Full Frame Wide Angle Lens List--20mm and Under

TTQ225 · 09-14-2017, 12:41 AM

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

Originally posted by alamo5000

I am (like a lot of people) interested in wide angle lenses for the K-1. Specifically by the definition of how I am using the word, this means 20mm and under. I also DO NOT want to include lenses that are designed for crop sensors but 'may work' on a FF camera.

I am specifically looking for lenses designed to be used on FF. Hopefully we can get some participation here so we can build up this list.

The only two AF lenses that I know of are the:

FA20mm
15-30mm zoom

As far as I know everything else is all MF.

There are Bowers, Samyang, Irix, but I don't know any others or even the specifics of the lenses out there. Any help would be appreciated. I see this as an ongoing project and I am pretty sure I am not the only one interested in this subject.

I just bought used Sigma 15mm 2.8 DG EX. It's diagonal full frame fish eye and works perfectly on my K-1. By applying this lens's profile in Lightroom CC, the fish eye effect can be completely eliminated. This is currently manufactured lens available new in many mounts at USD$609. It has excellent reviews in many forums. I shot two dozen images yesterday, ran them through LR CC and I love the results.

lpfonseca · 09-15-2017, 09:07 AM

What about the Tamron 17-35/2-8-4 Di?
I don't know if you can find it new but show up used now and then.
I havent tried mine with film (and don't have the K-1... yet!) but works fine with my K-5.
Regards,
Luis

angerdan · 09-15-2017, 09:31 AM - **2 Likes**

So lets collect all AF options below 20mm:

Pentax DA 12-24mm 4.0 (well usable on FF between 17-24mm)
Pentax D FA 15-30mm 2,8
Pentax FA J 18-35mm 4-5.6
Pentax FA 20mm 2.8
Pentax FA 20-35mm 4.0
Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6
Sigma 14mm 2.8
Sigma 15-30mm 3.5-4.5
Sigma 17-35 2.8-4.0
Sigma 20mm 1.8
Sigma 20-40mm 2.8
Tamron 14mm 2.8
Tokina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5
Tokina 20-35mm 2.8
Tokina 20-35mm 3.5-4.5

Available are some of them on eBay (you have to copy/paste the search parameters):
Pentax (12,14,15,17,20) (14,24,30,35,40) (FA,sigma,tamron,tokina) -(50,55,70,80,135,200,300,DC)

Sorted by the user rated sharpness in the lens database:

9,8..Sigma 20-40mm 2.8
9,7..Tokina 20-35mm 2.8
9,5..FA 20mm 2.8
9,4..HD D FA 15-30mm F2.8
9,3..FA 20-35mm 4.0
9,2..DA 12-24mm 4.0
9.....Tamron 14mm F2.8
9.....Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6
9.....Tokina 20-35mm 3.5-4.5
8,8..Sigma 15-30mm 3.5-4.5
8,7..Tokina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5
8.....Sigma 20mm 1.8
7.6..Pentax FA J 18-35mm 4-5.6
6,5..Sigma 17-35 2.8-4.0
5,5..Sigma 14mm 2.8

**mikesbike** · 09-15-2017, 10:31 AM

The 2nd and better version of the Tokina 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 (actually tested as 19mm) has a 77mm filter size, while the earlier one was 72mm and had some excessive vignetting problems. Good metal construction and very good sharpness. The less expensive Tokina 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5 is plastic but well-built, and likewise with a 77mm filter size, and received excellent test reviews (probably the same glass as the metal version). I have both and have enjoyed fine results from them. There was also a Tokina pro model, a 20-35mm f/2.8, having a 77mm filter size and a much heavier body, which had good user reviews.

Bophoto · 09-15-2017, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by photoptimist

Your concern is not misplaced.

Like clackers, I have the Sigma 12-24 which I bought 9 years ago for the K-10D, also used on the K-5, and really really enjoyed on APS-C. Now, on the K-1, 12 mm is insanely wide which makes it very special but also limits it's use. As clackers said, it does create drama -- my wife just about divorced me when she saw herself in the corner of one of the 12 mm photos! UWA really stretches people and circles at the edges and corners.

I'm sure you'd use the 20 mm more. Yet even if a crazy-wide lens gets less use, the results can be more powerful. A focal length like 11 to 14 mm on FF is a very cool for architecture (cathedrals, ceilings, facades) and landscapes (zenith shots of tree canopies, sweeping mountain vistas, long-views across flower-strewn meadows). And the extreme distortion can be useful for abstracts and crazy compositions. I still keep the Sigma 12-24 in my bag.

Overall, I'd definitely get the 20 mm for everyday WA but do think about something wider because UWA can be a real photographic challenge that can be really rewarding. Also, you can always crop a UWA image down to WA but unless you like the labor of panoramas, it's much harder to create a UWA image with just a WA lens.

Enjoy!

I think your wife like a shot from a fisheye better.

normhead · 09-15-2017, 11:54 AM

I have my FA-J 18-35, which is far from stellar, but it's passable since all my images are only seen at reduced sizes.

I just like my 28-105 so much, I think I'll hang in until there's a 14-28 variable aperture or ƒ4 constant. It might be years, but hey, I never really believed they would ever do a full frame either.

awscreo · 09-15-2017, 12:13 PM

Beware of the Tokina 20-35 3.5-4.5, my copy was decentered (not mentioned in the ebay description, was described as near-mint). I really liked the lens overall, if I had a good copy that'd probably be the best budget uwa zoom.

danielchtong · 09-15-2017, 02:32 PM

Originally posted by angerdan

So lets collect all AF options below 20mm:

Pentax DA 12-24mm 4.0 (well usable on FF between 17-24mm)
Pentax D FA 15-30mm 2,8
Pentax FA 20mm 2.8
Pentax FA 20-35mm 4.0
Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6
Sigma 14mm 2.8
Sigma 15-30mm 3.5-4.5
Sigma 17-35 2.8-4.0
Sigma 20mm 1.8
Sigma 20-40mm 2.8
Tamron 14mm 2.8
Tokina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5
Tokina 20-35mm 2.8
Tokina 20-35mm 3.5-4.5

I suppose you are aware of the fact that all under 20mm lens have huge depth of field and AF is just not necessary .
I always do zone focusing with fisheyes. If you set things around 8 feet away, practically everything will be in focus (foreground and background). Why would you need AF?
There are zillion fish eyes and wide angle lenses (manual focus). And they are a lot cheaper indeed.

angerdan · 09-15-2017, 02:43 PM

Hyperfocal Distance for 20mm f2.8 is 4,73m. So in case your subject is close to the lens or moving, AF makes sense.
For setting the distance you would have to take your eye back from the viewfinder and look at the lens barrel.

danielchtong · 09-15-2017, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by angerdan

Hyperfocal Distance for 20mm f2.8 is 4,73m. So in case your subject is close to the lens or moving, AF makes sense.
For setting the distance you would have to take your eye back from the viewfinder and look at the lens barrel.

Okei. And I take 20mm as an example (I have 16mm only) . If I do landscape (most of the time) and I set my distance to around 15 ft away, practically the lens does not need any focusing at all. Typically landscape would not have subject too close at all.

awscreo · 09-15-2017, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by danielchtong

Okei. And I take 20mm as an example (I have 16mm only) . If I do landscape (most of the time) and I set my distance to around 15 ft away, practically the lens does not need any focusing at all. Typically landscape would not have subject too close at all.

Isn't this completely subjective and up to personal preference? It's like arguing what color is the best..

normhead · 09-15-2017, 05:12 PM

Originally posted by angerdan

So lets collect all AF options below 20mm:

Pentax DA 12-24mm 4.0 (well usable on FF between 17-24mm)
Pentax D FA 15-30mm 2,8
Pentax FA 20mm 2.8
Pentax FA 20-35mm 4.0
Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6
Sigma 14mm 2.8
Sigma 15-30mm 3.5-4.5
Sigma 17-35 2.8-4.0
Sigma 20mm 1.8
Sigma 20-40mm 2.8
Tamron 14mm 2.8
Tokina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5
Tokina 20-35mm 2.8
Tokina 20-35mm 3.5-4.5

Available are some of them on eBay (you have to copy/paste the search parameters):
Pentax (12,14,15,17,20) (14,24,30,35,40) (FA,sigma,tamron,tokina) -(50,55,70,80,135,200,300,DC)

Sorted by the user rated sharpness in the lens database:

9,8..Sigma 20-40mm 2.8
9,7..Tokina 20-35mm 2.8
9,5..FA 20mm 2.8
9,4..HD D FA 15-30mm F2.8
9,3..FA 20-35mm 4.0
9,2..DA 12-24mm 4.0
9.....Tamron 14mm F2.8
9.....Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6
9.....Tokina 20-35mm 3.5-4.5
8,8..Sigma 15-30mm 3.5-4.5
8,7..Tokina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5
8.....Sigma 20mm 1.8
6,5..Sigma 17-35 2.8-4.0
5,5..Sigma 14mm 2.8

FA-J 18-35 F4-5.6 rated 7.72
SMC Pentax-FA J 18-35mm F4-5.6 Reviews - FA J Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

**Scorpio71GR** · 09-15-2017, 07:32 PM - **5 Likes**

The Sigma 12-24 is just crazy wide on FF at 12mm. 12mm on FF is totally unforgiving for poor composition. In my opinion a tripod is really best, of course that is not always possible. I can not justify the cost of the DFA15-30 so I went for the Sigma.

You are going to have so e work in post cleaning up the distortion.
Sigma 12-24@12mm on the K-1.

Sometimes the border stretching can be used to an advantage.

I recently aquired a Tokina 20-35 Verizon 1. This is the version with a 72mm filter thread. After some overall testing I am happy with it.
Tokina 20-35@20mm on the K-1.

The new Iris 15mm seems to be a nice FF option but I have seen some really bad copies from both versions.

danielchtong · 09-16-2017, 04:53 AM

Originally posted by awscreo

Isn't this completely subjective and up to personal preference? It's like arguing what color is the best..

I am saying that manual focus with wide angle lenses is super easy given its huge depth of field. That has nothing to do with subjective preference.
And as a result of that, buying MF fisheye /UWA lens make sense money wise. I am suggesting that AF function is redundant in majority of the cases

**Scorpio71GR** · 09-16-2017, 05:25 AM

Originally posted by danielchtong

I am saying that manual focus with wide angle lenses is super easy given its huge depth of field. That has nothing to do with subjective preference.
And as a result of that, buying MF fisheye /UWA lens make sense money wise. I am suggesting that AF function is redundant in majority of the cases

I agree here. AF on my Sigma 8-16 is essentially unnecessary unless shooting indoors. For landscapes almost everything is at infinity.

09-15-2017, 09:31 AM - 2 Likes	#33
angerdan Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,642	all AF options below 20mm So lets collect all AF options below 20mm: Pentax DA 12-24mm 4.0 (well usable on FF between 17-24mm) Pentax D FA 15-30mm 2,8 Pentax FA J 18-35mm 4-5.6 Pentax FA 20mm 2.8 Pentax FA 20-35mm 4.0 Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 Sigma 14mm 2.8 Sigma 15-30mm 3.5-4.5 Sigma 17-35 2.8-4.0 Sigma 20mm 1.8 Sigma 20-40mm 2.8 Tamron 14mm 2.8 Tokina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5 Tokina 20-35mm 2.8 Tokina 20-35mm 3.5-4.5 Available are some of them on eBay (you have to copy/paste the search parameters): Pentax (12,14,15,17,20) (14,24,30,35,40) (FA,sigma,tamron,tokina) -(50,55,70,80,135,200,300,DC) Sorted by the user rated sharpness in the lens database: 9,8..Sigma 20-40mm 2.8 9,7..Tokina 20-35mm 2.8 9,5..FA 20mm 2.8 9,4..HD D FA 15-30mm F2.8 9,3..FA 20-35mm 4.0 9,2..DA 12-24mm 4.0 9.....Tamron 14mm F2.8 9.....Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 9.....Tokina 20-35mm 3.5-4.5 8,8..Sigma 15-30mm 3.5-4.5 8,7..Tokina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5 8.....Sigma 20mm 1.8 7.6..Pentax FA J 18-35mm 4-5.6 6,5..Sigma 17-35 2.8-4.0 5,5..Sigma 14mm 2.8 Last edited by angerdan; 09-15-2017 at 11:41 PM. Reason: + Tokina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5; Pentax FA J 18-35mm 4-5.6

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Some questions about buying sony full frame + adapters + pentax full frame lens	jhlxxx	Pentax Full Frame	7	06-14-2017 05:13 PM
For Sale - Sold: Two wide angle full frame Pentax lenses	redrockcoulee	Sold Items	18	11-22-2016 12:39 PM
Wide angle advantage of full frame.	Timd	Pentax Full Frame	44	08-05-2016 04:29 PM
From Full-Frame Sony... to Pentax... to Full-Frame Canon	Mr_Canuck	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	42	01-21-2014 12:50 AM
Full Frame Full Frame	vanchaz2002	Pentax DSLR Discussion	30	12-11-2008 07:09 AM

09-14-2017, 12:41 AM	#31
TTQ225 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Vancouver, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 80	Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here. Originally posted by alamo5000 I am (like a lot of people) interested in wide angle lenses for the K-1. Specifically by the definition of how I am using the word, this means 20mm and under. I also DO NOT want to include lenses that are designed for crop sensors but 'may work' on a FF camera. I am specifically looking for lenses designed to be used on FF. Hopefully we can get some participation here so we can build up this list. The only two AF lenses that I know of are the: FA20mm 15-30mm zoom As far as I know everything else is all MF. There are Bowers, Samyang, Irix, but I don't know any others or even the specifics of the lenses out there. Any help would be appreciated. I see this as an ongoing project and I am pretty sure I am not the only one interested in this subject. I just bought used Sigma 15mm 2.8 DG EX. It's diagonal full frame fish eye and works perfectly on my K-1. By applying this lens's profile in Lightroom CC, the fish eye effect can be completely eliminated. This is currently manufactured lens available new in many mounts at USD$609. It has excellent reviews in many forums. I shot two dozen images yesterday, ran them through LR CC and I love the results.

09-15-2017, 09:07 AM	#32
lpfonseca Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Lisbon Posts: 143	What about the Tamron 17-35/2-8-4 Di? I don't know if you can find it new but show up used now and then. I havent tried mine with film (and don't have the K-1... yet!) but works fine with my K-5. Regards, Luis

09-15-2017, 10:31 AM	#34
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,558	The 2nd and better version of the Tokina 20-35mm f/3.5-4.5 (actually tested as 19mm) has a 77mm filter size, while the earlier one was 72mm and had some excessive vignetting problems. Good metal construction and very good sharpness. The less expensive Tokina 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5 is plastic but well-built, and likewise with a 77mm filter size, and received excellent test reviews (probably the same glass as the metal version). I have both and have enjoyed fine results from them. There was also a Tokina pro model, a 20-35mm f/2.8, having a 77mm filter size and a much heavier body, which had good user reviews.

09-15-2017, 11:24 AM	#35
Bophoto Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 429	Originally posted by photoptimist Your concern is not misplaced. Like clackers, I have the Sigma 12-24 which I bought 9 years ago for the K-10D, also used on the K-5, and really really enjoyed on APS-C. Now, on the K-1, 12 mm is insanely wide which makes it very special but also limits it's use. As clackers said, it does create drama -- my wife just about divorced me when she saw herself in the corner of one of the 12 mm photos! UWA really stretches people and circles at the edges and corners. I'm sure you'd use the 20 mm more. Yet even if a crazy-wide lens gets less use, the results can be more powerful. A focal length like 11 to 14 mm on FF is a very cool for architecture (cathedrals, ceilings, facades) and landscapes (zenith shots of tree canopies, sweeping mountain vistas, long-views across flower-strewn meadows). And the extreme distortion can be useful for abstracts and crazy compositions. I still keep the Sigma 12-24 in my bag. Overall, I'd definitely get the 20 mm for everyday WA but do think about something wider because UWA can be a real photographic challenge that can be really rewarding. Also, you can always crop a UWA image down to WA but unless you like the labor of panoramas, it's much harder to create a UWA image with just a WA lens. Enjoy! I think your wife like a shot from a fisheye better.

09-15-2017, 11:54 AM	#36
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	I have my FA-J 18-35, which is far from stellar, but it's passable since all my images are only seen at reduced sizes. I just like my 28-105 so much, I think I'll hang in until there's a 14-28 variable aperture or ƒ4 constant. It might be years, but hey, I never really believed they would ever do a full frame either.

09-15-2017, 12:13 PM	#37
awscreo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,722	Beware of the Tokina 20-35 3.5-4.5, my copy was decentered (not mentioned in the ebay description, was described as near-mint). I really liked the lens overall, if I had a good copy that'd probably be the best budget uwa zoom.

09-15-2017, 02:32 PM	#38
danielchtong Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 885	Originally posted by angerdan So lets collect all AF options below 20mm: Pentax DA 12-24mm 4.0 (well usable on FF between 17-24mm) Pentax D FA 15-30mm 2,8 Pentax FA 20mm 2.8 Pentax FA 20-35mm 4.0 Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 Sigma 14mm 2.8 Sigma 15-30mm 3.5-4.5 Sigma 17-35 2.8-4.0 Sigma 20mm 1.8 Sigma 20-40mm 2.8 Tamron 14mm 2.8 Tokina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5 Tokina 20-35mm 2.8 Tokina 20-35mm 3.5-4.5 I suppose you are aware of the fact that all under 20mm lens have huge depth of field and AF is just not necessary . I always do zone focusing with fisheyes. If you set things around 8 feet away, practically everything will be in focus (foreground and background). Why would you need AF? There are zillion fish eyes and wide angle lenses (manual focus). And they are a lot cheaper indeed.

09-15-2017, 02:43 PM	#39
angerdan Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,642	Hyperfocal Distance for 20mm f2.8 is 4,73m. So in case your subject is close to the lens or moving, AF makes sense. For setting the distance you would have to take your eye back from the viewfinder and look at the lens barrel.

09-15-2017, 03:03 PM	#40
danielchtong Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 885	Originally posted by angerdan Hyperfocal Distance for 20mm f2.8 is 4,73m. So in case your subject is close to the lens or moving, AF makes sense. For setting the distance you would have to take your eye back from the viewfinder and look at the lens barrel. Okei. And I take 20mm as an example (I have 16mm only) . If I do landscape (most of the time) and I set my distance to around 15 ft away, practically the lens does not need any focusing at all. Typically landscape would not have subject too close at all.

09-15-2017, 03:55 PM	#41
awscreo Veteran Member Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,722	Originally posted by danielchtong Okei. And I take 20mm as an example (I have 16mm only) . If I do landscape (most of the time) and I set my distance to around 15 ft away, practically the lens does not need any focusing at all. Typically landscape would not have subject too close at all. Isn't this completely subjective and up to personal preference? It's like arguing what color is the best..

09-15-2017, 05:12 PM	#42
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by angerdan So lets collect all AF options below 20mm: Pentax DA 12-24mm 4.0 (well usable on FF between 17-24mm) Pentax D FA 15-30mm 2,8 Pentax FA 20mm 2.8 Pentax FA 20-35mm 4.0 Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 Sigma 14mm 2.8 Sigma 15-30mm 3.5-4.5 Sigma 17-35 2.8-4.0 Sigma 20mm 1.8 Sigma 20-40mm 2.8 Tamron 14mm 2.8 Tokina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5 Tokina 20-35mm 2.8 Tokina 20-35mm 3.5-4.5 Available are some of them on eBay (you have to copy/paste the search parameters): Pentax (12,14,15,17,20) (14,24,30,35,40) (FA,sigma,tamron,tokina) -(50,55,70,80,135,200,300,DC) Sorted by the user rated sharpness in the lens database: 9,8..Sigma 20-40mm 2.8 9,7..Tokina 20-35mm 2.8 9,5..FA 20mm 2.8 9,4..HD D FA 15-30mm F2.8 9,3..FA 20-35mm 4.0 9,2..DA 12-24mm 4.0 9.....Tamron 14mm F2.8 9.....Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 9.....Tokina 20-35mm 3.5-4.5 8,8..Sigma 15-30mm 3.5-4.5 8,7..Tokina 19-35mm 3.5-4.5 8.....Sigma 20mm 1.8 6,5..Sigma 17-35 2.8-4.0 5,5..Sigma 14mm 2.8 FA-J 18-35 F4-5.6 rated 7.72 SMC Pentax-FA J 18-35mm F4-5.6 Reviews - FA J Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

09-15-2017, 07:32 PM - 5 Likes	#43
Scorpio71GR Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,014	The Sigma 12-24 is just crazy wide on FF at 12mm. 12mm on FF is totally unforgiving for poor composition. In my opinion a tripod is really best, of course that is not always possible. I can not justify the cost of the DFA15-30 so I went for the Sigma. You are going to have so e work in post cleaning up the distortion. Sigma 12-24@12mm on the K-1. Sometimes the border stretching can be used to an advantage. I recently aquired a Tokina 20-35 Verizon 1. This is the version with a 72mm filter thread. After some overall testing I am happy with it. Tokina 20-35@20mm on the K-1. The new Iris 15mm seems to be a nice FF option but I have seen some really bad copies from both versions.

09-16-2017, 04:53 AM	#44
danielchtong Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Toronto Posts: 885	Originally posted by awscreo Isn't this completely subjective and up to personal preference? It's like arguing what color is the best.. I am saying that manual focus with wide angle lenses is super easy given its huge depth of field. That has nothing to do with subjective preference. And as a result of that, buying MF fisheye /UWA lens make sense money wise. I am suggesting that AF function is redundant in majority of the cases

09-16-2017, 05:25 AM	#45
Scorpio71GR Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2014 Location: Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,014	Originally posted by danielchtong I am saying that manual focus with wide angle lenses is super easy given its huge depth of field. That has nothing to do with subjective preference. And as a result of that, buying MF fisheye /UWA lens make sense money wise. I am suggesting that AF function is redundant in majority of the cases I agree here. AF on my Sigma 8-16 is essentially unnecessary unless shooting indoors. For landscapes almost everything is at infinity.