Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-18-2008, 10:24 AM   #16
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 127
Original Poster
Finally the rain stopped for about 3 or 4 minutes, and I ran out with the K20 and took a few test shots. As expected it was hard to reproduce this phenomenon. The most efficient method turned out to be pointing the camera straight into a lot of leaves. Sorry for posting such crap. I know it's an absolute nonsense photo, but I think it shows a bit of what I'm ranting about.

Photos were taken using tripod and remote. I should have made sure they had the
same focal length, but then the rain came back and I had to get back inside.

The 16-45 f5 1/80



The 18-55. f5.6 1/125:



Of course these two lenses have a very different dof and overall image appearance, but I just don't find the out of focus branches in the front of the 16-45 image incredibly sexy. I think the ones in the back of the 18-55 photo give a more natural fade.

As a sidenote, I used the 18-55 II that came with the K20 for the first time, and it was interesting to see how the two lenses had (seemingly) constant difference in exposure. The 18-55 being the darkest one. Not that it matters to me in any way, but it explains why these two images differ in brightness.

Based on the responses in this thread I think it's probably not anything wrong with this lens at all. It's just the way it is. The stuff that _I_ don't find all that wonderful, is just one of the trade-offs made when designing the 16-45, to make it work wonders on other technical aspects of the image. Now if only someone else could say that this lens is perfectly ok, I can go ahead and sell it with a clear conscience. And if the buyer should complain I can always point to this thread and tell him or her it's just fine

09-18-2008, 10:30 AM   #17
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
Can you repost the 18-55mm image at the same size? It's only 600 pixels wide vs the 16-45 at 1000.
09-18-2008, 11:40 AM   #18
Veteran Member
sewebster's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 533
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
Some great images in there. Were all these photos taken with the 16-45mm?
Thanks audiobomber. Not exactly sure which pictures you were looking at, but here are all of mine on flickr taken with the 16-45: Flickr: sewebster's stuff tagged with smcpda1645mmf40edal

Probably the ones I like the best aren't on the first page.
09-18-2008, 01:52 PM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 127
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
Can you repost the 18-55mm image at the same size? It's only 600 pixels wide vs the 16-45 at 1000.
Is it? Both thumbnails say 1000x664, and when I click on them both are 1000 px wide in my browser. Imageshack may resize it in javascript, but just click on the image and it's shown at full size.

09-18-2008, 02:04 PM   #20
Veteran Member
sewebster's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 533
QuoteOriginally posted by sveinmb Quote
Is it? Both thumbnails say 1000x664, and when I click on them both are 1000 px wide in my browser. Imageshack may resize it in javascript, but just click on the image and it's shown at full size.
They look the same size to me, but there are other differences that make comparison difficult, for instance, focus distance and aperture... to me the 16-45 shot looks better, but possibly just because it is brighter.
09-18-2008, 02:07 PM   #21
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,047
Apart from the chronic darkness of 16-45 images, when I look at the two side by side, with most of the individual details, I see the 16-45 as better defined than the 18-55. There's more detail. In fact the 16-45 makes more sense to me than the 18-55. I'd love to see them equalized for exposure...

Never mind :O I got the two reversed. Yes, the 18-55 seems sharper in the foreground details.
09-18-2008, 02:59 PM   #22
Veteran Member
sewebster's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 533
QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
Never mind :O I got the two reversed. Yes, the 18-55 seems sharper in the foreground details.
Could be because the 18-55 was stopped further down and possibly focussed closer to the camera. The far background looks to be better in focus on the 16-45 shot supporting the focus distance argument...
09-18-2008, 03:12 PM   #23
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
QuoteOriginally posted by sveinmb Quote
Is it? Both thumbnails say 1000x664, and when I click on them both are 1000 px wide in my browser. Imageshack may resize it in javascript, but just click on the image and it's shown at full size.
I don't know what's up with that. The first couple of times I opened them, I did click on the photos and one was only 600. Anyway, it's working now. This is odd to me because my 18-55mm underexposes, as do some others I've seen. This seems to be the reverse. These two lenses are close enough in speed and range that you should be able to do a test with the same focal length, manual aperture, same shutter speed and same focal point (i.e. manually focus). The only way to have a meaningful test is to eliminate other variables so the lenses are the only variables.

I've been meaning to do some testing of some of my lenses against each other but I haven't managed to find the time and the next couple of weeks are looking even worse. One of these days...

09-18-2008, 03:18 PM   #24
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
QuoteOriginally posted by sewebster Quote
Thanks audiobomber. Not exactly sure which pictures you were looking at, but here are all of mine on flickr taken with the 16-45: Flickr: sewebster's stuff tagged with smcpda1645mmf40edal

Probably the ones I like the best aren't on the first page.
I liked Howe Sound, Setting, Lights and another couple that I must have missed this time through. I believe one was called Table Top. The other was my favourite, but I don't know what page it was on.
09-18-2008, 03:38 PM   #25
Veteran Member
sewebster's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 533
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
I liked Howe Sound, Setting, Lights and another couple that I must have missed this time through. I believe one was called Table Top. The other was my favourite, but I don't know what page it was on.
The first three you mentioned were taken with the FA50 So maybe the prime wins after all!

I like this one, taken with the 16-45 (40mm, f/6.7, 1/350s, iso100), but there were another couple nice ones of the same mountain with this lens:
09-18-2008, 03:58 PM   #26
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
QuoteOriginally posted by sewebster Quote
The first three you mentioned were taken with the FA50 So maybe the prime wins after all!
LOL! Oops...

I hope you don't think I said the 16-45mm matches the 50mm's IQ. The 50mm 1.4 is a better lens clearly, but it sucks at 16-45mm.

QuoteOriginally posted by sewebster Quote
I like this one, taken with the 16-45 (40mm, f/6.7, 1/350s, iso100), but there were another couple nice ones of the same mountain with this lens:
Yeah, that's the one. But there are a lot of great landscapes in your collection. I don't like the people shots so much, but there was one with a guy walking toward a large mountain off in the distance that got my attention. Sorry, I'm not going to look for it again, I've spent too much time looking already.
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!
copy, images, k-mount, lens, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Question about image quality of the k-7 justtakingpics Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 05-15-2010 05:30 AM
Are you satisfied with the K-x image quality? rjm Pentax DSLR Discussion 37 01-21-2010 06:27 AM
How can I get good image quality from a K-x?? Manfred Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 38 12-20-2009 08:18 PM
K or M Series - Which has the best image quality 8540tomg Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 20 10-05-2009 07:53 AM
Some concern about image quality. Bart Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 07-23-2007 05:54 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:43 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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