Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-15-2014, 11:56 AM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 12,273
Get the Pentax 12-24 fixed. I recall a Popular Photography review saying that it was the best of the bunch of wide angles.

I have one and have it used it extensively over about 4 years. Wonderful quality. Some of my pics with this high quality lens look 3D.

As far as replacing it with a third party lens. I wouldn't. You have the gem right now.

08-15-2014, 03:01 PM - 1 Like   #17
New Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 14
Original Poster
Not really thinking of giving the 12-24 away...

...but repairing it is out of the question, they asked me an arm and a leg, and I can still use it, it's just a bit uncomfortable: prefocus, it doesn't, and reach for the front to pull it back a tad. Here is a pic I took today with the 12-24, seems the fall did not produce any more damage than that.

With the money to repair it I can easily buy the cheaper lenses I mentioned (or add a couple hundreds for the 8-16) and have both. The point is, are they good enough to replace it when I want to travel lighter, for instance? Of course I want to go significantly wider, otherwise there's no point. On the other hand, it would be one more lens to carry around on long trips, when I normally take with me almost all lenses and choose day by day which ones I might need, is it worth it?

If the 8-16 is good enough, then I could couple it to the 17-70 on the other body and I would be covered. Or, if not, and the samyang, being prime, were very good, it would be probably it on one body (most of the pictures I take with the 12-24 are at the wide end anyway) and the 17-70 on the other.

About the 8mm fisheye, I have it, I used it today too, but defishing it I think would somewhat worsen definition and reduce the angle, or am I wrong? Also, how does one defish it, I read it has a different projection from all other fisheyes,, doesn't it mean the tools that work with normal fisheyes wouldn't work?
Attached Images
     

Last edited by subfly; 11-25-2014 at 04:39 PM.
08-17-2014, 01:56 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Detroit MI, USA
Posts: 508
QuoteOriginally posted by subfly Quote
I am in a pickle currently on ultrawides. The 12-24 i own fell to the ground and took up a certain slack, which means it works but sometimes I have to push it back otherwise it does not reach infinity focus.

I am now in doubt whether to keep it and buy the Samyang 10mm or the Sigma 8-16mm to go wider, or replace it altogether with the Sigma 8-16 or the 10-20 f3.5.

Any first hand experience? I am first of all interested in resolution as some other defects can be corrected, bad resolution not.
You won't be sorry with the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX lens. Some reviews, really most regard it highly. And the PopPhoto review picked the Sigma because for the money, just get it at its current price a Sigma EX lens! Its a no brainer if funds are limited as in the case with most of us.
08-17-2014, 04:18 PM   #19
New Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 14
Original Poster
Thanks, but I buy for the long term, so I am looking really for the best, not the best compromise. I had it and it's quite good at 10, but worse than the 12-24 overall, that's why I am looking at the lenses I listed. Looks like nobody has tried the Samyang yet...

08-17-2014, 04:55 PM   #20
Site Supporter
VoiceOfReason's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mishawaka IN area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,124
QuoteOriginally posted by subfly Quote
Thanks, but I buy for the long term, so I am looking really for the best, not the best compromise. I had it and it's quite good at 10, but worse than the 12-24 overall, that's why I am looking at the lenses I listed. Looks like nobody has tried the Samyang yet...
You really will not go wrong at all with the 8-16.
08-18-2014, 04:38 AM   #21
Veteran Member
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,186
QuoteOriginally posted by subfly Quote
Looks like nobody has tried the Samyang yet...
There are sample photos and impressions of Samyang 10mm scattered throughout this thread (especially pages 29 and 30, but feel free to "search thread" for 10mm):
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/137335-samyang-lens-club-30.html

PentaxForums has the first impressions and in-depth review:
Samyang 10mm F2.8 Ultra-Wide Lens First Impressions - Review News
Samyang 10mm F2.8 ED AS NCS CS - Introduction - In-Depth Reviews

And user reviews here:
Samyang 10mm F2.8 ED AS NCS CS Lens Reviews - Samyang Lenses - Pentax Lens Review Database

ePhotozine also has a review:
Samyang 10mm f/2.8 ED AS NCS CS Lens Review
08-18-2014, 05:20 AM   #22
Veteran Member
hoopsontoast's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 861
How much do you use the Ultra-Wide end?
I ask as I really like my DA14, its a very under-rated lens. Extremely well built (solid, metal construction), useful f2.8 wide open and close focus is a nice feature too.
Its about the same size as the DA12-24 but a bit shorter, and about the same weight.
There is also no real noticeable flare, distortion is very well controlled (no barrel distortion) and does pretty good bokeh for a WA Lens.

SMC Pentax-DA 14mm F2.8 ED [IF] Reviews - DA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

08-18-2014, 03:10 PM   #23
New Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 14
Original Poster
I use ultra wide a lot, the majority of the 12-24 pictures are at 12, and I found situations where it's not enough; of course I can take 4 pictures and stitch them together, but for some subjects it does not work.

About the 8-16 (and many Sigma lenses) I read QC is an issue and on such an extreme lens centering is problematic, I definitely have to go and test it… I use pola a lot, and that's another problem
08-19-2014, 06:23 AM   #24
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
TER-OR's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dundee, IL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,699
The 8-16 is a huge lens, too - I can see it potentially getting damaged. That front element is a thing of wonder, though. People definitely look at it with wide eyes.
I've read about some QC issues - decentered elements etc. I don't know if that would keep me from buying one, but I'd get the seller's word on it not being screwed up, just to have accountability. After that, it's yours.
08-19-2014, 06:28 AM   #25
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,694
QuoteOriginally posted by TER-OR Quote
I've read about some QC issues - decentered elements
I went through four of them before I got a copy that was certified by sigma to conform to their QC tolerances.
08-19-2014, 06:49 AM   #26
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
TER-OR's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Dundee, IL
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,699
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
I went through four of them before I got a copy that was certified by sigma to conform to their QC tolerances.
Wow. That's not promising. How has it performed since? I'm wondering whether this is QC or durability.
08-19-2014, 07:05 AM   #27
Site Supporter
VoiceOfReason's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Mishawaka IN area
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,124
Mine has been durable. I bought it used on here and have liked it.
08-19-2014, 07:54 AM   #28
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 11,694
QuoteOriginally posted by TER-OR Quote
That's not promising. How has it performed since? I'm wondering whether this is QC or durability.
Nearly all of them had de-centering issues. Durability is excellent with this zoom lens it is very solid. AF hasn't been much of a problem because I generally use hyperfocal techniques with this lens.
08-19-2014, 09:14 AM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,873
I didn't have decentering problems with my first and only copy of the 8-16.

When I purchased it I compared it to the 10-20 and it wasn't anywhere near close. The 8-16 was infinitely better.
08-19-2014, 11:27 AM   #30
New Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Posts: 14
Original Poster
That's one the things I was afraid of, and I several confirmations here… How do you see that? Different sharpness from one side to the other? Any quick way of checking that in a shop?

How did you get the exchanges and the certification by Sigma?

Last edited by subfly; 08-19-2014 at 02:16 PM.
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!
10mm, 8-16mm, hand, k-mount, pentax 12-24 vs, pentax lens, resolution, samyang, sigma, slr lens, vs samyang
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sigma 10-20 vs. Pentax 12-24 @ Night shemazar Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 09-10-2015 01:47 PM
Pentax 12-24 vs Sigma 10-20 tkindred Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 08-01-2011 08:22 PM
Sigma 8-16mm vs Pentax 12-24: Which one to keep cih Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 27 02-28-2011 10:56 PM
Q:sigma 10-20 vs. pentax 12-24 lomenak Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 06-19-2008 09:02 AM
Pentax 12-24 vs. Sigma 10-20 pentaxkman Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 02-16-2008 10:01 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:15 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