DA 20-40 has arrived !!!

goubejp · 12-07-2013, 12:01 PM

Cool, I haven't the required weather conditions to test it against flare, looks perfect on the first shot !

Parallax · 12-07-2013, 12:06 PM

Originally posted by goubejp

The extreme right is soft, though.

Were you standing perfectly square to the scene? It's hard to tell from the photos. The reason I ask is that the softness on the right appears to be a DOF issue. If you were turned even slightly to your left that would put what is on the right closer than that which is on the left. IF that is the case, depending on what you were focused on, it's conceivable that the extreme left was within the DOF and the right wasn't. Try a classic "brick wall" test, making sure the sensor is absolutely parallel to wall.

goubejp · 12-07-2013, 12:44 PM

Doesn't look as a DOF issue for me, the transition would have been more smooth. A slight centering issue for me, but not sufficient to return the lens. Most of wide angle lenses has slight centering issues.

goubejp · 12-07-2013, 02:55 PM

Better than nothing... with overcast weather and night, portrait of my favorite pet.
Remember that quality has been decreased cause of ImageShack limit to 5 Mbytes
http://imageshack.com/a/img15/8527/gcve.jpg
100 % crop on the eye, full quality

DogLover · 12-07-2013, 04:27 PM

Looks pretty good to me. If mine's at least that good it'll be a keeper. I actually may have lower standards for the lens than many others. I was going to buy a DA21 just because I wanted something in that range, but I could never get excited about it. The 20-40 was announced right about then and would give me that range, plus some "zoomability," WR and a DC motor, so I figured it was worth a little more. As long as the 20-40 is at least as good in IQ as the 21 (hopefully a little better) I'll probably be happy with it. I'll find out Monday.

Vylen · 12-07-2013, 05:34 PM

Looks pretty good from what I can see. Sharpness seems to be a chase of pixel peeping (which isn't a bad thing).

Other things that need to be compared are distortion and bokeh I guess. Then it just becomes a case of convenience; carrying 3 primes or 1 zoom. Unless you do need the wide aperture of the primes of course.

krebsy75 · 12-07-2013, 07:05 PM

Keep your expectations high. A thousand dollar lens should be pretty damn good.

DogLover · 12-07-2013, 07:12 PM

Originally posted by krebsy75

Keep your expectations high. A thousand dollar lens should be pretty damn good.

Yes, but I only paid $896, so it only has to be that good.

Parallax · 12-07-2013, 07:45 PM

Originally posted by DogLover

Yes, but I only paid $896, so it only has to be that good.

Right. It only has to be 89.6% as good as a $1000.00 lens.

ogl · 12-07-2013, 11:36 PM

The last photo is very good in terms of sharpness.

goubejp · 12-08-2013, 03:19 AM

Originally posted by DogLover

Looks pretty good to me. If mine's at least that good it'll be a keeper. I actually may have lower standards for the lens than many others. I was going to buy a DA21 just because I wanted something in that range, but I could never get excited about it. The 20-40 was announced right about then and would give me that range, plus some "zoomability," WR and a DC motor, so I figured it was worth a little more. As long as the 20-40 is at least as good in IQ as the 21 (hopefully a little better) I'll probably be happy with it. I'll find out Monday.

My impression after comparing side by side, and with a large experience of the DA21, is that the zoom is largely better - more homogeneous, sharp side from side at f4 (which is not the case of the DA21 !), same amount of CA. We shall see about distorsion - but the DA21 is not a good performer here - and color rendering.

Mr Spocko · 12-08-2013, 10:15 AM

Hard to say on this it's not got much of a size edge over the Tamron, if they ever update that lens with a USM motor and sealing and charge a bit more it would be a huge hit.
I'd want to see more samples on the new Pentax though before hammering it down.

lytrytyr · 12-08-2013, 10:47 AM

Originally posted by Mr Spocko

Hard to say on this it's not got much of a size edge over the Tamron

It does if you consider the Tamron with the hood attached.

The Tamron is an excellent lens,
but the hood needs to be reversed for storage,
and it takes a good few seconds to remove and attach.
For grab shots, I just leave the hood reversed,
since it doesn't interfere with the focusing.

I'm hoping the new DA zoom will be quicker on the draw.

**Crooski** · 12-08-2013, 10:48 AM

Today I have a number of recordings made by a stone wall.
At 20 30 and 40mm.
Maximum Aperture 2.8 3.5 and 4.0 at 40mm.
There is a clear distortion at 20mm.

These three shots.

lytrytyr · 12-08-2013, 10:49 AM

Originally posted by Mr Spocko

if they ever update that lens with a USM motor and sealing and charge a bit more it would be a huge hit.

The downside of that, it would probably be a VC version,
with lower image quality (deliberate decentering!) than the current A16.

12-08-2013, 10:48 AM	#59
Crooski Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Rozenburg , Zuid-Holland Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,672	Distortion DA 20-40 Today I have a number of recordings made by a stone wall. At 20 30 and 40mm. Maximum Aperture 2.8 3.5 and 4.0 at 40mm. There is a clear distortion at 20mm. These three shots. Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The DA limited is 20-40? and WR?!	LFLee	Pentax News and Rumors	1331	02-13-2014 10:55 PM
DA 20-40 Limited zoom availability	lytrytyr	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	20	12-05-2013 03:21 PM
DA 16-50 or DA 20-40 Black Friday	mtngal	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	7	11-29-2013 05:20 PM
DA limited 20-40 f/2.8-4	rlatjsrud	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	11-02-2013 11:04 AM
DA 40 Limited has arrived!	jsherman999	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	06-16-2008 08:28 AM

12-07-2013, 12:01 PM	#46
goubejp Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: France Photos: Albums Posts: 804	Cool, I haven't the required weather conditions to test it against flare, looks perfect on the first shot !

12-07-2013, 12:06 PM	#47
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by goubejp The extreme right is soft, though. Were you standing perfectly square to the scene? It's hard to tell from the photos. The reason I ask is that the softness on the right appears to be a DOF issue. If you were turned even slightly to your left that would put what is on the right closer than that which is on the left. IF that is the case, depending on what you were focused on, it's conceivable that the extreme left was within the DOF and the right wasn't. Try a classic "brick wall" test, making sure the sensor is absolutely parallel to wall.

12-07-2013, 12:44 PM	#48
goubejp Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: France Photos: Albums Posts: 804	Doesn't look as a DOF issue for me, the transition would have been more smooth. A slight centering issue for me, but not sufficient to return the lens. Most of wide angle lenses has slight centering issues.

12-07-2013, 02:55 PM	#49
goubejp Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: France Photos: Albums Posts: 804	Better than nothing... with overcast weather and night, portrait of my favorite pet. Remember that quality has been decreased cause of ImageShack limit to 5 Mbytes http://imageshack.com/a/img15/8527/gcve.jpg 100 % crop on the eye, full quality

12-07-2013, 04:27 PM	#50
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	Looks pretty good to me. If mine's at least that good it'll be a keeper. I actually may have lower standards for the lens than many others. I was going to buy a DA21 just because I wanted something in that range, but I could never get excited about it. The 20-40 was announced right about then and would give me that range, plus some "zoomability," WR and a DC motor, so I figured it was worth a little more. As long as the 20-40 is at least as good in IQ as the 21 (hopefully a little better) I'll probably be happy with it. I'll find out Monday.

12-07-2013, 05:34 PM	#51
Vylen Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,262	Looks pretty good from what I can see. Sharpness seems to be a chase of pixel peeping (which isn't a bad thing). Other things that need to be compared are distortion and bokeh I guess. Then it just becomes a case of convenience; carrying 3 primes or 1 zoom. Unless you do need the wide aperture of the primes of course.

12-07-2013, 07:05 PM	#52
krebsy75 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Chester County, Pa. Posts: 804	Keep your expectations high. A thousand dollar lens should be pretty damn good.

12-07-2013, 07:12 PM	#53
DogLover Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 2,054	Originally posted by krebsy75 Keep your expectations high. A thousand dollar lens should be pretty damn good. Yes, but I only paid $896, so it only has to be that good.

12-07-2013, 07:45 PM	#54
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by DogLover Yes, but I only paid $896, so it only has to be that good. Right. It only has to be 89.6% as good as a $1000.00 lens.

12-07-2013, 11:36 PM	#55
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	The last photo is very good in terms of sharpness.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-08-2013, 03:19 AM	#56
goubejp Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: France Photos: Albums Posts: 804	Originally posted by DogLover Looks pretty good to me. If mine's at least that good it'll be a keeper. I actually may have lower standards for the lens than many others. I was going to buy a DA21 just because I wanted something in that range, but I could never get excited about it. The 20-40 was announced right about then and would give me that range, plus some "zoomability," WR and a DC motor, so I figured it was worth a little more. As long as the 20-40 is at least as good in IQ as the 21 (hopefully a little better) I'll probably be happy with it. I'll find out Monday. My impression after comparing side by side, and with a large experience of the DA21, is that the zoom is largely better - more homogeneous, sharp side from side at f4 (which is not the case of the DA21 !), same amount of CA. We shall see about distorsion - but the DA21 is not a good performer here - and color rendering.

12-08-2013, 10:15 AM	#57
Mr Spocko Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Posts: 254	Hard to say on this it's not got much of a size edge over the Tamron, if they ever update that lens with a USM motor and sealing and charge a bit more it would be a huge hit. I'd want to see more samples on the new Pentax though before hammering it down.

12-08-2013, 10:47 AM	#58
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by Mr Spocko Hard to say on this it's not got much of a size edge over the Tamron It does if you consider the Tamron with the hood attached. The Tamron is an excellent lens, but the hood needs to be reversed for storage, and it takes a good few seconds to remove and attach. For grab shots, I just leave the hood reversed, since it doesn't interfere with the focusing. I'm hoping the new DA zoom will be quicker on the draw.

12-08-2013, 10:49 AM	#60
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by Mr Spocko if they ever update that lens with a USM motor and sealing and charge a bit more it would be a huge hit. The downside of that, it would probably be a VC version, with lower image quality (deliberate decentering!) than the current A16.