Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-29-2017, 06:22 PM   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Spodeworld's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New Joisey
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,370
Why 28 and not 24?

It seems like a 24-105 would have been a more useful range than a 28-105 for the K1. Most manufactureres making a full-frame walk around lens usually start at 24mm as the few additional millimeters make a big difference when you are trying to capture the broad sweep of things. I hear great things about the 28-105 but it seems it would have been a real home run if it went to 24. I know that there are people out there who are perfectly satisfied with it and that's good. But, I have the 16-85 which I use on my crop sensor cams, and I would hate to give up the extra mm at the wide end now that I've been using it for a while.

04-29-2017, 07:13 PM   #2
Pentaxian
Theov39's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Sydney
Posts: 594
True BUT its expensive to get that extra 2mm in FF and perhaps Pentax made the decision on that basis.

You can see this clearly in primes. A typical 24mm f2.8 lens will always be a lot more expensive then a typical 28mm f2.8 lens.

Last edited by Theov39; 04-29-2017 at 07:53 PM.
04-29-2017, 07:15 PM   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,034
Maybe that was due to the 24-70 being produced at near the same time with the F2.8 capability. Duplicating the product at the wide end may not have been desired due to the uniqueness factor the 24-70 was intended to represent.
04-29-2017, 07:55 PM   #4
Pentaxian
Kozlok's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,145
The 24-1xx lenses are $100 lenses, this one was made to a price point half of that. Those 4mm double the lens cost.

04-29-2017, 08:01 PM   #5
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Washington Cascades
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,991
I really, really wanted a 24-105 f/4. Would have paid the $1,000 and been done. But it was not to be. Perhaps someday, but right now I think Pentax cannot just fill out the catalog with lenses that 'everyone' has. They need to make each release count and from a strategic viewpoint they needed both a 24-70 f/2.8 and a relatively inexpensive walk around. So the 24-105 was non-essential with no place in the catalog. Maybe some day.
04-29-2017, 09:35 PM   #6
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 16,394
A decent 28 prime for an SLR like the K28 f3.5 can be kept small (and slow), while a 24 really starts to get problems that can only be corrected by more glass.

04-29-2017, 10:58 PM   #7
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,701
Seems to me that Pentax is either very traditional in its thinking and 28mm is the 'old wide'.
Indeed, 24mm is the new wide nowadays.
A pity that Pentax chose this as the widest on the 28-105.

However, I do think that price/size/complication of design have been taken into consideration too.


Hope a good 24-70mm and/or 24-105 f4 comes about in the near future.


Last edited by pinholecam; 04-29-2017 at 11:19 PM.
04-29-2017, 11:27 PM - 1 Like   #8
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,145
QuoteOriginally posted by Spodeworld Quote
It seems like a 24-105 would have been a more useful range than a 28-105 for the K1.
I agree that 28 isn't wide enough in some cases, although the DFA28-105 is even smaller that a crop lens covering the same range. For the wider end, the DFA24-70 is there for someone not wanting the DFA15-30.
04-30-2017, 12:45 AM   #9
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 16,394
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
I agree that 28 isn't wide enough in some cases, although the DFA28-105 is even smaller that a crop lens covering the same range. For the wider end, the DFA24-70 is there for someone not wanting the DFA15-30.
Yep, Big Boy's lenses to go on a Big Boy's camera.

04-30-2017, 01:37 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,854
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
I agree that 28 isn't wide enough in some cases, although the DFA28-105 is even smaller that a crop lens covering the same range. For the wider end, the DFA24-70 is there for someone not wanting the DFA15-30.
It's about the same as the 17-70 that cover a bit more on the wide end

But I agree with everybody there. The 28-105 is the kit lens for Pentax. The goal was to make it reasonably cheap and small too.

A 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 would need to be bigger and more expensive and a 24-105 f/4 even more!

And well if we compare other brand, there are thing like 28-70 from Sony, that far less useful in my opinion. With 28-105, you can still cover most things while finishing at 70 make you quite limited in reach for things like portraiture or to achieve any perspective compression... 105mm give you something much more comfortable.

And I think that's also the point vs the 24-70... There reasons to have both, really.

So nothing bad for that 28-105... Sure that a 24-105 f/4 or a 24-200 f/3.5-5.6 would be interresting as a 70-300 or also a 15-35 f/3.5-5.6 and a few many other focal range and apperture range to cover different needs, but it will all come in due time.
04-30-2017, 02:01 AM   #11
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,145
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
With 28-105, you can still cover most things while finishing at 70 make you quite limited in reach for things like portraiture or to achieve any perspective compression... 105mm give you something much more comfortable.
28-105 is a landscape lens , basically. It's small and light weight, and anyway for having everything in focus, it is necessary to stop down to f11 - f16 on full frame, so it makes no sense to have an f2.8 lens. The DFA24-70 is more of a general purpose lens that can do landscape, some portraiture and indoor shoots such as small concerts. Actually, having one FF body , a DFA24-70 and DFA150-450 would cover most situations, the other lenses been more for specialized photography. The DFA15-30 typically for archi. The DFA70-200 typically for people and short range sports. That's the way I see it.
04-30-2017, 02:43 AM - 2 Likes   #12
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 16,394
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
28-105 is a landscape lens , basically. It's small and light weight, and anyway for having everything in focus, it is necessary to stop down to f11 - f16 on full frame, so it makes no sense to have an f2.8 lens.
Yep, flash portraiture operates in the f5.6, f8, f11 range so it's fine for this too ....

04-30-2017, 02:46 AM   #13
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,145
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
Yep, flash portraiture operates in the f5.6, f8, f11 range so it's fine for this too ....
Sure. f2.8 may be useful if you want to blur the background, although f5.6 of the 28-105 can do it, but primes such as the FA77, FA85, and the DFA70-200 do it better.
04-30-2017, 03:08 AM   #14
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Planet Earth, Sol system, Milky Way galaxy, Universe
Posts: 1,119
I't not just a question of 24 vs 28mm but also of f/4 vs f/3.5-5.6. Canon has a 24-105/3.5-5.6 too. You just don't hear about it that often because the f/4 is more popular and probably better quality too. But the variable-aperture variant is actually quite cheap.

With regard to Pentax not offering a midrange (in terms of consumer/professional, not in terms of range) fullframe standard zoom, the reason is probably they haven't come around to it. Entry-level fullframe lenses are important, and high-end lenses are too. Midrange can wait. It makes sense from a business point of view, although I agree it does make the Pentax FF offering less appealing.

But yeah, 24mm is way better than 28. Especially if you consider this a landscape lens.
04-30-2017, 03:36 AM   #15
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,145
QuoteOriginally posted by starbase218 Quote
I't not just a question of 24 vs 28mm but also of f/4 vs f/3.5-5.6. Canon has a 24-105/3.5-5.6 too. You just don't hear about it that often because the f/4 is more popular and probably better quality too. But the variable-aperture variant is actually quite cheap.
I understand your point of view from not having used a DFA28-105. From specs, yes you are right.
Now, once again Pentax does unconventional things; with the 28-105 is weird product: 1) it's sharper than the 24-70 2.8. / 2) It's way smaller than any 24-something / 3) It's faster to focus / 3) But higher priced than a kit lens.
It's not comparable.
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!
24-70mm, 28mm, 77mm, and/or, consideration, da, dfa, f/4, f2.8, f4, fa, ff, filters, future, hope, k-mount, k1, landscapes, lens, lenses, pentax, pentax lens, pentax-a, pity, reach, slr lens, wildlife
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pntax 24-90, 28-105, 100-300/4.7..., Tamron 28-300, Sigma 70-300...and new 15-30 jeffreybehr Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 10-19-2016 04:26 AM
Not one, not two, not three, not four, but a wedding where half attendees are bob. LeDave Photographic Industry and Professionals 12 05-16-2016 03:40 AM
What different between SMC K 24/2.8, SMC K 24/3.5 and Takumar SMC 24/3.5 mdmitriy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 07-18-2009 02:02 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:16 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