Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-07-2009, 10:46 AM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,833
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
I had a 14/2.8 for quite a while. Great lens, but big.
My 12-24 was noticeably wider at 12mm than the 14, so I expect the 14 will be noticeably wider than your 16-45.
I wasn't weeing any real image quality difference between the 12-24 and the 14, and both lenses are quite large, so I sold the 14 in favour of a 15LTD.
Thanks for the info re; width between 14 mm, 12mm, 16mm...with all the 35 mm equivalent, etc...it throws me on the difference in width. That gives me a good working idea about what I may expect about the coverage of these different lens.

One thing I like about the 14mm is the fast F2.8 aspect.


12-07-2009, 10:47 AM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,833
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Lodewijk Quote
I have it and really like it, see my review in the database: Pentax Lens Review and Specification Database - 14mm F2.8

I use it wide open a lot, for low light or shallow DOF.

Note that there's also software to "defish" your DA 10-17 photos (see photozone's test Pentax SMC DA 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 ED[IF] Fisheye - Review / Test Report
Thanks for the defish link...it's something I want to try.
12-07-2009, 10:50 AM   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,833
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Andi Lo Quote
I'm wondering why you didnt mention the DA 15. It will turn whatever camera you have into a light kit, so there's something to consider between f2.8 and compactness.

Your question on whether it will feel wider, yes, 14mm will feel considerably wider than 16mm, but whether that's enough or not for your purpose is not something someone else can decide...

There's also Sigma 10-20mm, perfect overlap with your current 16-45
Re: 15mm...extra cost, F4 vs F2.8 and at 15 mm I wonder if it's much wider then my 16-45.

12-07-2009, 10:51 AM   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,833
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Dale Quote
Good question, I have one in a box, wrapped in decorative paper under a conifer in our living room. I have forsworn not to open, inspect or otherwise mount said lens until the morning of Dec the 25th. My other "wide" is the 17mm end of my Sigma 17-70 zoom.

Hypothetically if I had opened the box and mounted the lens (in spite of being forsworn above) juts to make sure it, errrr, fitted/worked, then let us say that I was impressed with the quality of image. Hypothetically you understand...

I've seen some of Raiders work, and if he is endorsing the lens then I'd consider it. Money being no object you might go for the Pentax wide zoom, however it was the faster glass and the prime that got me in.

Couple of links, Andy McInroy uses one quite a bit, particularly in sea caves. Keitha McCall has a good blog entry on the subject
Thank you for your 'guesstimate' on how well this lens works...make that 'may' work on the 25th.

12-07-2009, 10:53 AM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,833
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by raider Quote
What abt the Sigma 10-20/f3.5? I read it is a fairly sharp lens, expensive but quality lens? I think I will still go for the DA12-24 myself.



Thanks Dale for your kind words.
One I would consider...after market..is the Tokina 11-16...but it is not available in Pentax mount. I have heard that Tokina is also owned by Hoya....as with Pentax...makes me wonder if there is a reason why Tokina only makes a mount in Canon and Nikon for this and many of their lenses?
12-07-2009, 11:03 AM   #21
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,631
QuoteOriginally posted by lesmore49 Quote
Interesting that you say the 10-17 Fisheye is significantly wider at 17 mm then the 14 is at 14 mm?
From Pentax Imaging site:

DA 16-45mm @ 16mm, Angle of View = 83 degrees
DA 14mm, Angle of View = 90 degrees
DA 10-17mm @ 17mm, Angle of View = 100 degrees
12-07-2009, 11:05 AM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: on the wall
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 715
It would be helpful to see a line-up pic of the lenses together to get an idea of their relative sizes.
12-07-2009, 11:06 AM   #23
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
Not sure where you're looking, but at B&H and other major dealers, the DA15 is $100 cheaper than the DA14. I guess if you're planning on shooting action with it, the f/2.8 versus f/4 might be a big consideration, but it really isn't for most wide angle photography. But I would indeed be thinking long and hard about the focal lengths, as the differences between 12, 14, 15, and 16 can be striking. I know every time I mount the DA14 (which I don't own, but a friend does, and he "makes" me borrow it every time we get together), it feels disorienting to me, and I really don't like it. Whereas the DA15 feels *much* more natural to me. If you actually compare shots, you don't see a huge difference in the final result, but I find the experience of framing with them is just (subjectively) more different than it has any right to be. In fact, the DA15 almost seems closer in this sense to the 18mm end of my 18-55 than it does to the DA14. Almost. Which leads me to suspect that someone with a 16-45 wouldn't find the DA15 quite so compelling, except for size. Which frankly was my main reason for getting it to replace my 18-55 in the bag, strange as that might seem.

12-07-2009, 12:37 PM   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,833
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
From Pentax Imaging site:

DA 16-45mm @ 16mm, Angle of View = 83 degrees
DA 14mm, Angle of View = 90 degrees
DA 10-17mm @ 17mm, Angle of View = 100 degrees

Thanks, I never realized the difference. The angle of view gives a bit more of a better idea then mm.

Even at 17 mm the 10-17 mm FE lens is significantly wider than the 14 mm wide angle and distortion is not too bad at 17 mm, or at least something I can work with in lens placement.
12-07-2009, 12:41 PM   #25
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,833
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
Not sure where you're looking, but at B&H and other major dealers, the DA15 is $100 cheaper than the DA14. Looking at Canadian stores, Henry's, Don's, London Drugs. I guess if you're planning on shooting action with it, the f/2.8 versus f/4 might be a big consideration, but it really isn't for most wide angle photography. But I would indeed be thinking long and hard about the focal lengths, as the differences between 12, 14, 15, and 16 can be striking. I know every time I mount the DA14 (which I don't own, but a friend does, and he "makes" me borrow it every time we get together), it feels disorienting to me, and I really don't like it. Whereas the DA15 feels *much* more natural to me. If you actually compare shots, you don't see a huge difference in the final result, but I find the experience of framing with them is just (subjectively) more different than it has any right to be. In fact, the DA15 almost seems closer in this sense to the 18mm end of my 18-55 than it does to the DA14. Almost. Which leads me to suspect that someone with a 16-45 wouldn't find the DA15 quite so compelling, except for size. Good point...I want something that is significantly different then my 16-45 @ 16 mm. Audiobombers post re: angle of view is making me consider more work with my Pentax 10-17 mm @ 17 mm. Which frankly was my main reason for getting it to replace my 18-55 in the bag, strange as that might seem.
Like most of us I have a camera budget and I want to avoid redundancy as much as possible in lens selection.
12-07-2009, 11:47 PM   #26
Veteran Member
Andi Lo's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,925
QuoteOriginally posted by kristoffon Quote
Except the sigma 10-20 is soft soft soft...
Indeed it's not as sharp as my better zooms / primes, but same reason why I kept the DA 10-17 despite the horrible purple fringing, who cares when you're having some real world fun 10mm rectilinear is a totally different FOV from anything else.

Of course it will depend on what the OP wants it for in the end.... if it requires critical sharpness then the sigma won't be the ticket.
12-08-2009, 10:28 AM   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 3,833
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Andi Lo Quote
Indeed it's not as sharp as my better zooms / primes, but same reason why I kept the DA 10-17 despite the horrible purple fringing, who cares when you're having some real world fun 10mm rectilinear is a totally different FOV from anything else.

Of course it will depend on what the OP wants it for in the end.... if it requires critical sharpness then the sigma won't be the ticket.
The sharpness issue is critical for me. I get purple fringing occasionally with my Pentax 10-17 Fisheye, but it's not a big deal for me. I find other than that, it's a very useful lens.
12-08-2009, 11:28 PM   #28
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
...I wasn't weeing any real image quality...
ROTFLMAO

that is going in my funny typos from the internet collection, so far I'm up to volume 5
12-09-2009, 12:10 AM   #29
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by kristoffon Quote
Except the sigma 10-20 is soft soft soft...
I've found my 10-20 f4 at the tele end to be very sharp, I enlarged a picture from it to 36" wide and subsequently sold it at a tourist shop. On the wide side, the images are very sharp in the center but i've noticed apparent softness at the edges, not presently sure whether that is due to softness in the lens or field curvature. will test it when i get a chance. maybe there is sample to sample variation.
12-09-2009, 03:10 AM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by lesmore49 Quote
The sharpness issue is critical for me. I get purple fringing occasionally with my Pentax 10-17 Fisheye, but it's not a big deal for me. I find other than that, it's a very useful lens.
i bought this lense two days ago.

Could you post some image and 100% crop at center. Just trying get idea about how my lense is by comparing.
Any shot would do. Thanks.

PS: I will post something from it when i get familiar. Don't want put samples now, might give wrong ideas to people looking to buy.
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!
14mm, cars, f2.8, k-mount, kit, mm, pentax lens, pentax-da, slr lens, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA 14mm F2.8 ED (IF) PrimeObjectif Sold Items 2 01-20-2010 08:54 AM
Pentax 14mm 2.8 OR 21mm 3.2 tgplains Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 11 12-23-2009 04:47 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8 frekcles Sold Items 5 10-05-2009 09:39 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:13 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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