Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-15-2016, 12:49 PM   #556
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,507
QuoteOriginally posted by SlamDesiAK Quote
Great shots! Do you prefer this 21mm over, say, the 15mm? I'm going to buy one or the other. I'm just stuck on which one.
Get both. They are only similar in focal lengths.

03-15-2016, 01:04 PM   #557
Forum Member




Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Alaska
Posts: 67
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
All you have to do is search for recent posts from northcoastgreg in this thread. He has the HD version and is able to extract much more from it (or any other lens) than most of us so yeah the HD version is a good lens and by some accounts, better at the edges than the SMC (which is still a fine lens as well).
I just ordered that lens from B&H. My decision was based on all of the help I received in here. I'm really appreciative of everyone's input. I wanted the 15mm based on the built in lens hood alone but, went with a more applicable lens for my needs. I'll get used to the slightly goofy lens hood or, not use it at all.
03-15-2016, 02:11 PM - 2 Likes   #558
arv
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 412
21mm+CPL
"Deep blue sea"... I am not native English speaker, and I used to think this means a deep "blue sea"; only after shooting with CPL in Greece I realized this could mean a "deep blue" sea...

Name:  IMGP4448.jpg
Views: 411
Size:  419.1 KB

Name:  IMGP1826.jpg
Views: 412
Size:  461.5 KB

Last edited by arv; 03-15-2016 at 02:18 PM.
03-16-2016, 04:21 AM   #559
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,507
QuoteOriginally posted by SlamDesiAK Quote
goofy lens hood or, not use it at all.
Nothing wrong with the lens hood on the 21. It does the job it was designed to do, and the fact that it's metal is like having armor around your glass to protect it from accidental bumps. You would be worse off not using it because you think it's goofy.

03-16-2016, 09:06 AM   #560
Veteran Member
kh1234567890's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Manchester, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,653
QuoteOriginally posted by r0ckstarr Quote
Nothing wrong with the lens hood on the 21. It does the job it was designed to do, and the fact that it's metal is like having armor around your glass to protect it from accidental bumps. You would be worse off not using it because you think it's goofy.
Agreed, the DA21 hood works well. Just make sure it is on properly - turn until it clicks so that the rectangular opening lines up with the sensor.

Ideal if you are taking sneaky 'from the hip' street shots - people think that you've got your lens cap on
03-16-2016, 12:48 PM   #561
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 328
Ok...I have the DA 15, 35 macro and 70. Should I get the 40 or the 21 next? Of course, I am also thinking of an FA43, though my 50-A 1.4 keeps me pretty happy. The reds in the poppy photo are spectacular! I do quite a lot of garden/nature photography.
03-17-2016, 08:35 AM   #562
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Northern Michigan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,153
QuoteOriginally posted by jeverettfine Quote
Ok...I have the DA 15, 35 macro and 70. Should I get the 40 or the 21 next?
Given that you already have the DA 35, the 21 would seem to be a better fit. Unless, of course, you don't ever see yourself shooting at 21mm.

03-17-2016, 10:32 AM   #563
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: People's Republic of America
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,895
So my 21 is going back to the seller even though the shape of the lens wasn't as good as I expected, it still took great pictures. I had traded a 16-45 (plus cash) for it and the seller is sending me back the 16-45. He says the 16-45 is sharp when taking pictures in landscape but decentered when taking pictures in portrait (even though the wobble isn't bad, or so I thought...)

I liked the 21 a lot but I think I'll keep the 16-45 for now... at 21 - for my uses - it was very sharp edge to edge and the copy I had/will have again is especially strong at 45mm. f4 and f3.2 isn't all that different to be honest, and the 16-45 might even be a bit sharper and have better color wide open. I couldn't compare the 16-45 directly to the 21 but I think that stopped down the 21 has an edge over the zoom - as you would expect. At 35 though, I ran landscape tests between the DA 35 2.4 and the 16-45 (both at f5.6) and I was amazed that they were completely identical in color rendering and sharpnes, other than the zoom needing 1/3 stop more light in the form of a slightly slower shutter speed at the same aperture.

I'm sure I'll get another 21 at some point... especially now that you can find them in good condition for under 200, like I saw a couple days ago here in the marketplace!

I still have a bunch of 21 pictures to process (and I'm taking a few more before I send it back) so I'll post more to the thread, I'm sure Here's one wide open. I'm not crazy about the bokeh on this one.

03-17-2016, 10:39 AM   #564
Forum Member




Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Alaska
Posts: 67
QuoteOriginally posted by r0ckstarr Quote
Nothing wrong with the lens hood on the 21. It does the job it was designed to do, and the fact that it's metal is like having armor around your glass to protect it from accidental bumps. You would be worse off not using it because you think it's goofy.
I agree. I ordered a UV filter so, I'll either use that and no hood or, slap the hood on without a filter. I'm not too concerned. Thanks much.
03-17-2016, 10:42 AM   #565
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,507
QuoteOriginally posted by SlamDesiAK Quote
I agree. I ordered a UV filter so, I'll either use that and no hood or, slap the hood on without a filter. I'm not too concerned. Thanks much.
A UV filter can degrade image quality and induce flaring. I suggest using the hood that came with it and no UV filter for best results.
03-17-2016, 10:43 AM   #566
Forum Member




Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Alaska
Posts: 67
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
So my 21 is going back to the seller even though the shape of the lens wasn't as good as I expected, it still took great pictures. I had traded a 16-45 (plus cash) for it and the seller is sending me back the 16-45. He says the 16-45 is sharp when taking pictures in landscape but decentered when taking pictures in portrait (even though the wobble isn't bad, or so I thought...)

I liked the 21 a lot but I think I'll keep the 16-45 for now... at 21 - for my uses - it was very sharp edge to edge and the copy I had/will have again is especially strong at 45mm. f4 and f3.2 isn't all that different to be honest, and the 16-45 might even be a bit sharper and have better color wide open. I couldn't compare the 16-45 directly to the 21 but I think that stopped down the 21 has an edge over the zoom - as you would expect. At 35 though, I ran landscape tests between the DA 35 2.4 and the 16-45 (both at f5.6) and I was amazed that they were completely identical in color rendering and sharpnes, other than the zoom needing 1/3 stop more light in the form of a slightly slower shutter speed at the same aperture.

I'm sure I'll get another 21 at some point... especially now that you can find them in good condition for under 200, like I saw a couple days ago here in the marketplace!

I still have a bunch of 21 pictures to process (and I'm taking a few more before I send it back) so I'll post more to the thread, I'm sure Here's one wide open. I'm not crazy about the bokeh on this one.

It may just be me but, were we ever discussing front focus, back focus and decentered focusing when we used film cameras? Could be because there wasn't an auto-focusing mechanisms and sensors involved but, now, it seems disconcerting that one has to even be concerned with such issues considering they don't give lenses away. At least the Limited editions. I ordered the 21mm Limited from B&H and then, later, got a screaming deal on Amazon for the 35mm Limited. Let's hope it isn't a gray market unit. It'll either work or it won't. That's probably the lens I would have used on that floral cluster, Christian. Not that I know what I'm talking about.

---------- Post added 03-17-16 at 09:45 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by r0ckstarr Quote
A UV filter can degrade image quality and induce flaring. I suggest using the hood that came with it and no UV filter for best results.
I'll probably take your advice. I ordered a B+W filter but, one never knows. Speaking of filters, if I pack along a CP filter, is there any good way to clean those?
03-17-2016, 10:53 AM   #567
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,507
QuoteOriginally posted by SlamDesiAK Quote
Speaking of filters, if I pack along a CP filter, is there any good way to clean those?
You don't want my advice on cleaning CP filters. I rarely use them, and wipe them off with a corner of my shirt when they get dusty.
03-17-2016, 11:21 AM   #568
Forum Member




Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Alaska
Posts: 67
QuoteOriginally posted by r0ckstarr Quote
You don't want my advice on cleaning CP filters. I rarely use them, and wipe them off with a corner of my shirt when they get dusty.
Ha! I'm a freak. Kind of like the neatnik on The Odd Couple. Whoever inherits and/or buys my camera gear will get Like New goods.
03-17-2016, 11:24 AM   #569
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,507
QuoteOriginally posted by SlamDesiAK Quote
Ha! I'm a freak. Kind of like the neatnik on The Odd Couple. Whoever inherits and/or buys my camera gear will get Like New goods.
I can assure you that wiping a little dust off with your shirt isn't going to put a CP filter in poor condition.
03-17-2016, 02:36 PM   #570
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Austin, Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 328
QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
Given that you already have the DA 35, the 21 would seem to be a better fit. Unless, of course, you don't ever see yourself shooting at 21mm.
I do have a Pentax-A 24 2.8...bigger than a DA 21, but not that much. Stick with what I have for now.
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!
color, da21, edge, filter, flickr, focus, k-mount, landscape, lens, ltd, pentax lens, photos, pictures, post, rides, seller, shots, slr lens, starbursts, trade, tree, uv, von, water
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Post your ƒ1.2 Photos! (ƒ1.2 ONLY!) PentaxForums-User Lens Clubs 2087 03-19-2024 12:09 PM
LBA: DA21mm/f3.2 kjao Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 09-04-2010 04:49 PM
Travel 10 photos accepted in PPG (10 photos, larger post) tcom Post Your Photos! 22 01-22-2010 07:37 PM
How to post several photos at once ? jpzk Site Suggestions and Help 10 01-11-2010 04:53 AM
First post... a few photos animatorMike Post Your Photos! 9 02-28-2009 12:15 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:10 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