Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-06-2008, 08:40 AM   #16
RaduA
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by Alfisti Quote
The price of this lens continues to stagger me. Nikon have essentially the same specs for $350.
This kind of responses really baffles me sometimes I mean not "specs" make the picture but the lens itself and until now I am not aware of any professional test to prove what this one can do comparing with competition.
And regarding the Nikon besides that's 18-70 according to photozone's test: Nikkor AF-S 18-70mm f/3.5-4.5 G IF-ED DX - Review / Test Report

- heavy distortion @ 18 mm - 3,5% - for reference DA 16-45 has -2.52% @ 16mm
- MTF is lower @24 mm than DA 16-45 @ 24
- MTF is lower @40 mm - middle range than DA 16-45 @45mm - end range of the zoom!

And this are only the "measurable" values without considering color reproduction, contrast, flare resistance and many others. Even more I suspect this new lens will perform much better when coupled with hi res sensors than older designs and this is important for the K20D owners and essentially future proof.
So, let's first wait for some tests and afterwards asses what's the "value" of this lens shall we? Besides I guess if the price would be outrageous I won't see on daily basis new threads with people who bought it and enjoy it.

Radu

08-06-2008, 08:43 AM   #17
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,614
I have had my 17-70 for nearly two weeks now and haven't found anything I really don't like about it. Though 2.8 would be better, 4.0 is just fine; shooting ISO 200 instead of 100 makes up for it. I have a review posted in the lens review section and after having used it quite a bit more since I posted it I would now rate it closer to 9 rather than the 8 I initially gave it. The only serious comparison test I've done is to test it at 35/5.6 against my Zeiss 35 at f5.6, same subject from a tripod. Side by side I honestly can not tell, without some serious eyebrow scrunching, eye squinting pixel peeping which pic is which. I am sure that wide open, and at the zoom extremes it will be different, but it does tell me that they used some damn good glass in it. So far I have had only one missed-focus picture and no matter what I did I could not get it to focus on that subject but it would focus just fine on anything else at the same distance. I agree with CSoars about the AF speed being quite fast. (and also about the PITA factor of variable aperture)
08-06-2008, 08:47 AM   #18
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,614
QuoteOriginally posted by MissK Quote
Great, now I just wait for some photos! I'm currently leaning towards buying the Tammy 28-75/2.8 but I'd rather buy a Pentax zoom. I'm not really sure yet if I am willing to sacrifice 2.8 for SDM and 4... :S
I had a Tamron 28-75. Great IQ, but unfortunately the only way to achieve it was to manually focus it. Considering the number of reports of similar experiences, I would think twice before playing the 28-75 focus lottery.
08-06-2008, 10:50 AM   #19
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
I have had my 17-70 for nearly two weeks now and haven't found anything I really don't like about it. Though 2.8 would be better, 4.0 is just fine; shooting ISO 200 instead of 100 makes up for it. ...

With the K20D, ISO 200 is almost indistinguishable from ISO 100 with regards to noise - I almost never shoot with ISO 100 anymore, even in good light. The extra shutter speed makes for crisper shots, more keepers. I probably shoot at ISO 800 as often as ISO 100 now.

I really wish I could find the series of shots from this lens that I saw before that really impressed me... it might have been n the other forum. Anyone have a link to some shots?

08-06-2008, 11:00 AM   #20
New Member




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Sweden
Posts: 13
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
With the K20D, ISO 200 is almost indistinguishable from ISO 100 with regards to noise - I almost never shoot with ISO 100 anymore, even in good light. ?
How is it with the K10D. Is the difference between ISO 100 and 200 also indistinguishable?
08-06-2008, 11:04 AM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Outside of Philly
Posts: 1,564
I'm pretty sure that the AF-S VR 70-300mm drops to f/5.6 at the long end. Otherwise that would be an extremely inexpensive stabilized 300mm f/4


QuoteOriginally posted by CSoars Quote
The only constant f/4 nikon has is the AF-S Zoom NIKKOR 70-300mm f/4 for
$549.95
The Canon 300mm f/4 IS goes for more than $1000, and the Sigma 100-300mm f/4 is in that price range as well (perhaps a little less expensive). Nikon also has two 300mm f/4s (one with AF-S, one with screwdrive AF), and I'm pretty sure they are more than $549.95.
08-06-2008, 11:07 AM   #22
Veteran Member
deejjjaaaa's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: steel city / rust belt
Posts: 2,046
QuoteOriginally posted by Alfisti Quote
The price of this lens continues to stagger me. Nikon have essentially the same specs for $350.
wait - K20D in several month were available new @ USD $550-650 w/ rebates and cashback counted in, so be this lens.
08-06-2008, 11:11 AM   #23
Veteran Member
deejjjaaaa's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: steel city / rust belt
Posts: 2,046
QuoteOriginally posted by CSoars Quote
Variable aperture is a PITA when shooting in with flash in manual when you rely on a constant ambient exposure to maintain consistency between shots.
so just keep it fixed @ 4.5 all the way

08-06-2008, 11:13 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Outside of Philly
Posts: 1,564
My thoughts exactly

QuoteOriginally posted by deejjjaaaa Quote
so just keep it fixed @ 4.5 all the way
I pretty much keep my Canon 17-85mm f/4-5.6 @f/5.6 when I'm doing manual flash work. Now that is a lens I wish was f/4 at the long end. Oh well....
08-06-2008, 11:19 AM   #25
Veteran Member
deejjjaaaa's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: steel city / rust belt
Posts: 2,046
QuoteOriginally posted by egordon99 Quote
My thoughts exactly



I pretty much keep my Canon 17-85mm f/4-5.6 @f/5.6 when I'm doing manual flash work. Now that is a lens I wish was f/4 at the long end. Oh well....
I was talking about those lenses that end with "70/4.5"
08-06-2008, 11:24 AM   #26
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Outside of Philly
Posts: 1,564
Yes, but the OP was complaining about the fact that variable aperture lenses messed with manual flash exposures. I was just relaying my experience; the lens just happen to end with 85/5.6 instead

QuoteOriginally posted by deejjjaaaa Quote
so just keep it fixed @ 4.5 all the way
QuoteOriginally posted by deejjjaaaa Quote
I was talking about those lenses that end with "70/4.5"
Hope the OP noticed his misinformation on the mythical $550 NIkon 70-300mm f/4 VR.
08-06-2008, 12:30 PM   #27
Inactive Account




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Edmonton, Canada
Posts: 322
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by egordon99 Quote
I'm pretty sure that the AF-S VR 70-300mm drops to f/5.6 at the long end. Otherwise that would be an extremely inexpensive stabilized 300mm f/4




The Canon 300mm f/4 IS goes for more than $1000, and the Sigma 100-300mm f/4 is in that price range as well (perhaps a little less expensive). Nikon also has two 300mm f/4s (one with AF-S, one with screwdrive AF), and I'm pretty sure they are more than $549.95.
Nikon Canada

open up the zoom lenses tab and take a look. It's actually a typo, because when you click the f/4 link, it comes up as 4.5-5.6. They ran out of room on the text link.
08-06-2008, 01:25 PM   #28
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,614
QuoteOriginally posted by MissK Quote
How is it with the K10D. Is the difference between ISO 100 and 200 also indistinguishable?
I had a K10 prior to my K20 and yes, the difference between 100 and 200 is nearly indistinguishable. If you are looking for increased noise at 200 you will find it, but on a properly exposed photo it is completely unnoticeable if you aren't deliberately looking for it.
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!
aperture, bit, da, da*, focus, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, screw-drive, sdm, slr lens, system, thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
News Pentax Camera Comparisons Adam Site Suggestions and Help 1 11-08-2010 10:54 PM
lens comparisons - what am I missing? WMBP Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 09-08-2009 11:25 PM
Picked up my K-7 today (ISO 1600 image inside) Peter Fang Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 07-08-2009 01:49 PM
K7 Size comparisons sveinmb Pentax News and Rumors 15 05-19-2009 02:25 PM
645D Operational benjikan Pentax Medium Format 2 03-22-2007 07:48 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:05 PM. | 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