[Mbaez]

Hi guys,

Here is a comparison between the Pentax 11-18 and the Pentax 12-24 from F8 to F2.8.
I took the pictures simultaneously, hope they are helpful.

Pentax11-16_VS_Pentax12-24 | Flickr

[Docrwm]

Thanks for the comparison. In your Flickr account the photos listed as 11mm are the 11-18 and those at 12mm are the 12-24. For some reason the EXIF doesn't name the lens in all the information listed.

The 12-24 seems to be holding up pretty darn well IMHO. (Especially at $1400 vs $700 new - and $400ish used for the 12-24).

[hypermodern]

I’ll second that thanks.

And I agree, apart from the chromatic aberration, the 12-24 still looks mighty good.

[Madaboutpix]

Sure appreciated, those sample shots, Marcos.

Agree with Robert and hypermodern: the real surprise, if surprising at all, is not so much that the new lens performs with its price tag, but how well the 12-24 holds its ground even in 2019. Actually, I wouldn't have minded at all if they had kept it in the line-up as an F4 alternative. Or had even mark-II-ed it with newer (SP and HD) coatings, following the example of the refreshed HD FA35, or the HD DA Limiteds.

[clickclick]

The 12 does look good.

I'm always surprised how just 1mm can make such a difference in the FOV. Any chance you have a Sigma 10-20 you could throw into the mix?

[Mbaez]

Thanks for the comparison. In your Flickr account the photos listed as 11mm are the 11-18 and those at 12mm are the 12-24. For some reason the EXIF doesn't name the lens in all the information listed.

The 12-24 seems to be holding up pretty darn well IMHO. (Especially at $1400 vs $700 new - and $400ish used for the 12-24).

You're welcome, and right about the lenses. I don't know why the exif doesn't show all the information.

---------- Post added 03-19-19 at 02:05 PM ----------

I’ll second that thanks.

And I agree, apart from the chromatic aberration, the 12-24 still looks mighty good.

You're welcome, and yes, the oldie looks better than I thought.

---------- Post added 03-19-19 at 02:09 PM ----------

Sure appreciated, those sample shots, Marcos.

Agree with Robert and hypermodern: the real surprise, if surprising at all, is not so much that the new lens performs with its price tag, but how well the 12-24 holds its ground even in 2019. Actually, I wouldn't have minded at all if they had kept it in the line-up as an F4 alternative. Or had even mark-II-ed it with newer (SP and HD) coatings, following the example of the refreshed HD FA35, or the HD DA Limiteds.

You're welcome.
I agree with you, I would love those sunstars but with better flare resistance.

---------- Post added 03-19-19 at 02:10 PM ----------

The 12 does look good.

I'm always surprised how just 1mm can make such a difference in the FOV. Any chance you have a Sigma 10-20 you could throw into the mix?

Sorry, those are my only ultrawides.

[RGlasel]

I'm always surprised how just 1mm can make such a difference in the FOV.

Me too! It also affects how the photographs look, both lenses seem to produce quite rectilinear pictures (especially compared to the DA 15), but the wider FOV of the 11-18 seems to make the scene look brighter. And at f2.8 there really is no comparison.

[house]

Hi guys,

Here is a comparison between the Pentax 11-18 and the Pentax 12-24 from F8 to F2.8.
I took the pictures simultaneously, hope they are helpful.

Pentax11-16_VS_Pentax12-24 | Flickr

Thanks for the comparison Mbaez!
Have you checked the new lens for decentering? It's a bit hard to judge from this scene but it looks to me like your right hand side is more smeared than your left hand side?

[Mbaez]

Thanks for the comparison Mbaez!
Have you checked the new lens for decentering? It's a bit hard to judge from this scene but it looks to me like your right hand side is more smeared than your left hand side?

No, I have not. Do you think I should send it back?

[SSGGeezer]

I think there is nothing at all wrong with the 11-18. It looks marvelous!

[clickclick]

Sorry, those are my only ultrawides.

No apology necessary - it was a long shot, and figured if you had it, probably would have already posted, but had to ask.

I'm sure someone around here will have all three, and hopefully they'll post out some samples.

[mikesbike]

I think it would be crazy to eliminate the DA 12-24mm f/4 just because they have a pro-level 11-18mm f/2.8 lens at twice the price available. That would put having a rectilinear ultra-wide out of range for many Pentax photographers. If one needs the f/2.8 for low light shooting and the WR construction, the new lens still beckons, but not otherwise doable at that price for many, while having the/4 lens would be doable.

They are planning to have a more compact, less expensive DFA 70-200mm f/4 in addition to the DFA* 70-200mm f/2.8 lens are they not?

[caliscouser]

Thanks Mbaez. I'm sure in high contrast / high flare situations the 11-18 will spank the 12-24. Plus it is WR, has quiet AF, and is f/2.8.
The 12-24 is no slouch though. I always preferred it over the DA 15.

I do think both lenses show very minor de-centering, common with zoom lenses. Within manufacturing parameters. 11-18 slight softness on the right. 12-24 slight softness on the left. Best seen at f/4.

[Mbaez]

Friends, here I have more samples if you want to look at them. This time I used only the 11-18.

SOC samples with the Pentax 11-18 2.8 | Flickr

---------- Post added 03-20-19 at 07:32 PM ----------

Thanks Mbaez. I'm sure in high contrast / high flare situations the 11-18 will spank the 12-24. Plus it is WR, has quiet AF, and is f/2.8.
The 12-24 is no slouch though. I always preferred it over the DA 15.

I do think both lenses show very minor de-centering, common with zoom lenses. Within manufacturing parameters. 11-18 slight softness on the right. 12-24 slight softness on the left. Best seen at f/4.

You're welcome!

And it's true. This new lens is very resistant to flare. You can check it here:

SOC samples with the Pentax 11-18 2.8 | Flickr