[clackers]

If you didn't have the Sigma I'd say sell it and get a cheapo DA16-45. At 16mm this is actually useable at all apertures and there is not a great deal in it as far as field of view goes.

A second hand copy of that would also seem to be a good budget upgrade to the 18-55.

[kh1234567890]

A second hand copy of that would also seem to be a good budget upgrade to the 18-55.

The DA18-55 is a masterpiece of engineering - if you define engineering as the 'Art of Intelligent Compromise'

[clackers]

The DA18-55 is a masterpiece of engineering - if you define engineering as the 'Art of Intelligent Compromise'

Yeah, somebody on the forum thought it was better than the Canikon kit equivalents.

[don_park]

To be clear: the technology to make small and perfect 15mm on K mount or any equivalent mount (Canon, Nikon) doesn't exist. The registration distance is too long compared to the focal length.

So there basically 2 solutions, you'll make a small/light lens like the DA15, this lens will have great constrast, flare resistance and will be light in the bag. The max apperture will be soso and the performance not perfect, for sure. In case of DA15, borders are ok at f/8.

Or you make a much bigger lens with lot of glass. Flare will not be well controlled at all, contrast reduced, but you'll get a large max apperture and more sharpness, in particular on borders. That for example the Samyang 16mm. This kind of lenses are huge.

Last alternative, make it a zoom. You'll get flexibility, something big/heavy but loose basically the large apperture. Example Sigma 8-16.

So the question are what are your priorities.

DA15 handle contra light and flare like no other and has exceptionnal contrast control. It does fantastics shoots in practice, but has limited border sharpness. It is very small/light meaning you can always have it in the bag while a huge UWA zoom/prime will often stay at home.

If you prefer to get something sharper and able to zoom, what I got is that the 8-16 is the sharpest ultra wide angle lens in K-mount. DA12-24 is great, but not as sharp. Good thing of 12-24 is it is still smaller.

For a prime, is size is no concern, I'd think of some Samyang lenses like the 14mm f/2.8 or 16mm f2. They are different so you should choose depending of your priorities.

Now a few DA15 pictures... You can click to zoom...

Until two years ago, I used Nikon D810 and 14-24 Nikkor & 16-35 as my primary system for landscape photography. Being a 63 year old man, I realized that they were too heavy for me to carry. So I sold all of my Nikon gears and bought Leica M240 digital camera and Leica M lenses. Although the Leica system has been producing wonderful images for travel and street photography; however, I had to feel like something was missing. I began studying on secondary system to be added to Leica system. The candidates were Pentax K-3 mk 2, Olympus OM-D EM-1, Olympus OM-D EM-5 mk2. After all I chose Pentax, because its sensor size is bigger than M 4/3 and I became fascinated by the Pentax "Limited" prime lenses. Other than that, the camera body features are mostly indifferentiated from each other. So I bought K-3 mk2, HD DA 15 L and FA 77 L. Upon receiving them, I had Pentax authorized service center calibrate the body and two lenses. Honestly I was quite disappointed with HD DA 15. Unfortunately, I had to find other Pentaxians had similar problems with DA 15. Reluctantly, I had to buy a huge Sigma 18-35 zoom lens to make up for the deficiency of DA 15. And then I posted here asking for advices.

Many Pentaxians provided me so far with valuable advices. I confessed here that my expectation might be unreasonabley high stemming from my past experiences from using Nikon lenses and Leica lenses.

I saw all of your photos posted on flickr. And many of them were taken with DA 15. I couldn't find any soft edges issues from them. Maybe those issues were resolved during post processing. Basically my priority is on the lesser weight and smaller size. I would be willing to take prime lenses although I need to exchange the lenses frequently instead of using a convenient zoom. As of now, I am thinking that I would keep DA 15 and Sigma 18-35 for the time being, and take multiple images to be stitched as a panorama image to solve soft edges issue when I desperately need high quality landscape photos. Hopefully I could take Pixel Shift Resolution images if there would be no wind.

By the way, I saw your images taken with 135 mm lens. Initally, I thought it must be a 50-135 zoom. But you specified it as F135 in your profile. I couldn't find F135 in Pentax lens database. Is it an old Pentax manual lens that I do not know of?

Thanks,

[clackers]

.

I saw all of your photos posted on flickr. And many of them were taken with DA 15. I couldn't find any soft edges issues from them.

Thousands of pics by Pentaxians here, Don:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/122-lens-clubs/86234-15mm-limited-controls-my-mind-club-post874701.html

[Nicolas06]

@don_park

DA15
It would help if you provided a few samples of the softness problem. DA15 is a complex design, being so small and not all are great sample. It may be you got a dud. If you post say 1-2 web size shots with center/border crops at say f/8 that would help understand the issue. We would be able to say to you if the lens a lemon and you should get it serviced or exchanged or if you ask too much.

I can also send you 1 or 2 raws files of your choice: choose 1 picture or 2 on my flick and I'll upload them so you could see for yourself what it is really about. I say that because yes I post process my files, I typically don't touch sharpness myself, but I think DxO normalize it automatically from lens profiles. And sure that depending of what I want to shoot, I add some contrast/micro contrast.


F135 and 135mm lenses
The F135 f/2.8 is an old Pentax prime. You can buy it used, it has AF (very fast one). The lens is able to give very interresting bokeh and portraiture shots. It has purple fringing, in particular wide open. But for an all metal FF lens it is light and small (395g, 68x80mm) taking 52mm filters. Like some ltds, it has the hood included directly inside the lens and you can extract it when needed.

I had the 50-135 before, it make great photos, has far less purple fringing and sharper too. But for me the F135 is sharp enough, and I really prefer overall to get FA77 + F135, have something still smaller/lighter, don't have to take both all of the time and get something far less intrusive. I think the F135 is also better for portraits. The alternative for me if you really need reach would be the 55-300 f/4-5.8. I just got one for my birthday, as I plan to use it for a safari in Tanzania next september. In a few month hopefully I'll be able to provide some comparison.

Many people like the F135, and you can find it used or the same formula, similar performance, I think colapsible hood too in its FA form: FA135 f/2.8. I didn't find it difficult to find. Today for example, there one FA sample for 290$ in Korea from a user with good rep on ebay.

Here the link to the specs of review of both 135mm lens:
F135 f/2.8: SMC Pentax-F 135mm F2.8 [IF] Reviews - F Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
FA135 f/2.8: SMC Pentax-FA 135mm F2.8 [IF] Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

[don_park]

Thousands of pics by Pentaxians here, Don:

The 15mm Limited controls my mind - club - PentaxForums.com

I'll take time to review sample images. Thanks!

---------- Post added 03-27-16 at 07:54 PM ----------

@don_park

DA15
It would help if you provided a few samples of the softness problem. DA15 is a complex design, being so small and not all are great sample. It may be you got a dud. If you post say 1-2 web size shots with center/border crops at say f/8 that would help understand the issue. We would be able to say to you if the lens a lemon and you should get it serviced or exchanged or if you ask too much.

I can also send you 1 or 2 raws files of your choice: choose 1 picture or 2 on my flick and I'll upload them so you could see for yourself what it is really about. I say that because yes I post process my files, I typically don't touch sharpness myself, but I think DxO normalize it automatically from lens profiles. And sure that depending of what I want to shoot, I add some contrast/micro contrast.


F135 and 135mm lenses
The F135 f/2.8 is an old Pentax prime. You can buy it used, it has AF (very fast one). The lens is able to give very interresting bokeh and portraiture shots. It has purple fringing, in particular wide open. But for an all metal FF lens it is light and small (395g, 68x80mm) taking 52mm filters. Like some ltds, it has the hood included directly inside the lens and you can extract it when needed.

I had the 50-135 before, it make great photos, has far less purple fringing and sharper too. But for me the F135 is sharp enough, and I really prefer overall to get FA77 + F135, have something still smaller/lighter, don't have to take both all of the time and get something far less intrusive. I think the F135 is also better for portraits. The alternative for me if you really need reach would be the 55-300 f/4-5.8. I just got one for my birthday, as I plan to use it for a safari in Tanzania next september. In a few month hopefully I'll be able to provide some comparison.

Many people like the F135, and you can find it used or the same formula, similar performance, I think colapsible hood too in its FA form: FA135 f/2.8. I didn't find it difficult to find. Today for example, there one FA sample for 290$ in Korea from a user with good rep on ebay.

Here the link to the specs of review of both 135mm lens:
F135 f/2.8: SMC Pentax-F 135mm F2.8 [IF] Reviews - F Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
FA135 f/2.8: SMC Pentax-FA 135mm F2.8 [IF] Reviews - FA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

I asked Pentax authorized service center to re-calibrate my K-3-2 body with DA 15 Limited. After re-calibration, I see a slight softnesss and light fall-off only at the corners. I think my agony has gone now.
And regarding 135mm lens, I will re-consider my lens portfolio strategy whether I need to add an another telephoto lens to my current FA77.

Many thanks to all of the kind supports & advices so far.

[clackers]

I asked Pentax authorized service center to re-calibrate my K-3-2 body with DA 15 Limited. After re-calibration, I see a slight softnesss and light fall-off only at the corners.

You won't get it any better than that. It's an incredibly small UWA (49mm filter thread).

I also have a Samyang 14mm f2.8 which is sharp edge to edge because it's got a massive amount of glass in it. Too big to put on a screw-in filter, even.

Which prime goes into the bag for me depends on the convenience versus quality tradeoff.

[Siegfried]

Do I need to consider selling my new HD DA 15 for smc DA 12-24 for better lens performance?

Don,
if you consider the lens performance to be mostly of sharpness/acuteness type of thing, then yes, you'd better sell your HD15 and get a brand new (or even good used copy of) DA12-24.

Zig

[Digitalis]

The 15mm limited is "famous" for soft edges.

Yes, in some cases the corners can be soft at f/4 but the DA15 puts in a respectable performance when stopped down - the DA15 isn't as bad as a lensbaby.

[infoomatic]

I fully understand you. I have a hate-love relationship with my SMC DA 15mm ltd (had several copies and none of them was really sharp - using them between f/8 and f/11). On the one hand, I simply love the colors, microcontrast, size, flare-resistance, stars of the lens. On the other hand, when I view them on monitor and think "oh wow, thats really a great shot, it's worth for an A3 print" the result is simply not as sharp as I wish. Since I will buy the K-1 I really hope we get an "upgraded" little larger FF lens with an equivalent focal length. However, I don't expect this lens to be marketed before 2018, so I am thinking about getting a Zeiss Distagon 21mm for Nikon mount and buy a MultiMount adaptor. The DFA 15-30 also seems to be a nice lens, but since most of my the time I use the ultra-wideangle lenses I am travelling/hiking I don't want to carry more than 2kg for just one cam + one lens. (and the Zeiss lens is not that much lighter than the DFA 15-30), I wish we'd get one below 400grams soon. My FA 31mm is my reference concerning sharpness for a landscape lens.

[clackers]

since most of my the time I use the ultra-wideangle lenses I am travelling/hiking I don't want to carry more than 2kg for just one cam + one lens. (and the Zeiss lens is not that much lighter than the DFA 15-30), I wish we'd get one below 400grams soon.

UWA + sharp edge to edge = a lot of glass, though, Infoomatic. No avoiding it.

That's why on APS-C Pentax offer both the DA15 and DA14. Pick between convenience and optical correction.

It'll be worse if you go FF of course - the image circle has to be larger. That FA31 is of course the heaviest Limited ever made, and 31mm is not real wide.

[Digitalis]

That FA31 is of course the heaviest Limited ever made, and 31mm is not real wide.

You don't need absurdly wide lenses to do landscape photography, in fact: they can be a hindrance as they can make it difficult to create a strong composition. A vast majority of classic Landscape images in the past were shot at focal lengths between 28mm and 90mm, but that is by no means a hard and fast rule: I have used 600mm lenses for landscape work before.

[infoomatic]

You don't need absurdly wide lenses to do landscape photography, in fact: they can be a hindrance as they can make it difficult to create a strong composition. A vast majority of classic Landscape images in the past were shot at focal lengths between 28mm and 90mm, but that is by no means a hard and fast rule: I have used 600mm lenses for landscape work before.

yep, I shoot most of my landscape with 31 or 50mm ... rarely with 24mm or 20mm (in FF terms) but there are sometimes just those incredible situations where I want it wiiiiide (for my taste, I don't like it wider than 18mm, but sometimes wider than 24mm).

[Nicolas06]

I fully understand you. I have a hate-love relationship with my SMC DA 15mm ltd (had several copies and none of them was really sharp - using them between f/8 and f/11). On the one hand, I simply love the colors, microcontrast, size, flare-resistance, stars of the lens. On the other hand, when I view them on monitor and think "oh wow, thats really a great shot, it's worth for an A3 print" the result is simply not as sharp as I wish. Since I will buy the K-1 I really hope we get an "upgraded" little larger FF lens with an equivalent focal length. However, I don't expect this lens to be marketed before 2018, so I am thinking about getting a Zeiss Distagon 21mm for Nikon mount and buy a MultiMount adaptor. The DFA 15-30 also seems to be a nice lens, but since most of my the time I use the ultra-wideangle lenses I am travelling/hiking I don't want to carry more than 2kg for just one cam + one lens. (and the Zeiss lens is not that much lighter than the DFA 15-30), I wish we'd get one below 400grams soon. My FA 31mm is my reference concerning sharpness for a landscape lens.

Sorry to say that but the simplest solution to keep the bag light when travelling is to use a smaller format camera and the associated lenses Pentax APSC body are a bit on the heavy side but the lenses are really small and light. (FA, DA ltds). This is what I do. If you want even lighter, there m4/3.

What FF really bring to you that make sense for vacations in particular if you want to keep a light pack? APSC 24MP is enough for most uses (you can print A0 if the lens follow), there some very sharp lenses, there more reach for wildlife so to me it is mostly about ultimate shallow dof and low light performance... Are theses thing the priority for your vacations?

Problem if if you want something better than DA15 sharpness wise it will be heavy and big, there no ways arround that if you don't go for a mirroless with a short registration distance. And if you do that, your tele will become larger/heavier...