[kuau]

I currently own the 12-24 F4 pentax lens with my K20D is this the best setup for landscape work or would I be better served with the 14mm f2.8 prime lens

Thanks

[SpecialK]

12-24 is very good optically, with a bit more flexibility than a prime. Speed is not a real issue in landscapes.

[heliphoto]

Most will tell you that for absolute image quality, primes are best, and I won't argue, but I prefer the versatility of quality zooms. I've heard good things about the 12-24. I currently shoot landscapes with the DA*16-50, and the Tamron 70-200/2.8 and would love to add the 12-24 to the wide end. Landscapes don't always require a super wide lens (I really do use 200mm sometimes).

[Buddha Jones]

I use the DA*16-50mm sometimes, but I am actually more fond of using the DA*50-135mm and stitching multiple shots together, time permitting. But if Pentax ever got off their collective buts and made the much needed DA*11-16mm, then I would def own that and head right back out to the Grand Canyon.

You don't necessarily need a wide angle lens to take landscapes, it really depends on the landscape you are shooting.

This one was taken with a thirty five year old 200mm MF lens with a 2x Teleconverter.; https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/5983/1__IGP7575_1.jpg

This one was taken with a Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 lens; https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/5983/1__IGP7393_1_2.jpg

This one was taken with the 18-55mm MK1 kit lens; https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/5983/2_IMGP4990_1_1.jpg

This was taken with a Tamron 28-300; https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/5983/1__IGP6922_1.jpg

This was taken with a Sigma 105mm macro; https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/post-your-photos/17135d121878..._igp4559_1.jpg


Not a single wide angle lens there.

[Canada_Rockies]

I currently own the 12-24 F4 pentax lens with my K20D is this the best setup for landscape work or would I be better served with the 14mm f2.8 prime lens

Thanks

I am very happy with the results from my DA 12-24. I also use the DA* 16-50 more often so I can zoom in a bit more. The quality of either lens is right up there. To improve the quality without spending a bundle, get DxO Standard and run your images through it first to turn lenses into near perfect versions. $100 more or less depending on the exchange rate.

[Rense]

You don't necessarily need a wide angle lens to take landscapes, it really depends on the landscape you are shooting.

This one was taken with a thirty five year old 200mm MF lens with a 2x Teleconverter.; https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/5983/1__IGP7575_1.jpg

This one was taken with a Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4 lens; https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/5983/1__IGP7393_1_2.jpg

This one was taken with the 18-55mm MK1 kit lens; https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/5983/2_IMGP4990_1_1.jpg

This was taken with a Tamron 28-300; https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/5983/1__IGP6922_1.jpg

This was taken with a Sigma 105mm macro; https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/attachments/post-your-photos/17135d121878..._igp4559_1.jpg


Not a single wide angle lens there.

I totally agree. Well, what else could I say after seeing these photos of Gary, but I too made my best landscapes between 70 and 200 mm .....

[danielchtong]

I totally agree. Well, what else could I say after seeing these photos of Gary, but I too made my best landscapes between 70 and 200 mm .....

Wow that is long lens.

Zenitar 16mm happens to be my main landscape lens.



Holy City 2007 one out door one indoor

















Daniel

[Marc Sabatella]

By all accounts, if the focal length ranges between 12 and 24 appeal to you, the Pentax 12-24 is considered by most to be as good as it gets, prime or zoom.

But add me to the list who would feel stifled by a lens that could only go to 24mm. Most of my landscapes are shot between 24 and 50, with most of them right around 28 and right around 40 - and that's true when using my 18-55II, not just when shooting with my primes. And like others here, I shoot longer than that a fair amount too. Not that I don't *sometimes* shoot wider, but if you gave me a choice between, say, the 31 and a 12-24, I'd take the 31. As it is, I'm more than happy using my 28 and 40 and a telephoto zoom or prime.

[heliphoto]

Wow that is long lens.
...

Daniel

I've shot landscapes up to about 250mm. Here's a few more "long landscapes"...

Halfdome - 200mm from Glacier Point

exif

Bridal Veil Falls - 270mm (bigma) from Tunnel View -

exif

Tule Fog - 200mm.

exif

It's funny, but one of my complaints with the *50-135 is that it's too short for landscapes .

[Canada_Rockies]

By all accounts, if the focal length ranges between 12 and 24 appeal to you, the Pentax 12-24 is considered by most to be as good as it gets, prime or zoom.

But add me to the list who would feel stifled by a lens that could only go to 24mm. Most of my landscapes are shot between 24 and 50, with most of them right around 28 and right around 40 - and that's true when using my 18-55II, not just when shooting with my primes. And like others here, I shoot longer than that a fair amount too. Not that I don't *sometimes* shoot wider, but if you gave me a choice between, say, the 31 and a 12-24, I'd take the 31. As it is, I'm more than happy using my 28 and 40 and a telephoto zoom or prime.

That's why the 16-50 is on the camera more often, Marc. However when 16 (24 FF) is not enough to get it all in without falling off a cliff, the 12-24 comes out. it's a specialty lens, I admit.

[axl]

the best landscape lens is the one you have with you when you are standing with great looking landscape right at your feet. Any sharp lens will do!!! It's your style, your vision, your framing and your abilities that make or break the shot. Not the lens, although it helps to have a decen one!
BR