Are Pentax lenses that good? Really?

**Ash** · 01-22-2013, 10:40 PM

I also attest to the DA 12-24's amazing image quality. In every aspect, it has been a stellar performer for me - wide angle portraits, landscapes and architecture. The wide angle distortion is very well controlled and the sharpness amazing straight from f/4.

Na Horuk · 01-24-2013, 06:22 AM

lenses are not just sharpness. Other qualities are also very important. And Pentax has some lenses that have a higher rate of duds (like the 17-50 and 17-70), so some copies are better than others. But the primes and limited lenses are pretty great. Its hard to say that Nikon or Canon don't make equals, but they certainly cost a lot. I mean, Zeiss and Schneider-Kreutznach make great primes, probably as good or even better than Pentax, but expect to pay a lot for that quality (and often without AF). So you have to consider the bigger picture (no pun intended): which camera, which lenses, your budget, your needs
Oh and one more thing, sample photos only show you the potential of the lens. You don't know how much those photos are processed and in what ways. Some people intentionally add vignetting or edge softness, others overshapen their images. These are completely legitimate things, but they may create false expectations. Processing is a very important part of photography.

brntoki · 03-07-2013, 08:23 AM

Well, one thing led to another, and . . .

normhead · 03-07-2013, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by brntoki

Well, one thing led to another, and . . .

As I've often said, if you're upgrading from a K-5, it's the only way to go at the moment. For me the drawback is 25%-30% more resolution, for triple the cost in the camera body, compared to an $800 K-5. It's great if you have the money....

I could have bought a D800 but bought a Sigma 8-16, a Sigma 70 macro, and a Tamron 17-50, a used A-400mm and another K-5 instead. Value for dollar, I'm happy where I am. When Pentax gets 24 MP APs-c figured out, I'll be even happier. At that point the advantage of a D800 will be minimal, and the LW/PH advantage will be less than 20%, based on what Nikon has done with the 3200.

Last edited by normhead; 03-07-2013 at 09:15 AM.

**K(s)evin** · 03-07-2013, 10:11 AM

Originally posted by brntoki

Well, one thing led to another, and . . .

You just buy some boxes and lenscaps?

**Kerrowdown** · 03-07-2013, 10:19 AM

Originally posted by K(s)evin

You just buy some boxes and lenscaps?

It's not just me then, this was my first thought.

normhead · 03-07-2013, 10:43 AM

Come on, those are some very high class boxes and lens caps... I been straining my eyes to see if he got the 14-24....the lens that would sell me a D800. If someone will give me one of those, I promise I'll buy a Nikon something that it will work with.

brntoki · 03-07-2013, 08:44 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Come on, those are some very high class boxes and lens caps... I been straining my eyes to see if he got the 14-24....the lens that would sell me a D800. If someone will give me one of those, I promise I'll buy a Nikon something that it will work with.

Yeah! The boxes, nice as they are, were a lot cheaper than their original contents. The 14-24 box was still a little on the pricey side, however, so I bought a 50/1.8g box instead. The next boxes will likely be a Tokina 16-28, and a 70-200 in some incarnation, probably Tamron again. Although the 85/1.4 Samyang or 85/1.8g container could come even earlier.

Now I just need time to mount tripod sockets and get out and make some pinhole images with my nice boxes.

VisualDarkness · 03-07-2013, 08:47 PM

That's a seriously cool kit there!

**yucatanPentax** · 03-07-2013, 11:28 PM

Originally posted by lesmore49

I agree with a lot of what you say, except for your assessment of the Pentax 12-24. I have one and have taken 1000's of photo's with it, primarily vintage vehicles. The quality is wonderful and that's not just me. Popular Photography rates it as the best of the bunch and that bunch includes all super wide angles .

It's only F 4...and it would be nice to have it as an F 2.8...but other than that for sharpness and fine optical quality...top notch.

I have to agree on the 12-24 Pentax. I use it constantly for architectural interiors and for archeological exploration as well as everything else. It's my favorite Pentax lens of all time (so far). It is really a wonderful quality lens. Yes, F2.8 would be great, but it's big enough already.

brntoki · 03-07-2013, 11:35 PM

Originally posted by yucatanPentax

. . . but it's big enough already.

That was the surprising thing about my new camera . . . er . . . boxes. The size of the body isn't a big deal really. But the 24-70/2.8? Big and freakin' heavy. As soon as I picked up the box I thought, "Oh! This will be a workout to carry all day." But, I do like working out anyway, so . . .

Davidw0815 · 03-08-2013, 01:55 AM

Originally posted by normhead

When Pentax gets 24 MP APs-c figured out, I'll be even happier.

I know Nikon has a 24 MP APS-C camera but I'm not sure if it is more than a marketing gag. You have to see that even on a 14 MP camera the image quality starts decreasing if you stop down further than f/5.6 due diffraction. With higher resolution diffraction will be noticeable at wider apertures. If you increase the resolution further you'll pretty soon be at the point where you just increase the filesize and don't get a more detailed image...
I think there's no way around a bigger sensor if you need more resolution.
Cheers,
David

hoanpham · 03-08-2013, 03:38 AM

What a cool gear!
Since you are going to use manual lenses, why are you buying a nikon?

**Digitalis** · 03-13-2013, 03:09 AM

Originally posted by K(s)evin

You just buy some boxes and lenscaps?

Don't laugh, but I have actually bought boxes full of nikon lens caps - I have a habit of replacing many of the standard lens caps for my Canon,Pentax and Sigma lenses with Nikon ones because I like the ergonomics and quality of the Nikon lens caps. Plus it confuses the hell out of other photographers when I walk up to them with a Leica M9 and a 50mm f/1.0 lens with a nikon lens cap on it...

audiobomber · 03-13-2013, 04:44 AM

Originally posted by Davidw0815

I know Nikon has a 24 MP APS-C camera but I'm not sure if it is more than a marketing gag. You have to see that even on a 14 MP camera the image quality starts decreasing if you stop down further than f/5.6 due diffraction. With higher resolution diffraction will be noticeable at wider apertures.

You are overstating the numbers. Check this advanced diffraction calculator:

Digital Camera Diffraction – Resolution, Color & Micro-Contrast
"Most will find that the f-stop given in the "diffraction limits extinction resolution" field tends to correlate well with the f-stop values where one first starts to see fine detail being softened."

The calculated limit for 24mp on a 1.5X APS-C body is f/7.4. The limit for 16mp is f/9.1. That means that at any aperture up to f7.4, all of the resolution of the 24mp sensor will be useable. At apertures larger than f9.1, the 24mp body will have more resolution than a 16mp body. At apertures smaller than f9.1, they will show equal resolution.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Are we really THAT rare?	abmj	Pentax DSLR Discussion	7248	10 Hours Ago 04:12 PM
Pentax SDM lenses, how much they are really worth or are they worth it?	Pentaxor	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	01-17-2015 11:32 PM
How good are the Pentax 300mm star lenses on a 645D?	derAngler	Pentax Medium Format	12	08-22-2011 07:26 AM
Are the sensor stains really that bad??	bobby_navy	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	6	12-29-2010 04:19 PM
Is the 50-135 really that good?	FHPhotographer	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	9	10-14-2008 11:39 AM

01-22-2013, 10:40 PM	#46
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	I also attest to the DA 12-24's amazing image quality. In every aspect, it has been a stellar performer for me - wide angle portraits, landscapes and architecture. The wide angle distortion is very well controlled and the sharpness amazing straight from f/4.

01-24-2013, 06:22 AM	#47
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	lenses are not just sharpness. Other qualities are also very important. And Pentax has some lenses that have a higher rate of duds (like the 17-50 and 17-70), so some copies are better than others. But the primes and limited lenses are pretty great. Its hard to say that Nikon or Canon don't make equals, but they certainly cost a lot. I mean, Zeiss and Schneider-Kreutznach make great primes, probably as good or even better than Pentax, but expect to pay a lot for that quality (and often without AF). So you have to consider the bigger picture (no pun intended): which camera, which lenses, your budget, your needs Oh and one more thing, sample photos only show you the potential of the lens. You don't know how much those photos are processed and in what ways. Some people intentionally add vignetting or edge softness, others overshapen their images. These are completely legitimate things, but they may create false expectations. Processing is a very important part of photography.

03-07-2013, 08:23 AM	#48
brntoki Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Okinawa Posts: 73 Original Poster	Well, one thing led to another, and . . .

03-07-2013, 08:56 AM	#49
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by brntoki Well, one thing led to another, and . . . As I've often said, if you're upgrading from a K-5, it's the only way to go at the moment. For me the drawback is 25%-30% more resolution, for triple the cost in the camera body, compared to an $800 K-5. It's great if you have the money.... I could have bought a D800 but bought a Sigma 8-16, a Sigma 70 macro, and a Tamron 17-50, a used A-400mm and another K-5 instead. Value for dollar, I'm happy where I am. When Pentax gets 24 MP APs-c figured out, I'll be even happier. At that point the advantage of a D800 will be minimal, and the LW/PH advantage will be less than 20%, based on what Nikon has done with the 3200. Last edited by normhead; 03-07-2013 at 09:15 AM.

03-07-2013, 10:11 AM	#50
K(s)evin Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Colorado Posts: 476	Originally posted by brntoki Well, one thing led to another, and . . . You just buy some boxes and lenscaps?

03-07-2013, 10:19 AM	#51
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,835	Originally posted by K(s)evin You just buy some boxes and lenscaps? It's not just me then, this was my first thought.

03-07-2013, 10:43 AM	#52
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Come on, those are some very high class boxes and lens caps... I been straining my eyes to see if he got the 14-24....the lens that would sell me a D800. If someone will give me one of those, I promise I'll buy a Nikon something that it will work with.

03-07-2013, 08:44 PM	#53
brntoki Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Okinawa Posts: 73 Original Poster	Originally posted by normhead Come on, those are some very high class boxes and lens caps... I been straining my eyes to see if he got the 14-24....the lens that would sell me a D800. If someone will give me one of those, I promise I'll buy a Nikon something that it will work with. Yeah! The boxes, nice as they are, were a lot cheaper than their original contents. The 14-24 box was still a little on the pricey side, however, so I bought a 50/1.8g box instead. The next boxes will likely be a Tokina 16-28, and a 70-200 in some incarnation, probably Tamron again. Although the 85/1.4 Samyang or 85/1.8g container could come even earlier. Now I just need time to mount tripod sockets and get out and make some pinhole images with my nice boxes.

03-07-2013, 08:47 PM	#54
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	That's a seriously cool kit there!

03-07-2013, 11:28 PM	#55
yucatanPentax Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Dallas / Yucatan Posts: 1,841	Originally posted by lesmore49 I agree with a lot of what you say, except for your assessment of the Pentax 12-24. I have one and have taken 1000's of photo's with it, primarily vintage vehicles. The quality is wonderful and that's not just me. Popular Photography rates it as the best of the bunch and that bunch includes all super wide angles . It's only F 4...and it would be nice to have it as an F 2.8...but other than that for sharpness and fine optical quality...top notch. I have to agree on the 12-24 Pentax. I use it constantly for architectural interiors and for archeological exploration as well as everything else. It's my favorite Pentax lens of all time (so far). It is really a wonderful quality lens. Yes, F2.8 would be great, but it's big enough already.

03-07-2013, 11:35 PM	#56
brntoki Forum Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Okinawa Posts: 73 Original Poster	Originally posted by yucatanPentax . . . but it's big enough already. That was the surprising thing about my new camera . . . er . . . boxes. The size of the body isn't a big deal really. But the 24-70/2.8? Big and freakin' heavy. As soon as I picked up the box I thought, "Oh! This will be a workout to carry all day." But, I do like working out anyway, so . . .

03-08-2013, 01:55 AM	#57
Davidw0815 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 437	Originally posted by normhead When Pentax gets 24 MP APs-c figured out, I'll be even happier. I know Nikon has a 24 MP APS-C camera but I'm not sure if it is more than a marketing gag. You have to see that even on a 14 MP camera the image quality starts decreasing if you stop down further than f/5.6 due diffraction. With higher resolution diffraction will be noticeable at wider apertures. If you increase the resolution further you'll pretty soon be at the point where you just increase the filesize and don't get a more detailed image... I think there's no way around a bigger sensor if you need more resolution. Cheers, David

03-08-2013, 03:38 AM	#58
hoanpham Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Strand Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,366	What a cool gear! Since you are going to use manual lenses, why are you buying a nikon?

03-13-2013, 03:09 AM	#59
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by K(s)evin You just buy some boxes and lenscaps? Don't laugh, but I have actually bought boxes full of nikon lens caps - I have a habit of replacing many of the standard lens caps for my Canon,Pentax and Sigma lenses with Nikon ones because I like the ergonomics and quality of the Nikon lens caps. Plus it confuses the hell out of other photographers when I walk up to them with a Leica M9 and a 50mm f/1.0 lens with a nikon lens cap on it...

03-13-2013, 04:44 AM	#60
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Davidw0815 I know Nikon has a 24 MP APS-C camera but I'm not sure if it is more than a marketing gag. You have to see that even on a 14 MP camera the image quality starts decreasing if you stop down further than f/5.6 due diffraction. With higher resolution diffraction will be noticeable at wider apertures. You are overstating the numbers. Check this advanced diffraction calculator: Digital Camera Diffraction – Resolution, Color & Micro-Contrast "Most will find that the f-stop given in the "diffraction limits extinction resolution" field tends to correlate well with the f-stop values where one first starts to see fine detail being softened." The calculated limit for 24mp on a 1.5X APS-C body is f/7.4. The limit for 16mp is f/9.1. That means that at any aperture up to f7.4, all of the resolution of the 24mp sensor will be useable. At apertures larger than f9.1, the 24mp body will have more resolution than a 16mp body. At apertures smaller than f9.1, they will show equal resolution.