Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-12-2010, 08:16 AM   #301
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,780
tokyoso: That last shot especially has amazing detail on the bee. And I love the composition. Blossom time is so nice!

jct us101: Those are all excellent especially the close focus pix. Mmmm... sweets.

TOUGEFC: Great rough hewn look. My fave is the second.

Lots of proof of what the kit lens can do.

04-12-2010, 08:31 AM   #302
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
I had seen much better results with better glass.
I have seen better results from better glass as well. Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall anyone on this thread saying the kit lens is the best lens made.

QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
the exif data shows that you shot this at 23mm at f8, which is not a weak spot for the kitlens. although it still shows quite some bit of weakness in sharpness and obviously weak contrast rendering. I'm not saying that it is not sharp, but I'm rather stating that it is not at par or render as good as the better glasses out there. better glass means better resolution. it is an acceptable result to those whose needs aren't that high or for those that don't consider this a problem and such lens is enough.
anyway, it would had helped if you do or had some shots at 55mm for basis of comparison. I had some 55mm shots of it before and wondered how come they appear soft. that's were I did some tests and that's where I found out that it's softy at 55mm or at it's long end. there was also a thread here were a photo sample showed that softy rendering.
I wrote the F-stop, focal length and ISO in my post for the convenience of all so it really wasn't necessary to pull that from the EXIF. I'm not doing a lens test, so I'm not sure what it would help to shoot the scene at 50mm. I've put the lens on a tripod and shot newspapers, and of course there are other lenses that do a better job. I own several lenses that significantly outperform it at ~50mm, partly because there are so many exceptionally sharp lenses in that range.

I think the point of this thread is that people shoot some very nice shots with the kit lens--shots that from a technical standpoint are well beyond "acceptable" for the vast majority of viewers. That these shots do not meet your standards is a matter of taste and preference to which you are certainly entitled.
04-12-2010, 09:04 AM   #303
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 38,877
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
I have seen better results from better glass as well. Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall anyone on this thread saying the kit lens is the best lens made...
Don't feed the troll!!!

I am a real fan of the kit lens and, as a result, am fairly indulgent of some of the hyperbole from other fans. (No need for PP...get real!) Having said that, I will be the first to admit that the kit has its weak points, most of which have been covered in the last couple dozen posts. The important things to remember in regards to the DA 18-55 are:
  • It is dirt cheap
  • It has a useful zoom range
  • It truly is a decent performer, not miraculously so, but a decent lens none-the-less
  • The manual focus is actually usable
  • A newbie can shoot for YEARS with the DA 18-55 coupled with the DA 50-200 and get results from both that will amaze and thrill their friends (assuming they can avoid LBA)
  • It is somewhat soft at 55mm and has distortion at 18mm
  • Vignette at wide end
  • Need extreme shallow DOF?...look elsewhere
  • It is dirt cheap
In case the photos on this thread bear too much of the amateur's stamp, I would suggest going to the PPG and browse their selection of kit lens entries:

PENTAX Photo Gallery: DA 18-55/3.5-5.6 AL v1

PENTAX Photo Gallery: DA 18-55/3.5-5.6 AL v2

PENTAX Photo Gallery: DA 18-55/3.5-5.6 AL WR


Steve

(The kit is on the not-for-sale list...too good at what it does...unless I replace it with the WR version )

Last edited by stevebrot; 04-12-2010 at 09:28 AM.
04-12-2010, 10:54 AM   #304
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
I have seen better results from better glass as well. Maybe I missed it, but I don't recall anyone on this thread saying the kit lens is the best lens made.



I wrote the F-stop, focal length and ISO in my post for the convenience of all so it really wasn't necessary to pull that from the EXIF. I'm not doing a lens test, so I'm not sure what it would help to shoot the scene at 50mm. I've put the lens on a tripod and shot newspapers, and of course there are other lenses that do a better job. I own several lenses that significantly outperform it at ~50mm, partly because there are so many exceptionally sharp lenses in that range.

I think the point of this thread is that people shoot some very nice shots with the kit lens--shots that from a technical standpoint are well beyond "acceptable" for the vast majority of viewers. That these shots do not meet your standards is a matter of taste and preference to which you are certainly entitled.
why the discussion about 50-55mm?

the 50-55mm image taken by tokyoso generated some interest or some curiosity. it doesn't mean to undermine the lens itself but rather to verify or evaluate how the lens appears to be quite sharp at such focal length, especially when it was stated that it was even cropped? unfortunately, there is no exif data that can be used as reference. some attributed such nailing sharpness to shooting skill and knowledge or being shot in a good day, which I don't think makes the lens that sharper unless some tweaking is done to an extent [ be it in-camera (custom image or filters) or off-camera post-processing ]. your cropped sample gave a more accurate or let's say a more consistent assessment of how the 18-55 image would appear when cropped (same from my 18-55 images at 24mm). quite far-fetched from the one by tokyoso, not to mention it was shot at the weakest focal length of the zoom which is at 55mm. who wouldn't be happy to have such sharpness at 55mm? I'm sure everyone would, including myself. this is merely an enigma. that's why I post a question if it's because he had a unique copy or merely tweaked. I'd be happy if he'll be able to get a consistent sharp output like that at that focal length, same thing if I'll be able to produce such output as well. but the fact that I haven't, raises some question. no hate here.

04-12-2010, 11:12 AM   #305
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
why the discussion about 50-55mm?

the 50-55mm image taken by tokyoso generated some interest or some curiosity. it doesn't mean to undermine the lens itself but rather to verify or evaluate how the lens appears to be quite sharp at such focal length, especially when it was stated that it was even cropped? unfortunately, there is no exif data that can be used as reference. some attributed such nailing sharpness to shooting skill and knowledge or being shot in a good day, which I don't think makes the lens that sharper unless some tweaking is done to an extent [ be it in-camera (custom image or filters) or off-camera post-processing ]. your cropped sample gave a more accurate or let's say a more consistent assessment of how the 18-55 image would appear when cropped (same from my 18-55 images at 24mm). quite far-fetched from the one by tokyoso, not to mention it was shot at the weakest focal length of the zoom which is at 55mm. who wouldn't be happy to have such sharpness at 55mm? I'm sure everyone would, including myself. this is merely an enigma. that's why I post a question if it's because he had a unique copy or merely tweaked. I'd be happy if he'll be able to get a consistent sharp output like that at that focal length, same thing if I'll be able to produce such output as well. but the fact that I haven't, raises some question. no hate here.
My suggestion to the "Bee" question is that reducing a photo from 2-3,000 pixels to 500 in width may cause changes that look like sharpening. I looked at those photos closely, and did not see any of the artifacts I usually see with sharpening, but there are relatively few pixels there.
04-12-2010, 11:16 AM   #306
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Don't feed the troll!!!

I am a real fan of the kit lens and, as a result, am fairly indulgent of some of the hyperbole from other fans. (No need for PP...get real!) Having said that, I will be the first to admit that the kit has its weak points, most of which have been covered in the last couple dozen posts. The important things to remember in regards to the DA 18-55 are:
  • It is dirt cheap
  • It has a useful zoom range
  • It truly is a decent performer, not miraculously so, but a decent lens none-the-less
  • The manual focus is actually usable
  • A newbie can shoot for YEARS with the DA 18-55 coupled with the DA 50-200 and get results from both that will amaze and thrill their friends (assuming they can avoid LBA)
  • It is somewhat soft at 55mm and has distortion at 18mm
  • Vignette at wide end
  • Need extreme shallow DOF?...look elsewhere
  • It is dirt cheap
In case the photos on this thread bear too much of the amateur's stamp, I would suggest going to the PPG and browse their selection of kit lens entries:

PENTAX Photo Gallery: DA 18-55/3.5-5.6 AL v1

PENTAX Photo Gallery: DA 18-55/3.5-5.6 AL v2

PENTAX Photo Gallery: DA 18-55/3.5-5.6 AL WR


Steve

(The kit is on the not-for-sale list...too good at what it does...unless I replace it with the WR version )
Very true, and yes, the pp part of my post was tongue in cheek, though that may not come through. There is no lens that does not benefit from post processing. When you shoot raw files, it is an interesting question to determine what is post processing anyway?
04-12-2010, 12:03 PM   #307
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
My suggestion to the "Bee" question is that reducing a photo from 2-3,000 pixels to 500 in width may cause changes that look like sharpening. I looked at those photos closely, and did not see any of the artifacts I usually see with sharpening, but there are relatively few pixels there.
there are only a few pixels alright, but I don't think reducing the pixels would make the image sharper but rather cleaner. the image would also have less resolution when it's cropped bigger. so maintaining the image size and cropped as is, is recommended. it could be in-camera image settings though. but I'm not dismissing off-camera as well. there are programs that are capable of such removal or reduction of artifacts.
04-12-2010, 01:58 PM   #308
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MA
Posts: 133
K100D with kit


Last edited by basso4735; 04-13-2010 at 04:30 PM.
04-12-2010, 02:23 PM   #309
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Missouri
Posts: 400
04-12-2010, 02:57 PM   #310
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,780
One of the first shots I ever took with my Pentax DSLR. And the kit lens of course.


Flour Child



"Prototype For A Performance" by Elaine Reynolds at Belltable Arts Centre, Limerick, Ireland, 26 January 2008.
04-13-2010, 05:15 AM   #311
Veteran Member
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,830
Robin, I love the flour child photo.

I can't say I've seen a photo or taken a photo with this lens where I said afterward, if only the lens had been better. Now, for my work, I've said that about the photographer many times.
04-13-2010, 05:23 AM   #312
Veteran Member
casil403's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Calgary AB
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,170
My 18-55 is a close second behind the sigma10-20. I've been really happy with that lens:





04-13-2010, 04:16 PM   #313
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,780
QuoteOriginally posted by GeneV Quote
Robin, I love the flour child photo.
Thanks. I was definitely unaware of what I was doing at the time, still not having much experience with DSLRs. But I did manage to hand hold that shot, which must be a very long shutter, judging from the falling flour. I fell in love with SR right away!

This one is the apartment block I lived in at the time.


Lilac Staircase

04-13-2010, 04:16 PM   #314
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,780
I don't do much HDR, but this building rather cried out for it.


Medical Science Center I

04-13-2010, 04:17 PM   #315
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,780
And I have always liked textures and finding new things in what we take for granted.


Wal / Don't Wal

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!
centre, community, da, da-l, data, f/4-5.6, flickr, fremont, image, k200d, kit, kit lens, lens, lenses, lol, note, oldie, pentax, pentax lens, people, post, sharpness, shot, shots, thread, time, variety, water, wool
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The * lens club BrendanPK Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 56 08-13-2017 12:38 PM
The *any and all* lens club yeatzee Lens Clubs 37 11-08-2012 04:50 PM
The 'Hey this lens has glass elements in it' Lens Club Igilligan Lens Clubs 50 11-14-2010 11:07 PM
For Sale - Sold: WTT Pentax 18-55 AL II kit lens for 18-55 AL kit lens + money wallyb Sold Items 2 11-11-2009 02:26 PM
K20D Kit at Sam's Club... jocko_nc Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 11-27-2008 06:52 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:34 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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