Replace 16-50 with primes?

Pentaxor · 10-11-2009, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by axl

I know, even myself, I went for the cheaper route (for now

) -
10-20, Sigma 24/2.8 AF, 31ltd, 40ltd, F50/1.7

as for your suggestions. The first would work well (for me) 24 to 40 is nice gap and very managable, but there is missing something longer...
14 to 40 is too big gap IMO, I had 20 to 40 gap but found it too big. Was after 28mm lens but then good deal for 31 came along...
10-20, 40,50 doesn't work well either (again for me). I've been there, tried that. Again 20 > 40 is too big gap and 40 > 50 is not big enough (I wish I could get 55, but for now it seems I'll be following the gospel of Helios according to Gus...)
What does work well though is 10-20 (12-24 for that matter) 30ish (30, 31, 35) and fifty and up (either 50 or 50-135)
my 2p

I don't doubt I'd like it too once I'd have tried it but....
Truth is, if you are into REALLY wide, you don't want to go back after trying 10-20. Hell, I saw good deal on DA14/2.8 but no, no... 10mm is 10mm

That's true...
it hurts to realise there so much to improve in style, technique once you try ltds...
but if you get it right they are VERY rewarding...

BR
Peter

hey Peter,

there is this new Samyang 14/2.8 which could go for about 300 bucks.

I could go for this one since it's cheap and fast. but as you said, the versatility and additional 4mm wideness of a 10-20 seems to be more practical. I would love to have the 12-24 Pentax, but the price right now doesn't seem to go my way. I would rather get a used Sigma 10-20 if somebody is selling here at the marketplace and a new Samyang 84/1.4 which caught my attention recently.

axl · 10-11-2009, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

hey Peter,

there is this new Samyang 14/2.8 which could go for about 300 bucks.

I could go for this one since it's cheap and fast. but as you said, the versatility and additional 4mm wideness of a 10-20 seems to be more practical. I would love to have the 12-24 Pentax, but the price right now doesn't seem to go my way. I would rather get a used Sigma 10-20 if somebody is selling here at the marketplace and a new Samyang 84/1.4 which caught my attention recently.

I was thinking of 12-24 many times, but being in Egypt gave me a lesson in 10mm appreciation.
The DA14 I saw is going for £300 (very good price for UK, though used) but again, it's not about the range of 10-20 for me, IT IS THE 10mm

And I've tried the Samyang 85 too.. Honestly I was really pleasantly surprised by the results handheld at 1.4. Seems to be a very good lens for the price. But if I have to choose to spend hard earned cash (and unfortunately I do) I'll put it towards 21ltd and hope for M85/2 to pop up on some marketplace...

Pentaxor · 10-11-2009, 04:41 PM

Originally posted by axl

I was thinking of 12-24 many times, but being in Egypt gave me a lesson in 10mm appreciation.
The DA14 I saw is going for £300 (very good price for UK, though used) but again, it's not about the range of 10-20 for me, IT IS THE 10mm

And I've tried the Samyang 85 too.. Honestly I was really pleasantly surprised by the results handheld at 1.4. Seems to be a very good lens for the price. But if I have to choose to spend hard earned cash (and unfortunately I do) I'll put it towards 21ltd and hope for M85/2 to pop up on some marketplace...

I see. I want to ask some question regarding your Sigma 10-20.

setting aside the wide aspect of the lens, how do you find the colors, contrast, and sharpness? because those 3 are the most important thing for me in getting an ultrawide lens. I do mind and hate dull colors but wouldn't mind aperture speed.

and why didn't you get the 85 if it's that good? you can set it at f2 anyways, right? and a 21 doesn't seem to be a good choice since you have a 10-20. maybe a 24 would be more ideal. I just don't like the 28 at all(except the K f/2), that's why I'm not considering it.

Maxington · 10-11-2009, 05:00 PM

I have a DA* 16-50, and the FA 35/50/100 primes as well, and you can actually notice the difference in shots taken with a prime vs the zoom, but it really depends on the shot.

The bokeh is better, and less distortion, and the colour/contrast is all better on the primes, but the DA* is no slouch anyway.

It's a bit horses for courses, I find you can't beat the DA* for overall usefulness, it gives me a weather sealed, flexible one lens setup, and for hiking that's great. One unit to stuff in a backpack or clip to the straps.

When I have time, I like the primes because they give shots that extra bit of fairy dust. But primes are a pain in the ass when you are hiking up a mountain in dusty inland Australia, or rainy coastal Australia, where my shots are mostly taken.

So, I recommend buying them all

**interested_observer** · 10-11-2009, 06:57 PM

Evening All,

I have the 12-24, and like it very much. I like landscape shooting and wide angle is my primary focus (pun intended). It has been said many times that the 12-24 is like a set of primes in that range. I compared the test data, and figured that one lens against several was much easier to haul around. I have not been disappointed.

The 12-24 is very sharp, especially at f8. I tend to do a lot of work in the late afternoon and early evening, so my shutter times tend to be longer than normal, especially at f8 with and ISO 100 (going for sharpness). Its sharper than the 15, and a tad less than the 21 ltd (21 is better by about 10%) also a tad less than the 24 (by about 5%). On the edge of the lens its better than the 21 ltd, but again a tad less than the 24. So, given that its a prime, it certainly holds its own, with the best.

You look at the numbers, read the reviews and the remarks here, pay your money, get the lens and go shooting. That is really the only way to know for yourself. So far - I have been very happy.... One of these days, I will pick up either a 21 or 24 and find out, but right now its not in the budget - (we have 2 sons in college).

Hope that helps...

axl · 10-12-2009, 12:15 AM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

I see. I want to ask some question regarding your Sigma 10-20.

setting aside the wide aspect of the lens, how do you find the colors, contrast, and sharpness? because those 3 are the most important thing for me in getting an ultrawide lens. I do mind and hate dull colors but wouldn't mind aperture speed.

and why didn't you get the 85 if it's that good? you can set it at f2 anyways, right? and a 21 doesn't seem to be a good choice since you have a 10-20. maybe a 24 would be more ideal. I just don't like the 28 at all(except the K f/2), that's why I'm not considering it.

Pentaxor,

I have 24 (Sigma) at the moment, and in terms of FL I agree with you. 24 is better for my line up than 21. But I'm not happy with the IQ of the 24. I gave it a fair chance and it disappointed me. So I laid it aside. Then I took it out again. I thought it's OK until I started to process pics that my wife took on the same day with 31ltd.... Man, that was it. I'm out for a new lens. 21 vs 10-20? One is big bulky and superwide, other is lightweight. So if I'd be going light then 21 would get the call....

re: Sigma 10-20. I believe I have a great copy. I'm not fussed about AF and it's issued. 98% of my shots with that lens is @10mm f8/11, MF on 1m mark. Because of the huge FOV the metering with this lens is tricky. I stick to M mode, take few shots to determine the right exposure and off you go....
- all following relates to settings as described above -
Sharpness:
at f8 - 11 the lens is great! Coupled with K10 it delivers a lot of detail. On K20 (GX20 in my case) it it's nothing short of superb. At f5.6 most of the frame is still great and sharp, but extreme corners do lack a bit...

Color and contrast:
It's definitely "colder" than Pentax lenses. But if you nail the exposure, it has great contrast and punch to the pictures.
All in all, I think for the price this sells, you can't go wrong with ti!

Here are some examples:

BR
Peter

PS: sorry to OP for kind of hi-jacking the thread

Pentaxor · 10-12-2009, 12:47 AM

thanks Peter. those are nice captures. definitely has more contrast and detail than the kit lens that I use. but you are right about it being colder where I would miss the Pentax 12-24's warm colors . guess I need to warm that up with customization or WB then which is quite of a bit of a bother. I think with it would do well with the K-7. so I would say goodluck to myself and see how it does under multi-zone metering.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Primes to replace DA* 16-50mm	noahpurdy	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	4	04-29-2010 06:40 AM
K-7 replace K20d? or not?	gemini	Pentax DSLR Discussion	50	06-03-2009 04:30 AM
For Sale - Sold: smc Pentax M Primes, S-M-C Primes, THE Series 1 70~210 Zoom, Viv MFTC and more	monochrome	Sold Items	33	02-13-2009 01:29 PM
Replace parts	Catelin	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	9	02-09-2009 11:43 PM
Giving up the 16-45. what should replace it?	jazzman	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	12-21-2007 02:50 PM

10-11-2009, 04:01 PM	#16
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by axl I know, even myself, I went for the cheaper route (for now ) - 10-20, Sigma 24/2.8 AF, 31ltd, 40ltd, F50/1.7 as for your suggestions. The first would work well (for me) 24 to 40 is nice gap and very managable, but there is missing something longer... 14 to 40 is too big gap IMO, I had 20 to 40 gap but found it too big. Was after 28mm lens but then good deal for 31 came along... 10-20, 40,50 doesn't work well either (again for me). I've been there, tried that. Again 20 > 40 is too big gap and 40 > 50 is not big enough (I wish I could get 55, but for now it seems I'll be following the gospel of Helios according to Gus...) What does work well though is 10-20 (12-24 for that matter) 30ish (30, 31, 35) and fifty and up (either 50 or 50-135) my 2p I don't doubt I'd like it too once I'd have tried it but.... Truth is, if you are into REALLY wide, you don't want to go back after trying 10-20. Hell, I saw good deal on DA14/2.8 but no, no... 10mm is 10mm That's true... it hurts to realise there so much to improve in style, technique once you try ltds... but if you get it right they are VERY rewarding... BR Peter hey Peter, there is this new Samyang 14/2.8 which could go for about 300 bucks. I could go for this one since it's cheap and fast. but as you said, the versatility and additional 4mm wideness of a 10-20 seems to be more practical. I would love to have the 12-24 Pentax, but the price right now doesn't seem to go my way. I would rather get a used Sigma 10-20 if somebody is selling here at the marketplace and a new Samyang 84/1.4 which caught my attention recently.

10-11-2009, 04:11 PM	#17
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	Originally posted by Pentaxor hey Peter, there is this new Samyang 14/2.8 which could go for about 300 bucks. I could go for this one since it's cheap and fast. but as you said, the versatility and additional 4mm wideness of a 10-20 seems to be more practical. I would love to have the 12-24 Pentax, but the price right now doesn't seem to go my way. I would rather get a used Sigma 10-20 if somebody is selling here at the marketplace and a new Samyang 84/1.4 which caught my attention recently. I was thinking of 12-24 many times, but being in Egypt gave me a lesson in 10mm appreciation. The DA14 I saw is going for £300 (very good price for UK, though used) but again, it's not about the range of 10-20 for me, IT IS THE 10mm And I've tried the Samyang 85 too.. Honestly I was really pleasantly surprised by the results handheld at 1.4. Seems to be a very good lens for the price. But if I have to choose to spend hard earned cash (and unfortunately I do) I'll put it towards 21ltd and hope for M85/2 to pop up on some marketplace...

10-11-2009, 04:41 PM	#18
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by axl I was thinking of 12-24 many times, but being in Egypt gave me a lesson in 10mm appreciation. The DA14 I saw is going for £300 (very good price for UK, though used) but again, it's not about the range of 10-20 for me, IT IS THE 10mm And I've tried the Samyang 85 too.. Honestly I was really pleasantly surprised by the results handheld at 1.4. Seems to be a very good lens for the price. But if I have to choose to spend hard earned cash (and unfortunately I do) I'll put it towards 21ltd and hope for M85/2 to pop up on some marketplace... I see. I want to ask some question regarding your Sigma 10-20. setting aside the wide aspect of the lens, how do you find the colors, contrast, and sharpness? because those 3 are the most important thing for me in getting an ultrawide lens. I do mind and hate dull colors but wouldn't mind aperture speed. and why didn't you get the 85 if it's that good? you can set it at f2 anyways, right? and a 21 doesn't seem to be a good choice since you have a 10-20. maybe a 24 would be more ideal. I just don't like the 28 at all(except the K f/2), that's why I'm not considering it.

10-11-2009, 05:00 PM	#19
Maxington Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 255	I have a DA* 16-50, and the FA 35/50/100 primes as well, and you can actually notice the difference in shots taken with a prime vs the zoom, but it really depends on the shot. The bokeh is better, and less distortion, and the colour/contrast is all better on the primes, but the DA* is no slouch anyway. It's a bit horses for courses, I find you can't beat the DA* for overall usefulness, it gives me a weather sealed, flexible one lens setup, and for hiking that's great. One unit to stuff in a backpack or clip to the straps. When I have time, I like the primes because they give shots that extra bit of fairy dust. But primes are a pain in the ass when you are hiking up a mountain in dusty inland Australia, or rainy coastal Australia, where my shots are mostly taken. So, I recommend buying them all

10-11-2009, 06:57 PM	#20
interested_observer Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,707	Evening All, I have the 12-24, and like it very much. I like landscape shooting and wide angle is my primary focus (pun intended). It has been said many times that the 12-24 is like a set of primes in that range. I compared the test data, and figured that one lens against several was much easier to haul around. I have not been disappointed. The 12-24 is very sharp, especially at f8. I tend to do a lot of work in the late afternoon and early evening, so my shutter times tend to be longer than normal, especially at f8 with and ISO 100 (going for sharpness). Its sharper than the 15, and a tad less than the 21 ltd (21 is better by about 10%) also a tad less than the 24 (by about 5%). On the edge of the lens its better than the 21 ltd, but again a tad less than the 24. So, given that its a prime, it certainly holds its own, with the best. You look at the numbers, read the reviews and the remarks here, pay your money, get the lens and go shooting. That is really the only way to know for yourself. So far - I have been very happy.... One of these days, I will pick up either a 21 or 24 and find out, but right now its not in the budget - (we have 2 sons in college). Hope that helps...

10-12-2009, 12:15 AM	#21
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	Originally posted by Pentaxor I see. I want to ask some question regarding your Sigma 10-20. setting aside the wide aspect of the lens, how do you find the colors, contrast, and sharpness? because those 3 are the most important thing for me in getting an ultrawide lens. I do mind and hate dull colors but wouldn't mind aperture speed. and why didn't you get the 85 if it's that good? you can set it at f2 anyways, right? and a 21 doesn't seem to be a good choice since you have a 10-20. maybe a 24 would be more ideal. I just don't like the 28 at all(except the K f/2), that's why I'm not considering it. Pentaxor, I have 24 (Sigma) at the moment, and in terms of FL I agree with you. 24 is better for my line up than 21. But I'm not happy with the IQ of the 24. I gave it a fair chance and it disappointed me. So I laid it aside. Then I took it out again. I thought it's OK until I started to process pics that my wife took on the same day with 31ltd.... Man, that was it. I'm out for a new lens. 21 vs 10-20? One is big bulky and superwide, other is lightweight. So if I'd be going light then 21 would get the call.... re: Sigma 10-20. I believe I have a great copy. I'm not fussed about AF and it's issued. 98% of my shots with that lens is @10mm f8/11, MF on 1m mark. Because of the huge FOV the metering with this lens is tricky. I stick to M mode, take few shots to determine the right exposure and off you go.... - all following relates to settings as described above - Sharpness: at f8 - 11 the lens is great! Coupled with K10 it delivers a lot of detail. On K20 (GX20 in my case) it it's nothing short of superb. At f5.6 most of the frame is still great and sharp, but extreme corners do lack a bit... Color and contrast: It's definitely "colder" than Pentax lenses. But if you nail the exposure, it has great contrast and punch to the pictures. All in all, I think for the price this sells, you can't go wrong with ti! Here are some examples: BR Peter PS: sorry to OP for kind of hi-jacking the thread

10-12-2009, 12:47 AM	#22
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	thanks Peter. those are nice captures. definitely has more contrast and detail than the kit lens that I use. but you are right about it being colder where I would miss the Pentax 12-24's warm colors . guess I need to warm that up with customization or WB then which is quite of a bit of a bother. I think with it would do well with the K-7. so I would say goodluck to myself and see how it does under multi-zone metering.