Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-05-2019, 06:29 AM   #76
Pentaxian
bdery's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Quebec city, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,353
QuoteOriginally posted by y0chang Quote
I really do wish my DA 50-135mm f2.8 covered FF
That would be a big but wonderful FF lens for sure!

01-23-2020, 11:02 AM   #77
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,178
Ricoh now offer the Thomas Heaton lens kit here: HD Pentax-D FA 70-210mm F4 Officially Announced - Pentax Announcements | PentaxForums.com
01-23-2020, 11:54 AM   #78
Pentaxian
Jeff's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Berkshire, England
Posts: 837
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
. Now if Pentax goes crazy and actually releases a 70-200 f4, or 20mm f2.8 then I will re-access. )
Pentax has gone crazy! And not for the first time! Seriously though, it's great to see a 70-210mm f4 with a light and portable body. I've got the Tamron 70-200 f2.8 but don't use it as much as I'd like because it is heavy. Like you I think I will re-assess... It might be time to look at the new offering. And I'm also hoping Pentax goes completely nuts and releases the 85 1.4 this year!
02-03-2020, 05:35 PM   #79
Veteran Member
Qwntm's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Eastern Oregon
Posts: 856
Original Poster
And just when you thought the waters were safe...

Thomas Heaton goes off and buys a Fuji XT3 with 10-24, 18-55 and 55-200. LOL!

So in Pentax that would be the KP and: 12-24, the Pentax 18-55 sucks, I've got one, so not sure about that, and the 55-300 WR or PL would work.

Easy except for the 18-55. The Fuji one is really good if you get a good copy.


(Disclaimer: I really don't care what Thomas Heaton uses, but his kit makes a convenient way to have a discussion regarding the comparison of various camera brands and their lens offerings.)

02-04-2020, 05:23 AM - 1 Like   #80
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,869
About 4 pages ago I addressed the op by saying he needs a kit to work with the way he saw things. It seems the message was lost on others. To my knowledge, you can’t purchase the way another photographer sees or thinks, so who cares what he shoots.

I don’t see a lot of others lugging a view camera into the mountains like Ansel Adams. Wasn’t he a really great photographer? Why don’t people carry his kit? Why didn’t he shoot a Leica 35mm?

Give me a break.
02-04-2020, 06:35 AM   #81
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
StiffLegged's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2018
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,560
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
...I don’t see a lot of others lugging a view camera into the mountains like Ansel Adams. Wasn’t he a really great photographer? Why don’t people carry his kit? Why didn’t he shoot a Leica 35mm?

Give me a break.
That’s because Ansel used a Contax when he occasionally shot 35mm. Agreed, focussing on what gear A N Other photographer uses is generally meaningless, just as the occasional “I’ve used my Bessamatic Schnappvenvwerk since the 1940s and it’s never let me down, and all film developed in sour beer. Digital? Bah humbug!!“ But you don’t think some posters might be pullin’ our legs?
02-05-2020, 10:59 PM   #82
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,704
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
So Thomas Heaton shoots a Canon 5D Mark IV with a Canon 16-35 F4, Canon 24-70 F2.8 and a Canon 70-200 F4 for his landscape work and it's a solid kit based on solid choices.


I have been pondering how to put together a K1 Mark II kit with somewhat equivalent lenses.

The only direct swap is the Pentax 24-70 2.8, it's a direct equal (except $700 cheaper!)

For the 16-35 F4, I think the Rokinon 20mm 1.8 is a decent choice. Thomas shot with a Zeiss 20mm for years before getting the 16-35. And 20mm is a great focal length and what you need when you need a wide landscape, so no issues there for me. The 15-30 is massive, doesn't take filters easily and weighs a ton. Great lens but not an f4 equivalent for me.


The 70-200 F4 is the tricky one. I have the 55-300 WR and though it works fine in crop mode, it's weird in FF mode from about 70-170. The 70-200mm 2.8 Pentax is a fine lens, but for mobility it's not an F4 size and weight lens.

So any ideas or thoughts regarding these three, and specifically a 70-200 F4 FF Pentax lens equal? (Currently produced would be a bonus!)


Actually, I find nothing special in his kit that you mentioned.
Its just UWA zoom to telephoto zoom.
Thats like what most landscape/travel folks will have in their arsenal in one form or other.
Ok... maybe its harder to have similar due to the Pentax lineup.


The Zeiss 20mm you mentioned should be the Zeiss 21/2.8 distagon and thats a lens thats very good and a hard match optically for 20-21mm. (used to be available in PK mount)
The Canon 16-35/4 vII is also a great performer for edge performance (previous versions not so much).
Similarly, the Canon 70-200/4 is hard to rival, sharp and rather small in this FL range.

To get to as close to it for edge sharpness, really its going to be DFA 15-30/2.8, DFA24-70 and the new DFA70-210/4.
The Laowa 12/2.8 is rather small, fast, sharp, low distortion for a UWA too



However, imho, where the Pentax options may lose on edge sharpness, they often make up for with size and portability.
Most bloggers/internet personalities show you the nice stuff, but they don't say how darn back breaking it was hauling the stuff around (or that they had a crew or sherpa)

For me it would be a selection of lenses like the Laowa 12/2.8, M20/4, K28/3.5, FA31ltd, FA35/2, FA50/1.4; FA77ltd, FA135/2.8, S.Takumar 135/3.5 that will cover a 'like' focal length range.
Some are faster and no worse (if not better ) in stopped down IQ and often still smaller/lighter that the 3 above mentioned zooms.
(eg. Laowa 12, K28/3.5, FA50/1.4, FA135/2.8 );
Not to mention the option to leave most of them in the hotel since its dinner time and you only need 1 lens 'just in case'


from 135-200mm is the weak part in Pentax's lineup imo, if trying not to haul along a big/heavy f2.8 tele lens.
But this is really where that new DFA70-210/4 comes in

02-06-2020, 04:25 AM   #83
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 27,606
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
About 4 pages ago I addressed the op by saying he needs a kit to work with the way he saw things. It seems the message was lost on others. To my knowledge, you can’t purchase the way another photographer sees or thinks, so who cares what he shoots.

I don’t see a lot of others lugging a view camera into the mountains like Ansel Adams. Wasn’t he a really great photographer? Why don’t people carry his kit? Why didn’t he shoot a Leica 35mm?

Give me a break.
Ansel was interested in resolution and printing big. My guess is that if he was around today, he would use a full frame digital medium format camera. But he would fill in other focal lengths with 35mm. Per his books, he used a variety of cameras including 35mm, medium and large format cameras. Regardless, while I would love to have a 645z, I can't afford it and the lenses I would want with it and so I make do with a K-1.

I think the OP (who probably isn't interested any more, but still) was asking about covering certain focal lengths (16-200mm) while keeping the size manageable. This has been a challenge with Pentax up to now, because the DFA f2.8 zooms are quite large and bulky. The DFA 70-210 f4 should help a bit and then as Pinholecam says, mixing in some mixture of older lenses (FA 20/M20/Irix wide angle) could fill in the gaps.

Once you have the lenses, of course what you do with them is up to you and your vision.
02-07-2020, 12:04 PM   #84
Veteran Member
Qwntm's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Eastern Oregon
Posts: 856
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote

I think the OP (who probably isn't interested any more, but still) was asking about covering certain focal lengths (16-200mm) while keeping the size manageable.
It's something I think about on a daily basis and should really be doing other things more productive.


Most of PHOTOUNIVERSE on Youtube is me talking about gear selection. After 5 years or more I had to quit because I felt I was saying the same things over and over, which I probably was. (People still email me asking for more videos though, so go figure.)
02-13-2020, 11:29 PM   #85
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 28,182
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
Thomas Heaton goes off and buys a Fuji XT3 with 10-24, 18-55 and 55-200. LOL!

So in Pentax that would be the KP and: 12-24, the Pentax 18-55 sucks, I've got one, so not sure about that, and the 55-300 WR or PL would work.

Easy except for the 18-55. The Fuji one is really good if you get a good copy.
In Pentax the DA 18-50 is slightly better than the 18-55, the 20-40 is even better.
02-18-2020, 02:39 PM   #86
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,897
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
About 4 pages ago I addressed the op by saying he needs a kit to work with the way he saw things. It seems the message was lost on others. To my knowledge, you can’t purchase the way another photographer sees or thinks, so who cares what he shoots.

I don’t see a lot of others lugging a view camera into the mountains like Ansel Adams. Wasn’t he a really great photographer? Why don’t people carry his kit? Why didn’t he shoot a Leica 35mm?

Give me a break.
Clyde Butcher does walk around swamps and other places with a large format camera, or at least did until recently... not sure how well he's recovered from his health issues. I don't think anyone doing black and white landscape today comes close to his quality of work... and I'm sure his choice of equipment has a lot to do with it.

Regarding copying someone else's kit, I don't think it's as bad an idea as you seem to think. People new to photography need to start somewhere. So why not start by following the example of someone you admire? Two things will happen because of it:
1. You will stop blaming your equipment - when you know what your equipment is capable, you will get motivated (hopefully) to learn to make the best of it, because you've seen what's possible
2. As you grow as a photographer, if you like or need to change your equipment, you will do just that. I'm sure if Thomas Heaton changed his equipment to Fuji it's because he thought he was getting a more portable setup and he knows he can basically get the same results regardless of equipment, as long as he uses something that is proven to work well.

Which then brings up the main point I want to talk about...

...which is that if Thomas Heaton (and many others) are able to maintain their shooting style even after radical gear changes, it's because you find out that a great photographer will take great pictures regardless of the brand and even the format (for the most part) nowadays. It doesn't matter if it's full frame, APS-C or even Micro 4/3 - all these formats, if you get a good reliable body and some good lenses, you will be capable of getting great results.

So to the OP: maybe a Pentax KP with the DA*11-18mm plus the DA 20-40mm Limited and the DA 70mm Limited might cover your needs for landscape photography. If you need something longer, you can choose between portability (DA 55-300mm f/4.5-6.3 PLM) or the best quality possible regardless of weight and price (DA*70-200mma f/2.8).... but honestly most people would be happy with the smaller 55-300mm lens on APS-C. I'm not sure if that's what Mr. Heaton would buy if he was shooting Pentax, but who cares? You should be able to get good results from it.

I suggest the DA*11-18mm by the way, being the most expensive lens of the kit, because that's what you'll likely end up using most for this style of photography.
02-18-2020, 04:34 PM   #87
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
Canon 70-200 ƒ4 = 705 grams. magnification .21, dimensions 76mm by 176mm
Pentax 70-210 ƒ4 = 819 grams magnification .32 dimensions 78.5 mm by 175mm

I'm not understanding the issue. With much higher magnification the Pentax is probably the superior lens.
02-18-2020, 09:54 PM   #88
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2017
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 568
APS-C mode, a 16-85 and 55-300PLM will stack up pretty well against almost any competitors when used on a KP.

For portable full frame landscape Pentax is really lacking in modern lenses. That's the biggest hole left in their line-up. The 15-30 is great, but it's huge and heavy, and 2.8 is not needed for anything other than astro landscape. A 16-35 F4 would be very welcome, or a weather sealed 20 or 24 prime.
02-18-2020, 10:58 PM   #89
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 496
QuoteOriginally posted by UncleVanya Quote
In Pentax the DA 18-50 is slightly better than the 18-55, the 20-40 is even better.
I've been editing RAW photos taken with my K-30 and DA 18-55 kit lens that I lent to my mother for a holiday in Singapore, Cambodia, Thailand etc. for the past few weeks. I recently got the kit lens for free with a cheap broken donor *ist DL2 camera I bought to salvage the white solenoids from it to replace my K-30 green solenoid.

This is the first time in years I have seen images taken with the 18-55 as I sold mine years ago and I have only used my trio of DA15, DA 20-40, F* 300 f4.5 and DA* 60-250 for the last few years.

The DA18-55 absolutely sucks compared to good lenses, I'm not talking about sharpness as I'm not a beginner photographer, it is sharp enough but the real qualitative measures that an experienced photographer will judge a lens on are woefully lacking. I feel people who judge a lens by sharpness years on in photography have not moved up from rung 1 on the experience or talent ladder, sharpness in lenses is never a problem and it comes in as a trivial consideration in my judgement.

Lack of 3D pop, 'flat' images, poor contrast, poor colours and colour saturation, lack of micro contrast etc. etc. The images just did not look good and I have spent weeks in Lightroom trying to get a nice photoset from the DA18-55 images.

It was a real shock when 'going back' to a kit lens like this from being used to Limiteds and * lenses which just make much more delightful punchy images and need far less post processing.

The likes of DA 20-40 Limited is in a completely different league to 18-50/55 kit lenses. It is a rare occasion where a lens outperforms expectations which is what exactly happened to me when I seen the images for the first time I used it.

Kit lenses are perfectly decent for learning with like I did or for a jpeg snapper but then why bother owning a DSLR?
02-19-2020, 06:52 AM   #90
New Member
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Le Roy, NY
Posts: 34
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
So Thomas Heaton shoots a Canon 5D Mark IV with a Canon 16-35 F4, Canon 24-70 F2.8 and a Canon 70-200 F4 for his landscape work and it's a solid kit based on solid choices.


I have been pondering how to put together a K1 Mark II kit with somewhat equivalent lenses.

The only direct swap is the Pentax 24-70 2.8, it's a direct equal (except $700 cheaper!)

For the 16-35 F4, I think the Rokinon 20mm 1.8 is a decent choice. Thomas shot with a Zeiss 20mm for years before getting the 16-35. And 20mm is a great focal length and what you need when you need a wide landscape, so no issues there for me. The 15-30 is massive, doesn't take filters easily and weighs a ton. Great lens but not an f4 equivalent for me.


The 70-200 F4 is the tricky one. I have the 55-300 WR and though it works fine in crop mode, it's weird in FF mode from about 70-170. The 70-200mm 2.8 Pentax is a fine lens, but for mobility it's not an F4 size and weight lens.

So any ideas or thoughts regarding these three, and specifically a 70-200 F4 FF Pentax lens equal? (Currently produced would be a bonus!)
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
The 70-200mm 2.8 Pentax is a fine lens, but for mobility it's not an F4 size and weight lens.
Convert the DA * 60-250 F4 to full frame. Directions can be found on this web site.
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!
20mm, canon, da, da*, dfa, f2.8, f4, fa, ff, flickr, gear, gear choices, heaton pentax lens, k-mount, k1, lens, lens kit, lenses, mode, pentax, pentax lens, slr lens, sony, tamron, thomas, thomas heaton pentax, weight
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Saint Thomas Church rokm Monthly Photo Contests 14 10-13-2018 11:20 PM
Nature Ventura Thomas Fire Jim P Post Your Photos! 4 08-15-2018 08:03 AM
Thomas channels his inner Voodoo John279 Monthly Photo Contests 2 04-11-2016 12:00 PM
Thomas Hawk Quitting Getty... interested_observer Photographic Industry and Professionals 3 03-26-2013 01:04 AM
Gallery of Thomas Shahan - Amazing macro shots hcarvalhoalves Photographic Technique 6 01-02-2012 06:06 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:22 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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