[Wild Mark]

Haha, I know. Just didn´t want to sound rude!

thanks, that´s the spirit! I look forward to round 2! (I´ll have to go out myself, as I said, I don´t use it much. I got it at the same time as the DA15)

You´ll have to explain that one to me. I won´t lie, it was just a snapshot! And thanks to SR... 1/3 of a second at f/5.6

The rules of composition, which I am only just starting to understand myself as a novice, are important in producing an image. Balance and harmony are critical and it is these elements that set aside nice stuff in an image (e.g. how good is that lens) and a nice shot (e.f. wow that shot is evocative).

Rules include:

Golden spiral
Golden ratio
Diagonals
Rule of thirds
Triangles
Grid
Leading lines



The post in your images looks like the origin of a golden spiral. It might be slightly off and putting into PS with the cropping tools switched on you might be able to adjust the image to suit that rule. The pavement and wharf edge represent leading lines, drawing your eye to the ship. Other features int he image also seem well connected. This is the sort of stuff you try to include in an image to make it better than a point and shoot exercise.

When I learned of these rules it totally changed the way I looked at shooting. I now look for these elements while composing, hence I am natively cropping using the lens I have selected. Challenging and when you get it right very rewarding.

Does that make sense?

[tromboads]

# grumbles at those who snagged a 24mm Super tak cheaply..

[Wild Mark]

haha, not sure how this will help, but I like it. Your image is nice but all I can see is nice contrast and colors. Do you have a more challenging subject?
While filtering images taken with DA21 I realized I tend to use the 15mm instead... Here´s a not so nice DA21 photo but good sample of starbusts, flare, LoCA, edge sharpness. I just cropped out some boring black sky from the top so you can see the side and bottom edges.

I have had very little material to work with over the last few days. Perhaps my best pick of the photos taken today with the FA20mm

[lesmore49]

I have the Pentax 12-24 and the 21mm. Both excellent. The 12-24 is pricey....but when using it for vintage car photography....hard to beat.

[rrstuff]

Your choices will probably come down to a 12-24, DA15 and a sigma 10-20 F4-5.6 for general landscapes.
Less obvious alternatives will be rokinon 14mm F2.8, DA14 and sigma 10-20 F/3.5.

I own 10-20 F4-5.6. It is a good lens, built quality is excellent and it is inexpensive, but it has an annoying color cast. It causes me to use it less. In retrospect, I would probably DA15 and a 12-24 together, but these are much more expensive and sigma can do their job, just with more post-processing effort.

---------- Post added 05-07-14 at 12:52 PM ----------

btw. Don't be worried about primes vs zoom. Zooms do have more flexibility, but it is less important than you would think in real life. You can always crop a little, or change your angle. If anything, I found it to easier to shoot without having to select a focal length.

Most good shots of landscapes are done at around 20-24mm full-frame focal length which makes a DA 15, or even 16-45mm very good choices: http://i.imgur.com/XdtT3qr.png
source: reddit: A fun look at the 500px "Popular" photos (part 2) - Exposure Triangle : photography

[y0chang]

Pentax DA 12-24 f4.0 | Lens Reviews | The Northcoast Photographer

This guy pretty much single handedly convinced me that the 12-24 was worth the moolah. He also has good reviews of the 15mm and 16-45. When I found one used for 629 at B&H, I jumped on it and I have no regrets. I got the sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 but I was disappointed in the results. Maybe I got a bad copy, but the edges were poorly resolved and this was shot at f8 at reasonable shutter speeds. Even if I got a perfectly sharp copy, there are other issues that isn't just about QC. One, the color are 'off', even the 18-55 kit lens has better colors than the sigma. Northcoast mentions this in his article. Two, the sigma has significant mustache distortion, this leads to a weird focus zone where the edges and center are sharp but the middle ring is slightly off. Minor focusing errors can be very bad on a ultra wide because you can not see the lens misfocused in your viewfinder, but will see it once you get back to your computer. Also mustache distortion needs to be corrected with advanced optical correction to truly straighten out the lines. Finally, the sigma is weaker wide open and weaker at its long range. The pentax 12-24 while its not perfect, its great wide open (so awesome wide open, that I was taking nighttime city shots handheld thanks to combining 12mm focal length with SR), and its a well-behaved lens through out the zoom range (which means you can use any focal length of the lens to compose your shots, what is the point of a zoom otherwise?). The SMC coating of course gives the lens supremely wonderful colors. The only weakness of the 12-24 is controlling flare. When you get flare you get nasty polygonal flare that can ruin a shot rather than a controlled flare that can be worked on in post.

That being said, any focal length is good for landscape photography, not just wide angles. Good landscape photography is seeing a vision, picking a good composition, and processing your shot to match that vision. Just because you can include everything in your field of view, doesn't mean that you should. I would recommend the 16-45mm if you are starting out, its wide enough to give you a taste of wide compositions, but long enough be flexible. Also the 16-45 has excellent flare control, great corner to corner resolution.

This was taken with the 12-24.



This with the 16-45mm

[zyxwv]

Pentax DA 12-24 f4.0 | Lens Reviews | The Northcoast Photographer

This guy pretty much single handedly convinced me that the 12-24 was worth the moolah. He also has good reviews of the 15mm and 16-45. When I found one used for 629 at B&H, I jumped on it and I have no regrets. I got the sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 but I was disappointed in the results. Maybe I got a bad copy, but the edges were poorly resolved and this was shot at f8 at reasonable shutter speeds. Even if I got a perfectly sharp copy, there are other issues that isn't just about QC. One, the color are 'off', even the 18-55 kit lens has better colors than the sigma. Northcoast mentions this in his article. Two, the sigma has significant mustache distortion, this leads to a weird focus zone where the edges and center are sharp but the middle ring is slightly off. Minor focusing errors can be very bad on a ultra wide because you can not see the lens misfocused in your viewfinder, but will see it once you get back to your computer. Also mustache distortion needs to be corrected with advanced optical correction to truly straighten out the lines. Finally, the sigma is weaker wide open and weaker at its long range. The pentax 12-24 while its not perfect, its great wide open (so awesome wide open, that I was taking nighttime city shots handheld thanks to combining 12mm focal length with SR), and its a well-behaved lens through out the zoom range (which means you can use any focal length of the lens to compose your shots, what is the point of a zoom otherwise?). The SMC coating of course gives the lens supremely wonderful colors. The only weakness of the 12-24 is controlling flare. When you get flare you get nasty polygonal flare that can ruin a shot rather than a controlled flare that can be worked on in post.

That being said, any focal length is good for landscape photography, not just wide angles. Good landscape photography is seeing a vision, picking a good composition, and processing your shot to match that vision. Just because you can include everything in your field of view, doesn't mean that you should. I would recommend the 16-45mm if you are starting out, its wide enough to give you a taste of wide compositions, but long enough be flexible. Also the 16-45 has excellent flare control, great corner to corner resolution.

This was taken with the 12-24.



This with the 16-45mm

Such great advice, and love that top picture of Triple Falls I went there last year such a wonderful spot going to have to plan a new trip there when I get my new gear :-)

[peterjcb]

New to Pentax and unfamiliar just trying to get a feel of a good landscape lens to buy I was researching the 14mm f/2.8 but thinking it might be too wide I dunno

Thanks,
Mick

If you don't mind the size I'd recommend the DA12-24. It is super sharp (I would put it up against a prime anyday) and has great range for a super wide...although it's kind of big especially with the hood on. If size is not an issue I would highly recommend it.
The 16-45 is also excellent but not as sharp as the 12-24 but a lot more reasonable in price and still produces excellent images.
...and last but not least is the DA15....an excellent landscape lens IMO....very compact and very sharp! It is a lot of fun to use because of it's size and you might have trouble taking it off your camera.
I have to warn you though once you get hooked on the LBA it's hard to quit.....

PS....nice shots y0chang!

a couple with the 12-24







a few with the DA 15...with it's signature starburst !

[Wheatridger]

There is also the Pentax 12-24mm f/4 ED ASPH and the DA 15mm f/4 ASPH - both lenses have their pros and cons.




Though I would keep an eye out for the Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 - It has been discontinued but if you can find a copy of it in K mount and it performs well enough keep it.

(Ahem)-- I have one for sale here right now.

[GateCityRadio]

look into the sigma 10-20. The thread in the lens club section has several great pictures from it.

[Wild Mark]

OK it is not a wide angle on a crop sensor but traditionally it is so here it is

[Wild Mark]

haha, not sure how this will help, but I like it. Your image is nice but all I can see is nice contrast and colors. Do you have a more challenging subject?
While filtering images taken with DA21 I realized I tend to use the 15mm instead... Here´s a not so nice DA21 photo but good sample of starbusts, flare, LoCA, edge sharpness. I just cropped out some boring black sky from the top so you can see the side and bottom edges.

I took the plunge the other day on a zoom - Sigma 8-16mm to good a price to ignore

[y0chang]

Oh you got the 8-16. Grats have fun. That is a top rated lens. Only reason I didn't consider it is because it can't be filtered easily.

[Wild Mark]

Oh you got the 8-16. Grats have fun. That is a top rated lens. Only reason I didn't consider it is because it can't be filtered easily.

Nice lens. Sharpness OK but then again I am used to macro type sharpness. Colours are a little different to all my SMC Pentax primes. I might take a little getting used too.

Here is another very fine lens that will bloom brightly when FF finally comes.

[tromboads]

Ah main beach Newcastle.

The amount of altercations I have had with life saving desperado's trying to tell me where the rips are. geeees I tell ya :P You do have a lot of different coloured street laps to correct for. And I do miss that artificial yellow warm green glow the whole foreshore had.

You are making me home sick!