 16mm might be wide enough for me.
Perhaps there is less of a QC issue with the 12-24 as well?

Any ideas would be appreciated.

Thanks.
These lenses are two totally different animals.

If I was looking at the 16-24 range I would clearly prefer to work with the 12-24. It is sharper at 16 (IMO) and extremely sharp. Contrast is very good to excellent and color rendition is dead on.

On the 16-50mm my personal tastes would be to use the lens from 20mm on, though I have produced some good image at 16mm but it requires stopping down smewhat to bring the most out of that focal length. Contrast, color and sharpness are truly remarkable on the lens (past 16mm wide open)

I think that if you are thinking wide.... 16 isn't wide enough. I don't even think twelve is wide enough on these sensors, but that problem will be answered soon enough.

Stephen
12-13-2007, 09:14 AM   #6
Veteran Member
Buddha Jones's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,591
I would ask yourself these questions...
1. Do you currently have any lenses that are in the 16-50mm range that you use?
2. Do you need low light workability?

If you answered [yes] [no], get the 12-24mm. If you answered [no] [yes], get the 16-50mm. If you answered [no] [no], get the 12-24mm. If you answered [yes] [yes], get the 16-50mm.

I hope that confused you as much as it confused me.
12-13-2007, 09:23 AM   #7
m8o
Veteran Member
m8o's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 40-55'-44" N / 73-24'-07" W [on LI]
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,102
fantastic way to boil it down Mr. Jones!
12-13-2007, 11:47 AM   #8
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,134
QuoteOriginally posted by Bart Quote
From 16 to 24, obviously.
Can anybody comment on the optical qualities for these lenses?
And perhaps some examples?

Price wise, they are very close where I live (710 vs 666 EUR).
I'm looking for something on the wide side from 28mm but I do believe 16mm might be wide enough for me.
Perhaps there is less of a QC issue with the 12-24 as well?

Any ideas would be appreciated.

Thanks.
I made a mistake, and posted some Christmas light outdoor shots in the film SLR forum. The thread is "Christmas Lights and DA 12-24". It should have been posted here. The 12-24 worked marvellously. Next time out (and I will be out again, perhaps even this evening) I will be using the 16-50. You can then compare the two.

12-13-2007, 12:52 PM   #9
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: nyc
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 564
QuoteOriginally posted by Buddha Jones Quote
I would ask yourself these questions...
1. Do you currently have any lenses that are in the 16-50mm range that you use?
2. Do you need low light workability?

If you answered [yes] [no], get the 12-24mm. If you answered [no] [yes], get the 16-50mm. If you answered [no] [no], get the 12-24mm. If you answered [yes] [yes], get the 16-50mm.

I hope that confused you as much as it confused me.
Not to jump in, but what if you expanded your options to the sigma and tamron lines? I am debating how to upgrade from the kit lens myself, and the options are down to really 4....
the sigma 18-50 2.8
the tamron 28-70 2.8
the pentax 16-50 2.8
and either the pentax or tamron 18-250
obviously, choices 1, 2 and 4 are in the same ballpark, and the da* is a bit more...my dilemmas are many (and maybe this helps you too....)

-I like the da* for 2 reasons, aside from liking the samples I've seen. 1 is it effectively replaces the FL of the kit lens I seek to replace-I am losing 5mm on the long end, but can make up for that via the 50-200, or whatever replaces it.
2-its a da*, and there's a desire for me to own one.

the sigma appeals because it also matches the FL being replaced, seems to get favorable reviews, and comes in several hundred less than the pentax
the tamron, pricewise is similar to the sigma, and people seem to love it...i'd like having a bit longer reach, but I am concerned that I will miss having the lower end covered. I've checked my usage of that range, and it is not as extensive as say, 40,mm on up, but I still.....
the 18-250 is more a catch-all, lazy lens--though i've heard good reports on both......

What I'd love to see, if possible, is if someone actually owns or has access to all lenses, or even a few of them...to snap the same scene with them under the same conditions, just to really see what is what. I've heard folks say that the tamron and sigma compare nicely to the pentax da*, in spite of costing much less. I'd love to see that backed up by folks on the board, or disproven.

And just my .02 on a lens, if you haven't considered the 10-17 fisheye, give it a look. I gotta say, that is fast becoming a favorite of mine, not regretting that purchase at all.
12-13-2007, 01:02 PM   #10
Veteran Member
Wethphotography's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Washington, D.C., USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 417
Though he may have been in too great a hurry to qualify his thoughts on the DA*16-50, it doesn't appear thatBen thinks highly of his copy...
12-13-2007, 02:29 PM   #11
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Oklahoma
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 68
I have the 12-24 and am extremely pleased with it. But I don't think you'd want to use it as a walk-around lens - not enough reach. I'm looking to get one of those 2.8 zooms some day - hopefully soon. Right now, I have the Sigma 18-200, which is a nice lens but not fast.

Cheers
12-13-2007, 02:40 PM   #12
Veteran Member
Buddha Jones's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,591
Well if you are just looking to cover ranges then your "best" options would be as follows
Super Wide Angle - Pentax 10-17mm FE, Sigma 10-20mm and Pentax 12-24mm
Wide Angle - Pentax DA* 16-50mm, Pentax 16-45mm, Sigma 17-70mm, Sigma 18-50mm (macro is better than the non-macro)
Mid-Zoom - Tamron 28-75mm, Pentax FA 28-80mm and 24-90mm, Sigma 28-80mm

Frankly the list is too damn long to go through, all of that was just off the top of my head. I forget what my point was to begin with now...
12-13-2007, 03:16 PM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: nyc
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 564
QuoteOriginally posted by Buddha Jones Quote
Well if you are just looking to cover ranges then your "best" options would be as follows
Super Wide Angle - Pentax 10-17mm FE, Sigma 10-20mm and Pentax 12-24mm
Wide Angle - Pentax DA* 16-50mm, Pentax 16-45mm, Sigma 17-70mm, Sigma 18-50mm (macro is better than the non-macro)
Mid-Zoom - Tamron 28-75mm, Pentax FA 28-80mm and 24-90mm, Sigma 28-80mm

Frankly the list is too damn long to go through, all of that was just off the top of my head. I forget what my point was to begin with now...

I am debating between ones on the wide angle list, and one on the mid-zoom list......and really, at least to my photo-uneducated self, its a matter of having the 18-28mm range covered (or 16 in the * case) versus starting it at 28 and using the kit lens to make up the difference if I notice I am really missing it.

And I don't know enough yet, to know if I would or not. exposureplot tells me I would miss a handful, but not a good percentage....but I prefer to have all angles covered, per se.

to make things a bit more complex, my main local store either doesn't sell, or doesn't like to sell, non-pentax glass. and my other options (adorama and b and h mostly, plus beach) carry one or the other, but don't seem to have both (which means, no side by side compare...not nice)
12-13-2007, 04:58 PM   #14
Veteran Member
Buddha Jones's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Charlotte, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,591
Do this... in the Marketplace right now, there is a Sigma 17-70mm for sal for $300 and someone has a Sigma 70-200mm for sale. Two lenses get you covered. And when you feel ready get the Sigma 10-20mm and you will never have to buy another lens for a long long time.
12-14-2007, 05:00 AM   #15
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2007
Location: WW community of Pentax users
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,128
Original Poster
summary

Hi,

Thanks for all the responses.
Let me see if I can sum it up:
12-24: - A fine lens
QuoteQuote:
...extremely sharp. Contrast is very good to excellent and color rendition is dead on.
- Seems to have (far) less of the QC issues.
- Would be adding the full 12-24 range to my current set-up - apart from the kit lens.
16-50: - So far, there seems to be a hit & miss factor involved in getting a good copy
QuoteQuote:
I will be getting the newest version of the 16-50 shortly
+ a lot of reports about this issue.
- Even when you do get a good copy, it seems the lens is not 'at its best' below 20mm.
- For me, this would mean a range from 20 - 28 and an overlap from 28 - 50.
- A plus is the 2.8 meaning a more comfortable use even when you don't shoot at 2.8.

Although Steven clearly states
QuoteQuote:
If I was looking at the 16-24 range I would clearly prefer to work with the 12-24
it would still be nice to have some real world photos of the same scene with both lenses to appriciate the differences. Anybody?

I'm still not convinced I would use the 12-16 range all that much. With the kit lens, I rarely go wider than 20. On the same note, I don't like the fish eye perspective (10-17).
This will be my last lens purchase (no, really), so I want to get it right. I'd say I'm leaning more towards the 12-24.

Thanks
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, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
?? K-R IQ versus K-X IQ geezer52 Pentax K-r 1 10-30-2010 07:50 AM
1.7 versus 1.4? NecroticSoldier Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 18 04-21-2010 05:26 AM
18-55 versus 17-70? NecroticSoldier Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 13 04-04-2010 03:07 PM
1.4x TC + 55-300 versus 1.7x TC + 55-300 versus 55-300mm + cropping. Pentaxor Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 09-05-2009 02:41 PM
Versus Teo D'Or Post Your Photos! 1 05-21-2008 07:52 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:44 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