[moshepupkin]

Any recommendations for a wide angle lens? To shoot landscapes and urban pictures mostly.

Preferably one which can be purchased in a Kit (I am going to get K-5 II).

Thanks.

[Deedee]

18mm is wide enough for kit lens. 18-55 and 18-135 both.

It will be roughly 27mm equivalent of 35mm camera.

For something wide - Ultra wide - I am waiting for Samyang 10mm f2.8.

Cheers!

[VoiceOfReason]

The 18-135 is probably the best choice in a kit. For wide angle you're going to have to buy it outside the kit. For a budget I'd say Tamron 10-24, for really wide and good I'd say Sigma 8-16.

[waterfall]

Can't go wrong with DA 15 Ltd or the DA 21 Ltd.

[blackcloudbrew]

Keep in mind that every mm below 24mm gives a slightly different view. For landscapes you can have too wide a lens. If you start with the DA 18-55 and find that 18mm is enough, fine. If not something like the Tamron 10-24 is a great value lens. I prefer my DA 12-24 though. Personally, I never found the kit lens to be wide enough - for me. Now I have a number of ultra wide lenses: 8 fisheye (FE), 10-17FE, 12-24, 14, 15, 16-50, 17FE, 18-55, 19-28FE, 19-35, and 24mm lenses. What's my favorite? Each is different. For landscapes I'm partial to the 12-24, 15, and 16-50 lenses though.

[moshepupkin]

So to summarise I guess you are saying that there is no really such thing as kit with wide angle lens (I have Sigma 17-50 f2.8 and I am looking for a wider lens), right?

[TER-OR]

Yeah, wider than the kit lenses are specialty items. The 16-45 seems pretty wide for the price, but not that much wider than the 18mm.
Look at pricing for the 10-20mm, 12-24 and 8-16 lenses and you'll see.


The fisheye type distortion can be pretty pronounced when using a really wide lens, too, so bear that in mind. That said, at the long end the 10-17 and 8-16 are not super distorted. Both are nice UWA zooms.

[Kayaker-J]

Keep in mind that every mm below 24mm gives a slightly different view. For landscapes you can have too wide a lens. If you start with the DA 18-55 and find that 18mm is enough, fine. If not something like the Tamron 10-24 is a great value lens. I prefer my DA 12-24 though. Personally, I never found the kit lens to be wide enough - for me. Now I have a number of ultra wide lenses: 8 fisheye (FE), 10-17FE, 12-24, 14, 15, 16-50, 17FE, 18-55, 19-28FE, 19-35, and 24mm lenses. What's my favorite? Each is different. For landscapes I'm partial to the 12-24, 15, and 16-50 lenses though.

Ah, I've found the one-man K-mount Landscape Photo Testing Lab! Being new to Pentax (though pretty well informed Pentax-wise at this point, via this site and others) I'd like to ask this: I have the 12-24mm and primes exclusively through the HD DA 70mm/105mm FF-equivalent; except for the little 35-70mm F. More primes (mostly MF) to cover way out to the 600mm equiv., w/ some zoom options, and employing the 2x crop factor of m4/3 as required to keep my best glass up front. So, A.) How do you find the 15mm prime complements the 12-24mm for deliberate landscape work? ...And B.) How is the 16-50mm useful versus primes in this context -- for more than convenience? Thanks for your advice. -- Fred

[Canada_Rockies]

I'm in the DA 12-24 ultra wide camp. The wide angle (not ultra wide) I am used to, and find quite useful is 16mm on APS-C, 24mm on 24x36. That puts the DA 16-45 in the ball park. 16 is actually quite a bit wider than 18mm. It's a percentage thing. 12 mm is 99 degrees, for example. With 10 or 12 or even 14mm, you have to be very careful that the advantage of the super wide doesn't get freaky. For example, aking pictures of a group of people, even at 16mm, you have to be very careful that no one is too close to the edge of the frame. It makes an anorexic look fat.

[j2photos]

18mm was never wide enough for me, it always kept me wanting more. I have the DA 15 LTD and it is amazing.

[Canada_Rockies]

Fred, the advantage of the 12-24 is the variable angle of view. You must work with it to be in the right place and at the right viewing angle on the lens to create the photo you want. I remember a friend who saw me working my MZ-S and FA 24-90 on some water lilies and he commented that he didn't know taking flower pictures could be such good stretching exercises. For me, I don't see much advantage of the 15 prime over the 12-24. The IQ on the 12-24 is very good. My latest sale was a 16x24 gallery wrap taken at 12mm. The client is really pleased.

[j2photos]

Fred, the advantage of the 12-24 is the variable angle of view. You must work with it to be in the right place and at the right viewing angle on the lens to create the photo you want. I remember a friend who saw me working my MZ-S and FA 24-90 on some water lilies and he commented that he didn't know taking flower pictures could be such good stretching exercises. For me, I don't see much advantage of the 15 prime over the 12-24. The IQ on the 12-24 is very good. My latest sale was a 16x24 gallery wrap taken at 12mm. The client is really pleased.

The DA 15 is sharper and less prone to CA.


I ALMOST bought the 12-24 as it can be had from borrowlenses.com for $600

After looking at hundreds upon hundreds of sample shots I chose the 15, but will more than likely scoop up the 12-24 soon enough as it is a fantastic lens.

[fretlessdavis]

You may not necessarily want the widest lens for landscapes. You need to get in real close to get usage out of a super wide angle lens, otherwise your subject will be lost in foreground and sky. 30-35mm equivalent is my favorite for general landscape use (I actually use a Super Tak 35mm on 35mm, a 50mm-- close to 30mm in 35 terms-- on 645, and 135 on 4x5). For digital, a super sharp prime, like the FA 24/2 or DA 21 would be excellent.

For canyoneering and climbing, a 24mm (in 35 terms) lens is my choice, when I'm forced to be in tight.

For an ultrawide lens, I'd recommend a prime in that range. If you're already getting in real close, it's often not harder to get in a tad closer. I had a nice 18-35 zoom for a while for 35mm, and I used it at 35 and 18... almost never in between.

[blackcloudbrew]

Ah, I've found the one-man K-mount Landscape Photo Testing Lab! Being new to Pentax (though pretty well informed Pentax-wise at this point, via this site and others) I'd like to ask this: I have the 12-24mm and primes exclusively through the HD DA 70mm/105mm FF-equivalent; except for the little 35-70mm F. More primes (mostly MF) to cover way out to the 600mm equiv., w/ some zoom options, and employing the 2x crop factor of m4/3 as required to keep my best glass up front. So, A.) How do you find the 15mm prime complements the 12-24mm for deliberate landscape work? ...And B.) How is the 16-50mm useful versus primes in this context -- for more than convenience? Thanks for your advice. -- Fred

YMMV

a) The DA15limited f4 is a well reviewed and much hallowed lens and I can not offer any more than has already been said about this lens other than it comes with magic pixy dust that makes all photos better. Compared to the DA 12-24 f4, there are differences (besides size and focal length). My experience is that the DA 15 is just sharper and deals with contrast better than the 12-24. But the 12-24 is better - for me - at a lot of things like buildings. It's a rectilinear lens and while no t/s lens, works better than the 15. The 12-24 has some occasional distortion issues at 12mm.

b) Well the DA*16-50 is weatherized and that's a big plus. It has the possibility of issues with SDM failure somewhere in it's life (I've had mine since 2009 and it's been to the shop once). But as an f2.8 constant aperture lens with the best coatings and glass Pentax makes, it's just my personal favorite lens for general shooting period, and I have nice primes too. It like all SDM lenses has it's detractors but if I want to go out on a shoot with just 2 lenses in all kinds of weather and conditions and have quality results, the combination of the DA*16-50 f2.8 and the DA*50-135 f2.8 are killer IMHO. I will say that at 16mm's with a CPL on I can get vignetting. Interestingly enough another online friend is considering replacing their 16-50 with the HD 20-40 limited zoom. That experiment is yet to conclude but it's clearly an option.

[sterretje]

The only kits you can buy contain either the 18-55 or the 18-135. I can count the occasions that I wished that I had something wider than 18mm for a Pentax dSLR on one hand.