[cadart]

I just need convincing about which wide angle lens (zoom or not) to take landscapes with a k5iis. A lens to take advantage of it wonderful resolution but not a lens to cripple my bank account and get me in trouble with Mrs.cadart.
Input will be appreciated. Cheers. I just can't make up my mind

[chromo]

I'm in the same boat.
I'll wait and see the answers.
I was thinking something around 12mm but don't want the distortion.

[hcc]

DA15mm.

I have both DA10-17mm Fisheye and DA15mm. I am blown away by the IQ of the DA15m on both K-01 and K-7 cameras. Highly recommended

The DA10-17mm is nice for fisheye and tight rooms. But the IQ is sub-par to the DA15mm IMHO.

The in-depth review of the DA15mm is spot on: https://www.pentaxforums.com/reviews/pentax-da-15mm-f4-limited-review/introduction.html.

Hope that the comment may help.

[cadart]

DA15mm.

I have both DA10-17mm Fisheye and DA15mm. I am blown away by the IQ of the DA15m on both K-01 and K-7 cameras. Highly recommended

The DA10-17mm is nice for fisheye and tight rooms. But the IQ is sub-par to the DA15mm IMHO.

The in-depth review of the DA15mm is spot on: Pentax-DA 15mm F4 Limited Review - Introduction - PentaxForums.com.

Hope that the comment may help.

Thanks HCC.....the DA 15mm limited was definitely one of the lenses I was toying with. I think that the obvious quality of the limited lenses makes it really hard to go past them.

[DSims]

I got the DA15. I later got the DA10-17, which actually can be used in its place if need be, providing minimal fisheye effect at 17mm (which is equivalent to around 14mm in a linear lens IIRC). As you probably know, you can also get away with a surprising amount of fisheye effect in a landscape photo without people necessarily noticing, especially if you dare to actually put the horizon in the middle (!). The DA10-17 gives a nice variable FE effect, but the DA15 has better resolution and minimal distortion. They both give some of the best colors you'll ever see in a lens.

But just today I ordered a Sigma 8-16mm because I'll be taking some interior (home) architecture photos within a week or so. I generally don't like Sigma lenses as much (the way they render images) but this is the one Sigma lens I've been interested in ever since it was released. I'm certainly not interested in trying to de-fish a bunch of images I have to deliver to a client. I think it will actually be the slowest lens I own. But AFAIK, no one else goes wider, even in full-frame (apparently you can get an exact-equivalent-focal length 12-24mm FF lens for some DSLRs). The only better solution I could think of was buying (or renting) a Nikon D600/D800/E and a 14-24 lens, but that's completely unnecessary (and expensive) right now. The ultra-wide capability of the Sigma is what makes it worth getting in the first place. The Sigma 10-20s and Tamron 10-24 never had IQ as high as I wanted anyway, and the DA12-24 was too much of a compromise in every area, especially for the price. I think the Sigma 8-16 will barely give the IQ I want, but that will be good enough.

The Sigma reportedly has almost no distortion at 12mm, and even those who (like me) aren't Sigma fans seem to like it, so I think it's a good option.


So I'd consider one of these 3 lenses. I also have a K-5 IIs, and they all seem worthy of it - in fact I was shooting these two DA lenses on it again today and got good results and brilliant colors. A used DA15 is probably your best value.

Note that for landscapes you might not want to go this wide (not even 15mm) unless you plan on incorporating some interesting objects in the very near foreground. Even a lens such as a DA21, FA20, or A24/2.8 may work (all of which I've owned or used). And my FA20-35/4 was strong at the wide end and almost as nice as my FA20, but I correctly decided I couldn't own both plus the DA*16-50 (which, along with the DA16-45, is actually a nice landscape lens too, at used prices). Also, since typical landscape photos have a large DOF, so any of these lenses may be plenty fast, depending on your usage patterns. I love fast lenses and tend to shoot near wide-open, but I've never found the slightly slower speed of these two DA lenses to be a problem.

[cadart]

Mmmmm....such a dilemma. DA 15, DA21, 10-20 3.5?........these I think are what I am looking at. Thanks for your help guys..?........I need another beer and think about it more.....god I wish I was rich!

[jimr-pdx]

I really like my choice -



but you don't want distortion, so I guess the Sigma 15/2.8 fisheye is not for you. Such lenses can be de-fished reasonably well in software but the IIs might not show its best stuff after that processing. The samyang etc. 8mm would be the best bargain for wide angle imaging, but bank acct vs. distortion is in play that way .

[TER-OR]

I rented the Sigma 8-16 for a few weeks, and really enjoyed it. It's not small...but I thought it was good for landscape work and indoor work.

[Kozlok]

For me, I like landscapes at longer lengths. When I shoot landscapes at 15, Everything just gets too tiny. The 15 works much better with something significant in the foreground.

[captainbert]

A very good option and which is also probably the cheapest is the Samyang 14 2.8. It's a manual focus only lens though, and it also doesn't allow the use of filters so if you intend to use them it's of no use. I have it along with the DA 15 and Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 and it's the best performer of the lot of them being sharp across the frame even from f 3.5 (it's a full frame lens so that might explain that part but it gets great reviews for full frame cameras too). It does however have plenty of distortion and the DA 15 beats it there as well as the da 15 being more flare resistant. It's easy to focus so the manual focus part isn't a problem ive found whatsoever. If i don't need filters, it's the first one i would use before the Sigma 10-20 and DA 15 any day. It's worth a think about if you don't need filters want to keep the costs down (and have a very good performing wide angle lens at that).

[derekkite]

Pentax 12-24. I just got this a little while ago and am learning to see wide, but so far am impressed.

[cadart]

Pentax 12-24. I just got this a little while ago and am learning to see wide, but so far am impressed.

I just can't afford the Pentax OR sigma 12-24.. They are just too expensive.....$1200 in Australia. That was more than the camera. I think I am leaning towards the limited 15mm. $400 cheaper and obviously a wonderful lens.

[DSims]

I just got my Sigma 8-16 in the mail today from NYC ($650). It arrived at dusk, so I've only tried it a little so far. It looks like it renders much like other Sigmas (which I don't like so much), but the ability to zoom wide from 16 to 8mm is really nice.

The DA15 will give you nicer looking photos overall, it's just a little less flexible. But sometimes it comes along with me simply because I can fit it in my pocket.


Both of these lenses may affordable enough to be considered.


Having said all this, I'd rather shoot landscapes with something like my FA*24 when possible.

[Billgscott]

I have both the 17 - 35 and 10 - 20 Sigma EX's and both are great on the K5

[Na Horuk]

Just get the 21mm or even an old manual 24mm.