[interested_observer]

The two lenses complement each other. The focal lengths are meaningless in that one is a fisheye and the other a normal (rectilinear) lens. The really only common basis of comparison is through the angle of view. The 10-17 has a angle of view of 180 to 100 degrees, while the 12-24 has an angle of view from 99 to 60 degrees. The normal lens, since it is so wide, actually pulls (stretches) the view to keep lines straight, which can be seen in the clouds of UWA images. The fisheye, when used properly actually is a very good landscape lens. It does not have to pull the view at all.

The main difference when compared is that with the fisheye when taking images of say buildings, you will see the bend or barrel distortion. However with natural settings, with out a lot of straight lines, it can be difficult to tell the difference (if the fisheye is shot level and straight on). Here are some examples...

• https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/235102-uwa-...omparison.html

[Doundounba]

The fisheye, when used properly actually is a very good landscape lens. It does not have to pull the view at all.

Uh oh... LBA starting to itch now...

[SpecialK]

Greetings,

Silly question, to which I'm unable to provide an answer all by my lonesome : is it incoherent to own both the DA 12-24 and the DA 10-17 fisheye?

I had both. They are different. The 12-24 is excellent.

[seventysixersfan]

Dammit, you guys are making me want to get a 10-17 fisheye zoom even though I'm perfectly happy with my Tamron 10-24. Looks like they might complement each other well...

[hoopsontoast]

I had a DA14 as my only UWA, and sold it to fund another hobby, I replaced it with a DA10-17 as an impulse purchase and I really like it. I am still looking to add a 12-24mm for Landscape/Long Exposures (takes filters) but since the 10-17 arrived, its much further down the LBA list. So much so I am looking for a FA*24mm to go with first, then see if I 'really' need the 12-24.

The 10-17 is super sharp, if you don't mind the fisheye distortion, the colours and contrast are amazing. Also, the best lens I have used for consistant exposure (only had it a few weeks though).

I love the lack of flare too:

[Davidparis]

I had both. They are different. The 12-24 is excellent.

Thanks for the pic comparison. I ordered a 12-24 and will test it on vacation...

---------- Post added 06-24-2015 at 01:38 PM ----------

I had both. They are different. The 12-24 is excellent.

Thanks for the shots. Have just ordered the 12-24.