Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-22-2013, 05:50 AM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 120
UWA for Rome

Try to find the "best" UWA for trips, nature. And there are only two options that might be interesting: sigma 8-16 and pentax 15ltd. Problem is I must find a solution until Tuesday since on 26 I'll be in Rome .
But there are some doubts:
- tried 15mm, is small, fine, metal, but is not as wide as I want
- 8-16 is ok for the "8" but the "16" is to wide for an "all around" like others that goes to 20-24mm, no filter, bigger, some strange distortions, no FF
Third option is to keep trust in my old 18-55mm (+ stitch if necessary). Pentax 12-14 is 50% expensive. Other in stock option is sigma 10-20 f3.5 or tamron 10-24.

Main usage is for trips: interiors (buildings, museums, churches), big buildings in narrow spaces, wide field astrophoto, etc. Will be paired with k5iis.

Thanks for ideas!


Last edited by valy; 12-22-2013 at 06:13 AM.
12-22-2013, 06:27 AM   #2
Pentaxian
Kozlok's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,789
For inside work, I'd go for the 10-20 for the f3.5 aperture. I have the 15, but it's really an outside lens (best stopped down to f8 or so).
12-22-2013, 06:33 AM   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 120
Original Poster
Usually light is not an issue, of course sigma 8-16 is not very wide at f4.5-5.6 but k5 has a good iso and SR to compensate. Where permitted I can use gorillapod.
Also I think that WA-UWA don't require wide apertures as the tele for example.
12-22-2013, 07:31 AM   #4
Pentaxian
carrrlangas's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Joensuu (Finland)
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,750
QuoteOriginally posted by valy Quote
Usually light is not an issue, of course sigma 8-16 is not very wide at f4.5-5.6 but k5 has a good iso and SR to compensate. Where permitted I can use gorillapod.
It will be difficult to balance the sigma 8-16 with the gorilla pod and compose as you want precissely (assuming you have the SLR zoom model, perhaps the biggest one would be ok, but thatīs an extra 800g)
QuoteOriginally posted by valy Quote
Also I think that WA-UWA don't require wide apertures as the tele for example.
I think koslok wasnīt referring to depth of field, but to stop down the DA15 to get even sharpness across the frame.

I wouldnīt care about max aperture of the lens. Iīd pick the lightest and smallest UWA zoom available.* All of them will have a weakness, the key being to know what it is for the model you choose.

*Honestly, Iīd carry the DA15 and thatīs it. Hate heavy, big zooms when walking a city.

Have a nice trip!

12-22-2013, 07:38 AM   #5
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 120
Original Poster
I bought tamron 70-200 f2.8 special for trips so the weigth is a (well known) problem but tried/learned to ignore it.
While DA15 is sexy I can't get my mind from those 8mm
Gorillapod is SRL zoom model, difficult to balance heavy lenses but if you try hard you could use it. Anyway I try to use it handheld with high iso and SR. For night shoots I can find a solid object to put the camera on it.
Thanks.

Last edited by valy; 12-22-2013 at 07:51 AM.
12-22-2013, 08:37 AM   #6
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,107
Good Morning,

The forum had a review across the zooms that you are interested in.I have the Pentax 12-24 and that it probably my most used lens. The range of focal lengths is just right for me. I have seen excellent results on line from both the Sigma and Tamron also. I would not hesitate picking us any of them. Zooms by their very nature are larger in size. I have also acquired the 8-16 mainly to shoot the tall ships (so as to be able to go from the waterline up to the top of the masts in as single frame). I will say its a wonderful lens, however due to its very wide 8mm it does distort.

Distortion is one area that you really can't get away from in using these UWA lenses. I find that the 8 in the 8-16 can really be too wide in a lot of the cases. I have been using my 12-24 for about 4 years now and find that it really has a good coverage of the focal lengths with distortion controlled reasonably well. That is why I would have no problems with either the 10-20 or 10-24. The review link above - Adam concluded that the Sigma 10-20 was the best of the bunch especially for image quality. I have also been very successful stitching with my 12-24, especially in the portrait orientation.

I understand that the 8-16 does not have the coverage up into the 20 to 24 area. All UWA zooms have no more than a 2x zoom range, because of the complexity of the optics required to cover such a wide set of focal lengths. So, 2x is essentially the best that you are going to be able to do.

So, I went to flicker and put in "rome" plus the 3 different lenses. The results are basically what folks uploaded so its just what was available. Not having the really wide 8-10 range, I don't think will really make a hugh difference. The Sigma 10-20 had the largest variety, mainly due to the popularity of the lens. I think that you will be able to make the 10-20 or 10-24 work, and will probably not notice not having or needing the 8-10 at all. You will certainly not miss the distortion.hope that helps....

12-22-2013, 08:53 AM   #7
Veteran Member
nanhi's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Bangalore, India
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 440
Hello Vally, we went on a 3-weeks tour of Europe with Thomas Cook and found the 18-55 is practically useless. Europe has very tall towers and spires, very wide panoramic monuments and squares. Worst of all the roads are quite narrow so that you cannot move back and catch that imposing monument. A good example was the Trevi Fountain where the wrap around road is too narrow.
Only at Pisa you get some wide open spaces.
My $ 290 used Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC came in very handy. This copy is brutally sharp and combined with the K-5s high ISO performance, I got away even inside the Vatican, example the Sistine Chapel.
This lens is the best choice for a tourist on a budget. It takes slim filters - like my Hoya Pro1D Protector, an ND4, and Chinese branded CPL + GND - 77mm lens mount. There is a Tokina AF 11-16 mm f2.8 but I am not sure if it comes in Pentax mount
Regards.
Bipin
12-22-2013, 12:21 PM   #8
Site Supporter
savoche's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Lowlands of Norway
Posts: 8,666
I have the older Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 and find it very nice. I don't use it much after I got the 15 Ltd, though, but of course 10 is a lot wider than 15. I would definitely bring it if I should go to Rome. Well, I'd bring both of them

I'm surprised nobody has suggested the DA 10-17 Fisheye, though. Those owning seem to like it a lot, stressing the fact that it is not very fishy, especially not the long end. But, as with the 8-16, its long end is not very long...

How about a Tamron 10-24? Should be very versatile reaching well into "normal" range.

12-22-2013, 12:50 PM   #9
Veteran Member
EarlVonTapia's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Vancouver
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,152
QuoteOriginally posted by savoche Quote
I'm surprised nobody has suggested the DA 10-17 Fisheye, though. Those owning seem to like it a lot, stressing the fact that it is not very fishy, especially not the long end. But, as with the 8-16, its long end is not very long...
I vote for this!

It's easy to de-fish a picture using editing software, and you always have the ability to keep it as a fisheye pic if you want for some artistic spin.

Plus, straight pictures of the monuments everyone knows and loves are so boring . . .
12-22-2013, 02:58 PM   #10
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 120
Original Poster
Pentax DA 10-17mm is out of stock, fisheye is fun but rectilinear is more interesting.
Tamron 10-24 seems perfect: accepts filters, 10-24 good range, half the price, but it seems that the IQ is not so good.

Last edited by valy; 12-22-2013 at 03:07 PM.
12-22-2013, 03:06 PM   #11
Veteran Member
tclausen's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,399
I'd still consider is the Pentax 10-17mm as viable - assumedly a FE lens at 10mm, but (almost) rectilinear at the 15-17mm end. Also, when in the focal-lengths where distortions are inevitable, assuming and making an (artistic) virtue of these might just be the right thing to do.

I never leave home without the 31mm. For a city-trip, I'd schlep the 15mm along also, and possibly the 10-17mm, too - the latter, only if I'd have "time to contemplate composition", though, it does take a notch of deliberate considerations to use it successfully .

It'd not go amiss to bring a fast tele (like an 100/2.8 or something) for if wanting to take close-ups of details of, say, the interior of the Sixtine Chapel.
12-22-2013, 03:18 PM   #12
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 120
Original Poster
I know UWA and FE are not easy to use, but some time I miss shorter than 18mm focal lengths. I have 16mm FE on FF film camera.
12-22-2013, 03:52 PM   #13
Pentaxian
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,332
When I visited Rome last year, I found the 18-135 satisfied most requirements. For the occasions when it didn't, I used the DA15. With the Trevi Fountain, and similar popular spots, the problem was seeing past the hordes of other visitors. I took perhaps one or two wide shots and then used the long end of the 18-135 for detail - stopped down, it's more than adequate, even if it isn't a match for the DA*50-135. I don't recall having the need to get the Sigma 10-20/3.5 out of my backpack, there. If I'd de-SDMed my 16-50 at that time, it would have had more use. If my back was up to it, I'd keep the 16-50 and 50-135 on two bodies, but, as it is, the 15 and 18-135 covered just about everything. Of course, if you have time, primes are the way to go, but time limitations don't often allow the luxury of working with a bunch of primes and one body.
12-23-2013, 03:02 AM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 120
Original Poster
Of course I can still use the kit lense as I did from 2006 since now, but then we should forbid such threads: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/107938-sigma-8-16mm-club-27.html
12-24-2013, 03:04 AM   #15
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 120
Original Poster
Brought the tamron 10-24: half the price, more zoom, accepts filters. But sigma 8-16 is full time manual, silent, much wider as I imagined first.
Thanks you all

Last edited by valy; 12-24-2013 at 04:13 AM.
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, option, pentax, pentax lens, rome, sigma, slr lens, uwa
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Flareless UWA for Landscape? Kaiowas Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 22 06-10-2013 05:10 PM
Which UWA prime for a trip to Venice... rashdown_online Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 02-06-2013 02:01 PM
UWA for K-5 kkx Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 22 07-22-2012 09:39 PM
Photo Stitching for UWA Landscape KevinR Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 21 12-01-2011 11:17 PM
UWA for a newbie wed7 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 21 05-13-2010 10:41 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:33 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