[KoolKool]

I'm using wonderful K70 and 18-135, the versatility of 18-135 is the reason i'm happy walking around and enjoying any moment
right now i'm looking for a second len can make me "pleasure myself" the maximum quality out of 24mp for my "private times"

i'm checking Dxomark, and i but really feel kinda...off....none limited lens i see capable resolve 24mp or at least 15mp! the only best is Sigma one can resolve 16mp , the DA* can't hold up as well

what you guy think? should i bother too much?

[twilhelm]

Given myself and many other forum members get professional quality from Limited and DA* lenses on K3, K3ii, KP, K70 and even older cameras, I think you are reading far too much into "resolving power" of lenses.

The best thing you can do is look at some of the lens specific threads here and even browse Flickr. See what the various lenses can give you.

[IgorZ]

I think it depends on you and the style of your photography. For some people it may be important. For others, the most technically imperfect lenses produce the most wonderful images. Think Helios 44 and Helios 40, Meyer Optik primoplan and trioplan. The trioplan was described as demonstrating a comprehensive list of optical problems yet it produces beautiful images. If you like that kind of stuff.

Regarding the limiteds, I have only used the 43 and the 77 and they have this quiet beauty that's not in your face like the older lenses I mentioned, but it's there and they do make special images. If they produce special images, does it matter what their ranking is? For some it does, for others it doesn't.

[pschlute]

I'm using wonderful K70 and 18-135, the versatility of 18-135 is the reason i'm happy walking around and enjoying any moment
right now i'm looking for a second len can make me "pleasure myself" the maximum quality out of 24mp for my "private times"

i'm checking Dxomark, and i but really feel kinda...off....none limited lens i see capable resolve 24mp or at least 15mp! the only best is Sigma one can resolve 16mp , the DA* can't hold up as well

what you guy think? should i bother too much?

Do not use DXo tests to compare Pentax lenses with other brands. Their methodology means that any any aps-c sensor camera will show half the sharpness score of a FF sensor. As they don't use the K1 for any tests the Pentax lenses will always appear poor on that site.

IGNORE it

[clackers]

Yeah, their methodology can't even test a lens by itself.

MTF charts, as imperfect as they are, are best. They predict the sharpness, microcontrast and aberrations by position across the frame.

Sample photos make a useful adjunct as long as it's understood they're both scene and operator dependent.

[joergens.mi]

I'm using wonderful K70 and 18-135, the versatility of 18-135 is the reason i'm happy walking around and enjoying any moment
right now i'm looking for a second len can make me "pleasure myself" the maximum quality out of 24mp for my "private times"

When your are happy walking around with your equipment, why bothering about DXOmark. The important thing are pleasant photo's not numbers.

[Trickortreat]

I think it depends on you and the style of your photography. For some people it may be important. For others, the most technically imperfect lenses produce the most wonderful images. Think Helios 44 and Helios 40, Meyer Optik primoplan and trioplan. The trioplan was described as demonstrating a comprehensive list of optical problems yet it produces beautiful images. If you like that kind of stuff.

Regarding the limiteds, I have only used the 43 and the 77 and they have this quiet beauty that's not in your face like the older lenses I mentioned, but it's there and they do make special images. If they produce special images, does it matter what their ranking is? For some it does, for others it doesn't.

Absolutely agree. And would add - sharpness will for most of the photographers be the least important feature of a lens.
Our vision is more adapt to see textures, shapes, large scale contrast and colors.
For example - most review sites will rate lenses like 7artisans 35mm f1.2 as crap. I just like how that lens renders the images. And there is a lot technically wrong about that lens
7Artisans 35mm f1.2 Review & Sample Photos - Alik Griffin
7Artisans 35mm F1.2 | Flickr

[Unregistered User 8]

Hi KK, there is SSOOOO much more to this hobby we have chosen other than " technical statistics." Put a lens on your wonderful K-70 and enjoy shooting.

[PJ1]

As @pschlute said, the tests do not allow meaningful comparisons between different sensor sizes. Nor is it possible to make meaningful comparisons between different systems (such as Nikon FF vs Sony FF). Most reputable lens testing sites will advise that lenses should not be compared across different systems. The K70 is a very capable camera and there are many outstanding new and legacy Pentax lenses that will make it shine. Tests may be interesting from an academic viewpoint (I read them too) but don't let them stop you taking pictures!

[MrB1]

As has been suggested, perhaps consider giving more attention to what users think of the images they obtain from lenses, rather than the results of laboratory testing.

For example, is this good enough for you?.....
HD Pentax-DA 35mm F2.8 Limited Macro Reviews - DA Prime Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database
.....and the majority of those reviews are from users of 24MP Pentax cameras.

Philip

[TonyW]

d.

I'm using wonderful K70 and 18-135, the versatility of 18-135 is the reason i'm happy walking around and enjoying any moment
right now i'm looking for a second len can make me "pleasure myself" the maximum quality out of 24mp for my "private times"

i'm checking Dxomark, and i but really feel kinda...off....none limited lens i see capable resolve 24mp or at least 15mp! the only best is Sigma one can resolve 16mp , the DA* can't hold up as well

what you guy think? should i bother too much?

I have no personal experience of the camera or lenses you speak of but like others I would urge caution when considering 'Test reviews'. There is a big danger of really overthinking this.

I cannot believe that the majority of modern (and many old!) lenses produce less than very good quality - at least somewhere in their range with the best in class performing excellently at all apertures and across their whole field.

Remember also that your digital cameras Bayer systen is only at best around 50% efficient in terms of resolving power i.e. your 24 megapixel camera can only deliver about 12 megapixels of resolvable detail - so on the face of it the lenses you quoted are all delivering at least technically enouth for the task at hand?

You may be better served by asking questions about a specific lens/lenses here and if possible consider hiring a lens or purchasing from a brick store that may give you the opportunity for sale or return - just a thought

[Piotrek K]

Well 18-135 is usually rated as good but not exceptional compared to many other Pentax lenses. If it is OK for you I'm sure you will rate many other as clearly better.

[Docrwm]

Well 18-135 is usually rated as good but not exceptional compared to many other Pentax lenses. If it is OK for you I'm sure you will rate many other as clearly better.

While many have correctly said that the tests are flawed, Piotrek K has hit the nail on the head! If you like the 18-135, which I believe is rated in the middle of the Pentax lens lineup, there are plenty of steps up for you among Pentax lenses.

[Lowell Goudge]

I'm using wonderful K70 and 18-135, the versatility of 18-135 is the reason i'm happy walking around and enjoying any moment
right now i'm looking for a second len can make me "pleasure myself" the maximum quality out of 24mp for my "private times"

i'm checking Dxomark, and i but really feel kinda...off....none limited lens i see capable resolve 24mp or at least 15mp! the only best is Sigma one can resolve 16mp , the DA* can't hold up as well

what you guy think? should i bother too much?

If you want to use dxo then I suggest you start by comparing your present lens and its score with a lens you want. If as others indicate, comparisons are relative, that's where you start. I bet the 18-135 doesn't score well at all yet it pleases you.

Also, if you are looking to outresolve your sensor, perhaps you need to rethink things, after all unless you print at the 24 mp size and a printer resolution of 100 dpi for a 40 X 60 inch print, and view it from less than a foot, no one will notice

[normhead]

DxO has a built in bias against slower lenses. You can almost rank lenses by their apertures. If it's the fastest lens it gets the best rating, a lens that's not a 1.4 lens has no chance. They test in the equivalent of a basement with conventional lighting. My joke for years was "Tested in my mom's basement with a single incandescent bulb." Because of that bias, their work is pretty much irrelevant to what lens is better on a sunny day, 100 ISO, ƒ8m 1/400s. It's not so much an intentional bias, it's including in the score a metric that is irrelevant to many shooting styles. But if you can't afford studio lighting (or flash) and shoot in a windowless basement their scores are probably bang on.

The good thing is if you shoot an event in a dark warehouse and need optimum images, their software can probably help you out. Although many use it straight up, I tend to think of it as recovery software, for when you are forced to shoot in a bad environment and need the best results possible. I have no doubt 1.4 lenses are the best for that environment, and DXO will tell you which ones excel. It's just sad they won't tell you what lens is best in the places most of us shoot most of the time.