Would I notice the extra sharpness?

jsherman999 · 08-31-2008, 06:56 PM

I'd suggest staying with your 18-55 for now, and practice with it. But also, get yourself an inexpensive fast 50 - you'll be able to realize the benefit of exceptional IQ, play with DOF with the larger aperture, practice composition with one focal length, and not break the bank doing it.

M/K/A/Super Tak 50 1.4, 1.7, 1.8, or 2 - take your pick, they'll all teach you something about photography and give you better/sharper images than the kit can give you.

.

**Canada_Rockies** · 08-31-2008, 09:32 PM

Originally posted by MrTea

There have been several threads recently discussing the relative merits of lenses such as the DA 16-50, DA 16-45, Tamron 17-50, Sigma 18-50 etc, which I have read with interest as I am thinking of upgrading myself.

All of these are said to be "so much sharper than the kit lens". But the question is, would I really notice that extra sharpness? For my usual purposes, i.e 7x5 prints, and resizing for the web, I'm sure the answer would be no.

But suppose one day I do manage to take a photo that I would really like to see printed large, e.g 12x18 or bigger, to hang on my wall, but it was "only" taken with the kit lens. How likely would I be to say, "I wish I had a much sharper lens, then I could get it printed even larger"? Given that I "only" have the 6mp K100D, would the extra resolution of a better lens really make a big difference?

The extra mm or two on the wide end of these lenses would be nice. A constant F2.8 would also come in handy sometimes, too. But most of the time, e.g outdoors, when the kit lens is stopped down to F8 - F11 anyway, it seems that none of these lenses would really do anything over and above what the kit lens can do.

Am I therefore better off spending my money on something that does do something really different?

Aidan

You might notice that my signature has only Pentax glass in it. Each lens was carefully selected for what it could do. I come from the film generations and love the look of slides. When I fell away from Pentax, there was a look that was missing. Others are working happily with non-Pentax equipment, so I know some of it may be subjective. There is a look to an image made with a better quality lens. There is a look to an image made with a better quality Pentax lens. My FA 28-80 cannot hold a candle to the images produced with the FA 24-90, even in the same focal range.

What I am suggesting is that you be very, very careful in what you buy next. Look at all the comments on the lens you can find in these forums, and in the lens databases here. Be very selective in the lens you pick. If you pick good lenses, you can use them for a very, very long time.

Just on old photog's opinionated opinion.

soccerjoe5 · 08-31-2008, 11:59 PM

i say go for the faster lenses when you've outgrown your kit lens.

creampuff · 09-01-2008, 01:13 AM

Originally posted by Canada_Rockies

My FA 28-80 cannot hold a candle to the images produced with the FA 24-90, even in the same focal range.

The FA 28-80mm has never had a good reputation. One of the few Pentax lenses with forgettable performance.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
16:9 until further notice.	Taff	Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories	25	02-12-2010 06:12 AM
Sharpness VS Fine-Sharpness in k20d	wasim_altaf	Pentax DSLR Discussion	8	10-12-2009 11:41 AM
Sharpness vs Fine Sharpness on K20D	morfic	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	11-02-2008 10:13 AM
Fine sharpness and sharpness move together on K20D 1.01	morfic	Pentax DSLR Discussion	2	07-11-2008 09:18 PM
Extra! Extra! My latest blog inside!	bdavis	General Talk	7	06-09-2007 05:25 AM

08-31-2008, 06:56 PM	#16
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	I'd suggest staying with your 18-55 for now, and practice with it. But also, get yourself an inexpensive fast 50 - you'll be able to realize the benefit of exceptional IQ, play with DOF with the larger aperture, practice composition with one focal length, and not break the bank doing it. M/K/A/Super Tak 50 1.4, 1.7, 1.8, or 2 - take your pick, they'll all teach you something about photography and give you better/sharper images than the kit can give you. .

08-31-2008, 09:32 PM	#17
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Originally posted by MrTea There have been several threads recently discussing the relative merits of lenses such as the DA 16-50, DA 16-45, Tamron 17-50, Sigma 18-50 etc, which I have read with interest as I am thinking of upgrading myself. All of these are said to be "so much sharper than the kit lens". But the question is, would I really notice that extra sharpness? For my usual purposes, i.e 7x5 prints, and resizing for the web, I'm sure the answer would be no. But suppose one day I do manage to take a photo that I would really like to see printed large, e.g 12x18 or bigger, to hang on my wall, but it was "only" taken with the kit lens. How likely would I be to say, "I wish I had a much sharper lens, then I could get it printed even larger"? Given that I "only" have the 6mp K100D, would the extra resolution of a better lens really make a big difference? The extra mm or two on the wide end of these lenses would be nice. A constant F2.8 would also come in handy sometimes, too. But most of the time, e.g outdoors, when the kit lens is stopped down to F8 - F11 anyway, it seems that none of these lenses would really do anything over and above what the kit lens can do. Am I therefore better off spending my money on something that does do something really different? Aidan You might notice that my signature has only Pentax glass in it. Each lens was carefully selected for what it could do. I come from the film generations and love the look of slides. When I fell away from Pentax, there was a look that was missing. Others are working happily with non-Pentax equipment, so I know some of it may be subjective. There is a look to an image made with a better quality lens. There is a look to an image made with a better quality Pentax lens. My FA 28-80 cannot hold a candle to the images produced with the FA 24-90, even in the same focal range. What I am suggesting is that you be very, very careful in what you buy next. Look at all the comments on the lens you can find in these forums, and in the lens databases here. Be very selective in the lens you pick. If you pick good lenses, you can use them for a very, very long time. Just on old photog's opinionated opinion.

08-31-2008, 11:59 PM	#18
soccerjoe5 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,343	i say go for the faster lenses when you've outgrown your kit lens.

09-01-2008, 01:13 AM	#19
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	Originally posted by Canada_Rockies My FA 28-80 cannot hold a candle to the images produced with the FA 24-90, even in the same focal range. The FA 28-80mm has never had a good reputation. One of the few Pentax lenses with forgettable performance.