no love for the 14mm

Pentaxor · 08-20-2009, 09:28 AM

is it just me or does this lens doesn't get much attention as it should? I see that more and more people are leaning towards the 15mm, why is that? is it because that it's much better for being an LTD glass? well the 14mm does have a faster aperture and a 1mm edge (not that if people care about it t, I dunno what complaints what people might have with it. any thoughts?

Last edited by Pentaxor; 08-20-2009 at 12:20 PM.

emr · 08-20-2009, 10:19 AM

I think many people want a smallish wide lens and a DA 14mm is significantly bigger AFAIK than a DA 15mm.

Another aspect may be that in today's consumerism, nobody wants that plain vanilla however good it tastes. The glass just HAS to have that special star or ltd.

gnaztee · 08-20-2009, 10:22 AM

For me, the DA 15 is more interesting because of size. When I got my DA 12-24, I chose it over the DA 14 because they were essentially the same size, I don't shoot wide at 2.8 very often (mostly landscape), and the 12-24 was more versatile.

Wheatfield · 08-20-2009, 10:33 AM

I liked the 14, but it was just too big. The 14 is almost exactly the same size as the A15/3.5, though it is substantially lighter. The 12-24 isn't all that much larger, or at least it didn't seem that way to me (I had both, I just sold my 14 recently), and though a stop slower, is much more flexible and is very close to the same optical quality.
I let the 14 go in favour of the new 15/LTD. I like the size of the new lens, though I'm not entirely certain it is a better optic.
OTOH, I find it to be a carryable size, so it will get much more use than my 14 did.

séamuis · 08-20-2009, 10:35 AM

smaller is always better..... most of the time.

**rparmar** · 08-20-2009, 11:54 AM

There is a similar thread on the UK list and someone brought up the good point that the DA14 has one big advantage... very close focus. IIRC 17cm compared with 30cm for the DA12-24. So if you like those trick big-thing-in-front-of -the-lens shots, it would do a better job than the alternatives.

PrimeObjectif · 08-20-2009, 12:20 PM

Originally posted by rparmar

There is a similar thread on the UK list and someone brought up the good point that the DA14 has one big advantage... very close focus. IIRC 17cm compared with 30cm for the DA12-24. So if you like those trick big-thing-in-front-of -the-lens shots, it would do a better job than the alternatives.

I found a DA 14 at a good price, and made a bit of an impulse buy. I have the 16-50, so I didn't a huge amount on the wide end, and I nearly had to sell the DA 14 soon after to cover some bills, but one of the main reasons I'm glad I still have the DA 14 is its close fosuing ability. It adds a different dimension to shooting wide angle, and makes this lens very versitile and a lot of fun to use. However, the DA 15 ltd. is pretty close to the DA 14 in it's min. focusing distance, so I can see why the smaller lens very appealling for a wide prime.

Either way, I can't get a 14 or 15 now for the price I paid for my lens, so I'm happy with what I've got. :P

Pentaxor · 08-20-2009, 01:12 PM

Originally posted by emr

I think many people want a smallish wide lens and a DA 14mm is significantly bigger AFAIK than a DA 15mm.

Another aspect may be that in today's consumerism, nobody wants that plain vanilla however good it tastes. The glass just HAS to have that special star or ltd.

how bout shooting in lowlight indoors or dark sceneries at dusk or dawn? would that be a problem?

Marc Sabatella · 08-20-2009, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

how bout shooting in lowlight indoors or dark sceneries at dusk or dawn? would that be a problem?

Indoors in low light is not the first application one normally thinks of for an ultra-wide lens. Dusk landscapes, maybe, but a) you don't need a very fast shutter speed to get a good shot at 14mm, and b) unless you really want to try for shallow DOF in your landscape shots, I think most would still prefer to stop down and raise ISO or use a tripod.

Not to say there wouldn't be a reason to ever shoot at f/2.8, just that ultra-wide lenses make that less likely than other lenses. In general, with ultra-wide angle, if you're going to capability is considered more worth paying the price for in size, so a lot of people looking at the 14 end up choosing the 12-24 instead.

Shashinki · 08-20-2009, 01:24 PM

Sorry, I feel no love for the 14mm. The 12-24mm is sharper @ f4 and has less distortion. Add the too tight focus ring and size/weight and you have a pretty useless lens in the lineup vs. 15mm and the 12-24mm. Yeah, I know the 15mm vignettes alot, but I still like it for its size and build quality. you really can't beat those Ltd lenses...

pb_red · 08-20-2009, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

how bout shooting in lowlight indoors or dark sceneries at dusk or dawn? would that be a problem?

if you have a tripod then it's not a problem

i've also had fun turning up the ISO and getting noisy (on purpose) b&w pics with the 15mm.

otherwise i can't see myself using this lens very much in low light conditions.

Pentaxor · 08-20-2009, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by Shashinki

Sorry, I feel no love for the 14mm. The 12-24mm is sharper @ f4 and has less distortion. Add the too tight focus ring and size/weight and you have a pretty useless lens in the lineup vs. 15mm and the 12-24mm. Yeah, I know the 15mm vignettes alot, but I still like it for its size and build quality. you really can't beat those Ltd lenses...

ok, so a 1mm difference between the 14mm and 15mm doesn't matter then? I'm just curious as to how the 15mm would fair against the 12-24mm in terms of overall IQ (sharpness, colors and contrast). this is of course both at 15mm comparison. I'm also thinking of the vignetting of the 15mm and 12-24mm at 15mm and that horrible barrel distortion. it's not that barrel distortion would be non-existent in UW lenses, but atleast it is kept at a minimum. since I have not yet tried the 15mm, I wonder if it is any better in handling those concerns.

joeyc · 08-20-2009, 02:22 PM

I had one for a short period. Pretty neat lens. As a landscape or general purpose wide angle it is outstanding. Focuses very close to. However, as a lens for critical architecture or interior shots, it falls short IMO. The horizontal edges were very wavy and required significant pp. I sold it, but do miss it otherwise. For important interior shots, I'm actually stitching my DP1 (using a proper pano head).

**Ash** · 08-20-2009, 02:26 PM

Originally posted by séamuis

smaller is always better..... most of the time.

In today's language, less is more...

I also had a short fling with the DA 14 recently, whilst I liked the build quality, the IQ was no better IMO than the 12-24, which I find a lot more versatile. I also never needed the extra stop of speed, nor the closer focusing ability, so the decision for me to move on was much easier.

It's still a fine lens, though.

8540tomg · 08-20-2009, 03:10 PM

Interesting discussion. I have very little on the wide end of things in my current collection of lenses. The widest as I write is a K 24/2.8 which is not very wide at all on digital. I’m not a big fan of zooms so something like the DA 15 or DA 14 has some appeal for me. As a rule I tend to prefer a faster lens to a slower one so the DA 14/2.8 is appealing not only for its speed but close focusing features. That being said you have given me some food for thought here.

Tom G

08-20-2009, 09:28 AM	#1
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	no love for the 14mm is it just me or does this lens doesn't get much attention as it should? I see that more and more people are leaning towards the 15mm, why is that? is it because that it's much better for being an LTD glass? well the 14mm does have a faster aperture and a 1mm edge (not that if people care about it t, I dunno what complaints what people might have with it. any thoughts? Last edited by Pentaxor; 08-20-2009 at 12:20 PM.

08-20-2009, 02:18 PM	#12
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513 Original Poster	Originally posted by Shashinki Sorry, I feel no love for the 14mm. The 12-24mm is sharper @ f4 and has less distortion. Add the too tight focus ring and size/weight and you have a pretty useless lens in the lineup vs. 15mm and the 12-24mm. Yeah, I know the 15mm vignettes alot, but I still like it for its size and build quality. you really can't beat those Ltd lenses... ok, so a 1mm difference between the 14mm and 15mm doesn't matter then? I'm just curious as to how the 15mm would fair against the 12-24mm in terms of overall IQ (sharpness, colors and contrast). this is of course both at 15mm comparison. I'm also thinking of the vignetting of the 15mm and 12-24mm at 15mm and that horrible barrel distortion. it's not that barrel distortion would be non-existent in UW lenses, but atleast it is kept at a minimum. since I have not yet tried the 15mm, I wonder if it is any better in handling those concerns. Last edited by Pentaxor; 08-20-2009 at 02:32 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Soon to have a DA 14mm f2.8	sjwaldron	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	10-07-2010 05:57 PM
DA 14mm F2.8 size	drewx2	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	02-24-2010 10:40 PM
DA 14mm f/2.8	ajuett	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	0	02-04-2010 06:22 PM

08-20-2009, 10:19 AM	#2
emr Guest	I think many people want a smallish wide lens and a DA 14mm is significantly bigger AFAIK than a DA 15mm. Another aspect may be that in today's consumerism, nobody wants that plain vanilla however good it tastes. The glass just HAS to have that special star or ltd.

08-20-2009, 10:22 AM	#3
gnaztee Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: West Palm Beach, FL Posts: 772	For me, the DA 15 is more interesting because of size. When I got my DA 12-24, I chose it over the DA 14 because they were essentially the same size, I don't shoot wide at 2.8 very often (mostly landscape), and the 12-24 was more versatile.

08-20-2009, 10:33 AM	#4
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,976	I liked the 14, but it was just too big. The 14 is almost exactly the same size as the A15/3.5, though it is substantially lighter. The 12-24 isn't all that much larger, or at least it didn't seem that way to me (I had both, I just sold my 14 recently), and though a stop slower, is much more flexible and is very close to the same optical quality. I let the 14 go in favour of the new 15/LTD. I like the size of the new lens, though I'm not entirely certain it is a better optic. OTOH, I find it to be a carryable size, so it will get much more use than my 14 did.

08-20-2009, 10:35 AM	#5
séamuis Banned Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H. Posts: 5,979	smaller is always better..... most of the time.

08-20-2009, 11:54 AM	#6
rparmar Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,819	There is a similar thread on the UK list and someone brought up the good point that the DA14 has one big advantage... very close focus. IIRC 17cm compared with 30cm for the DA12-24. So if you like those trick big-thing-in-front-of -the-lens shots, it would do a better job than the alternatives.

08-20-2009, 12:20 PM	#7
PrimeObjectif Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: New York Photos: Albums Posts: 599	Originally posted by rparmar There is a similar thread on the UK list and someone brought up the good point that the DA14 has one big advantage... very close focus. IIRC 17cm compared with 30cm for the DA12-24. So if you like those trick big-thing-in-front-of -the-lens shots, it would do a better job than the alternatives. I found a DA 14 at a good price, and made a bit of an impulse buy. I have the 16-50, so I didn't a huge amount on the wide end, and I nearly had to sell the DA 14 soon after to cover some bills, but one of the main reasons I'm glad I still have the DA 14 is its close fosuing ability. It adds a different dimension to shooting wide angle, and makes this lens very versitile and a lot of fun to use. However, the DA 15 ltd. is pretty close to the DA 14 in it's min. focusing distance, so I can see why the smaller lens very appealling for a wide prime. Either way, I can't get a 14 or 15 now for the price I paid for my lens, so I'm happy with what I've got. :P

08-20-2009, 01:12 PM	#8
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513 Original Poster	Originally posted by emr I think many people want a smallish wide lens and a DA 14mm is significantly bigger AFAIK than a DA 15mm. Another aspect may be that in today's consumerism, nobody wants that plain vanilla however good it tastes. The glass just HAS to have that special star or ltd. how bout shooting in lowlight indoors or dark sceneries at dusk or dawn? would that be a problem?

08-20-2009, 01:16 PM	#9
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Originally posted by Pentaxor how bout shooting in lowlight indoors or dark sceneries at dusk or dawn? would that be a problem? Indoors in low light is not the first application one normally thinks of for an ultra-wide lens. Dusk landscapes, maybe, but a) you don't need a very fast shutter speed to get a good shot at 14mm, and b) unless you really want to try for shallow DOF in your landscape shots, I think most would still prefer to stop down and raise ISO or use a tripod. Not to say there wouldn't be a reason to ever shoot at f/2.8, just that ultra-wide lenses make that less likely than other lenses. In general, with ultra-wide angle, if you're going to capability is considered more worth paying the price for in size, so a lot of people looking at the 14 end up choosing the 12-24 instead.

08-20-2009, 01:24 PM	#10
Shashinki Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Norway Posts: 355	Sorry, I feel no love for the 14mm. The 12-24mm is sharper @ f4 and has less distortion. Add the too tight focus ring and size/weight and you have a pretty useless lens in the lineup vs. 15mm and the 12-24mm. Yeah, I know the 15mm vignettes alot, but I still like it for its size and build quality. you really can't beat those Ltd lenses...

08-20-2009, 01:25 PM	#11
pb_red Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Seattle Posts: 194	Originally posted by Pentaxor how bout shooting in lowlight indoors or dark sceneries at dusk or dawn? would that be a problem? if you have a tripod then it's not a problem i've also had fun turning up the ISO and getting noisy (on purpose) b&w pics with the 15mm. otherwise i can't see myself using this lens very much in low light conditions.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-20-2009, 02:22 PM	#13
joeyc Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 478	I had one for a short period. Pretty neat lens. As a landscape or general purpose wide angle it is outstanding. Focuses very close to. However, as a lens for critical architecture or interior shots, it falls short IMO. The horizontal edges were very wavy and required significant pp. I sold it, but do miss it otherwise. For important interior shots, I'm actually stitching my DP1 (using a proper pano head).

08-20-2009, 02:26 PM	#14
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Originally posted by séamuis smaller is always better..... most of the time. In today's language, less is more... I also had a short fling with the DA 14 recently, whilst I liked the build quality, the IQ was no better IMO than the 12-24, which I find a lot more versatile. I also never needed the extra stop of speed, nor the closer focusing ability, so the decision for me to move on was much easier. It's still a fine lens, though.

08-20-2009, 03:10 PM	#15
8540tomg Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Waterloo, Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,461	Interesting discussion. I have very little on the wide end of things in my current collection of lenses. The widest as I write is a K 24/2.8 which is not very wide at all on digital. I’m not a big fan of zooms so something like the DA 15 or DA 14 has some appeal for me. As a rule I tend to prefer a faster lens to a slower one so the DA 14/2.8 is appealing not only for its speed but close focusing features. That being said you have given me some food for thought here. Tom G