Originally posted by richardwong How do you like the Taks with the Fuji system? I used to love the colours coming out of my Fuji bridge zoom camera before I came to Pentax.
---------- Post added 08-30-18 at 05:06 PM ----------
That's just blasphemy, only 2 lenses. What are they, lol?
---------- Post added 08-30-18 at 05:07 PM ----------
AlvaraGarcia - how do you like the Distagons, are they as nice as the 3 princesses?
---------- Post added 08-30-18 at 05:08 PM ----------
Bethor - A very nice lens and a versatile few. Nice.
---------- Post added 08-30-18 at 05:10 PM ----------
x-country: Nice to have that passion for photography versus collecting gear that so many of us have.
I haven't tried/tested "the 3 princesses" (I guess you are talking about the 3 famous metal made "Limited" FA Pentax lenses: 31, 43 and 77mm, right?).
The Zeiss are amazing: solidly built as any other, so sharp (center to corners), so contrasty, so bright... The color rendition is also superb, they're very neutral. But as the Pentax K1 color rendition already leans towards the "cold" side, using these Zeiss with the K1 will deliver a bit "clinical" colors. Besides, the Pentax/Tamron lens is a bit "warm", so matching it with the "cold" K1 delivers in my opinion the right and perfect color rendition, a little bit more attractive and naturally saturated (just a little bit) than the Zeiss.
ZEISS PLUSES:
The Zeiss are the best ones when it comes to:
- Sharpness (center to corners).
- Contrast.
- Maximum brightness of 2.0.
- Less distorsion.
- Very compact but extremely solid and robust. It's lighter than the Pentax, but denser.
- They are much cheaper than the Pentax 24-70, either used or brand new (although Zeiss does not produce the Pentax "K" mount any more-).
- Materials and build quality: metal (no plastic), highest quality optic glass and coatings, smooth and precise to operate, with minimum tolerances. The whole sensation of QUALITY is absolute.
ZEISS MINUSES:
- Focusing manually with them is a challenge (I only use them with landscape photography: focus to infinite).
- Fixed focal length lenses uaually give the best image quality, but lack the versatility of a zoom.
- The colors, while being excellent, but they are a bit too "clinical" when matching with the already "cold" rendition of the K1, hence the result is just that, a bit "clinical". Possibly these Zeiss are a better match for those cameras with "warm" tones like the Canons, I don't know.
- Some noticeable purple fringing on the corners, but nothing annoying.
PENTAX/TAMRON PLUSES:
- The AF is very practical.
- The versatility of the zoom range (24-70).
- The color rendition of Tamron lenses is a bit "warm" and I don't like them at all when paired with already "warm" cameras like Canon, specially for landscape photography (green color tonalities from vegetation are usualy rendered more brownish and look much "drier" than other brands like Nikon and Pentax for instance, and that's the result of matching a "warm" camera like Canon with a "warm" lens like Tamron). However, when paired with the "cold" K1, the result when it comes to color rendition is a bit more equilibrated and look a little bit more pleasing, maybe one of the best possible matches for the K1, color wise.
- It lacks the purple fringing aberration observed on the Zeiss lenses.
PENTAX/TAMRON MINUSES:
- Noticeably less sharp (specially on the corners) than the Zeiss. And that, when shooting with a high resolution camera, can be a big minus if you are a pixel peeper, unless you never crop, print on big format or never zoom-in the images when viewing them.
- Less contrasty than the Zeiss. In addition to the less sharpness, you will certainly lose textures and details compared to Zeiss. But again, not a major problem if you don't zoom-in or you don't crop or print on big format.
- This lens is "only" 2.8 and the difference of two half stops in brightness with the Zeiss 2.0 starts to be noticeable, specially at the sunsets, etc.
- The distorsion of this lens is much more evident than the Zeiss, specially at wide angle focal lengths.
- Much bulkier and heavier than the Zeiss (and bigger/more expensive filters).
- Extremely pricey for what it is. I paid way over 1000€ for it. For this price I bought TWO Zeiss Distagon lenses which in the end are better (in both: build quality and image quality). It's expensive, it's costy, but it doesn't correspond to its overall quality at all.
- The build quality is also much poorer when compared to any of my Zeiss Distagons: high grade plastic (but plastic), less quality glass (if no policarbonate, what I ignore), as well as not as fine to operate with and with bigger tolerances. I'm not saying its quality is bad by any means, but once you have on your hands the Zeiss Distagons and feel their top build quality (when I say "top" I really mean "TOP"): all metal, real optic glass, the robustness, density, precise focusing ring, the unique Z* coatings... then you realize how "poor" all the other plastic-made lenses are and you easily start to forgive and forget the very few and little/minor flaws the Distagons may have.
SUMMARIZING:
- When visiting cities and doing street photography (focusing short to medium distances, what is a real challenge for the Distagons), you can benefit from Pentax's more practical zoom focal length range and AF, and it's my companion for those occasions.
- When shooting landscapes (focusing mainly to infinite), I do prefer the Zeiss, they are sharper, more contrasty, brighter, with less distorsion and overall better image/build quality.
I'd love to have AF Zeiss lenses for my K1, they would be simply perfect, but they don't exist.
I'd also like to test the Pentax FA 31mm Limited lens (which is the closer equivalent focal length to my 28 and 35mm Distagons) and compare all three side by side, but unfortunately I can't.