Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-17-2013, 05:27 PM   #31
Pentaxian
Driline's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,954
QuoteOriginally posted by tclausen Quote
Yeah, the 35/2.8 is a total dog for landscapes, impossible to get anything good out of - I really should ask for my money back
Since I don't personally own this lens I cannot comment on it. I'm just quoting what other "Pentaxians" have said on this forum. And there have been many that have said that this lens is not as sharp when used as a landscape lens. Not poor by any means, but just not as sharp as say other lenses that are not Macro's. Maybe they're FOS?

I can't say that your landscape pictures are exceedingly sharp either, but they do look nice.

07-17-2013, 05:37 PM   #32
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,651
I've seen some great landscapes from the DA 35 Limited, but the FA Limiteds also have a very nice reputation for landscapes as well.

FA 77:







07-17-2013, 05:40 PM   #33
Pentaxian
Driline's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,954
QuoteOriginally posted by builttospill Quote
I've seen some great landscapes from the DA 35 Limited, but the FA Limiteds also have a very nice reputation for landscapes as well.

FA 77:







Now to my eyes, those look sharp sharp sharp.
07-17-2013, 05:54 PM   #34
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,801
QuoteOriginally posted by Driline Quote
Since I don't personally own this lens I cannot comment on it. I'm just quoting what other "Pentaxians" have said on this forum. And there have been many that have said that this lens is not as sharp when used as a landscape lens. Not poor by any means, but just not as sharp as say other lenses that are not Macro's. Maybe they're FOS?

I can't say that your landscape pictures are exceedingly sharp either, but they do look nice.
It may hit diffraction earlier being designed for close-up focusing, but that's not apparent from the DxO scores:

DxOMark - Compare lenses

The DA 35/2.8 Macros is a resolution monster at the centre (it is, after all, a macro), while the DA 35/2.4 is more even across the frame. The DA 40 is less efficient but it is a tiny pancake. At f/11 the DA 35/2.8 Macro actually seems to do the best of the lot and that slight advantage continues to f/22.

07-17-2013, 06:17 PM   #35
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,381
Sharpness doesn't depend on the lens, it depends on the use of a tripod. I get awesome sharpness from my 18-55, I just lug a tripod if I'm being paid for the work. I'm 100% sure the 18-55, when used on a tripod, easily out-resolves the sensor, pixel peepers.

Anyway, I love my 15 + 35 limited and as some others here have attempted to explain over and over, there's more to a good lens (& good photo) than the brick wall resolution test.
07-18-2013, 01:58 AM   #36
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 456
Original Poster
I knew this was going to be difficult. I will be watching the prices very closely over the next couple of months and see what comes my way.
07-18-2013, 05:06 AM   #37
Pentaxian
Driline's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,954
QuoteOriginally posted by calsan Quote
Sharpness doesn't depend on the lens, it depends on the use of a tripod.
If that were true then why would anyone in their right mind spend more than $80 for a lens. There are a lot of sick people here.
07-18-2013, 05:42 AM - 1 Like   #38
Site Supporter
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,297
QuoteOriginally posted by Driline Quote
If that were true then why would anyone in their right mind spend more than $80 for a lens. There are a lot of sick people here.
Because, as has been said numerous times, there is more to a lens than sharpness.

07-18-2013, 07:02 AM   #39
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,801
There's more to a photo than sharpness.

The comment that to truly achieve sharpness requires a tripod is echoed by virtually every pro photographer and publication out there. Technique is far more important than equipment.
07-18-2013, 07:05 AM   #40
Pentaxian
Driline's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,954
QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
Because, as has been said numerous times, there is more to a lens than sharpness.
True......but as I said sharpness is King. Anything above and beyond that is icing on the cake.
07-18-2013, 07:07 AM   #41
Pentaxian
Driline's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,954
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
There's more to a photo than sharpness.

The comment that to truly achieve sharpness requires a tripod is echoed by virtually every pro photographer and publication out there. Technique is far more important than equipment.
Then why are you paying $1,000 for a lens when an $80 kit lens will do what you say?
07-18-2013, 07:13 AM   #42
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,444
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
The comment that to truly achieve sharpness requires a tripod is echoed by virtually every pro photographer and publication out there. Technique is far more important than equipment.
I agree. A tripod (and precise focus, good light and the right aperture) will get the best out of any lens.
For the record though, my shot in post #30 was hand held, and it still looks OK to my eyes. I'm too lazy/impatient to get my tripod out 99% of the time.
07-18-2013, 07:28 AM   #43
Pentaxian
Driline's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: IOWA Where the Tall Corn Grows
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,954
Well then I'm going to get rid of my FA 43, DA * 50-135 and just keep my tripod and kit lens because using the tripod I should be able to take great pictures = or better than any Pentax FA or DA limited lens.
07-18-2013, 08:36 AM   #44
Site Supporter
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,297
QuoteOriginally posted by Driline Quote
Then why are you paying $1,000 for a lens when an $80 kit lens will do what you say?
You can buy a sharp as hell $80 lens that is not particularly fast, manual focuses, doesnt have weather sealing, has a sloppy focusing ring, has bad CA etc.
That is why people pay more than $80.
07-18-2013, 08:43 AM   #45
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,651
A tripod helps reduce blur. It's a necessary tool for some shots, but I don't think it will ever make an unsharp lens produce a sharp photo.

Sharpness is important, but it's never been my #1 priority. Rendering and character are my top requirements for a lens. My DA 40 Limited was sharp, but it lacked character. It rendered out-of-focus areas nicely, but was still missing character. I bought the 40 after using the 43 for years to compare, and after using it for about a year it just couldn't compete with the 43. I liked the lens. It produced fantastic sharp photos, but the results were often almost too "clinical", or boring. In this case sharpness wasn't everything.

Your needs will vary from mine, but I should also mention the other side of the story. I was disappointed with the DA 15 because I wanted it to be sharper. It had lots of character, but that didn't matter when the subject wasn't sharp. I replaced the 15 with the FA* 24 and couldn't be happier.
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!
da, k-mount, lens, macro, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lens comparison- which is which normhead Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 52 06-18-2014 06:34 PM
Which Limited to get? rrwilliams64 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 25 04-21-2013 10:52 PM
Wedding - which lens with which body? The Kellyboy Photographic Technique 16 04-13-2012 05:06 PM
Which limited series lens for weddings and portraits? phuey Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 20 07-16-2010 10:05 AM
Which Limited Lens? hsu1 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 11-22-2009 11:03 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:53 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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