[robbiec]

Oh, now I get it. In the original post I was talking about 16/85mm lens and the f5,6 referred to APSC and you talk about FF. I am of course aware that f5,6 on FF is something different (equals to f3,7 on APSC).
And I was talking about portraits with a background (environmental portraits, is it correct expression?), not studio portraits (I am not a pro with own studio), so fast lens comes handy. So let´s finish this with statement that f4 would be nicer in more ways, that´s all.

Sometimes it is just better to stop digging...

[jonny1986]

complain complain complain some only know how to complain...they want pentax do everything nikon and canon but at half price....that's why most people didn't buy ff camera and lenses from canon....it was money....now that pentax come out with a good proposal at very good price...the 24-70 cost less than half....they complain cause the kit zoom lens is shorter...they not even consider that probably the canikon 24-120 cost double....they want all at half price....
i expect big rant for lens af even price...

---------- Post added 02-15-2016 at 09:49 AM ----------

by the way nobody consider the huge advantage of in camera pixel shifting....or sensor adjustment composition (something that is so good to mimic a cube head from arca and something you can't do with a ball head only...so you save some good money).....or 5 axes stabilization ....i'm sure the only thing people will tell


- af ois not on par with canikon
-kit lens is slow and short
flash sync not 1/250---

bla bla bla...

stop ranting and go buy the gear you wanted from beginning...a d810....usre it will cost double considering the 24-70 but you will be happy and you will cure your complex of inferiority towards your canikon friend,

[FantasticMrFox]

complain complain complain some only know how to complain...they want pentax do everything nikon and canon but at half price....that's why most people didn't buy ff camera and lenses from canon....it was money....now that pentax come out with a good proposal at very good price...the 24-70 cost less than half....they complain cause the kit zoom lens is shorter...they not even consider that probably the canikon 24-120 cost double....they want all at half price....
i expect big rant for lens af even price...

Exactly. You're damned if you release a stellar lens with a price point to match, you're damned if you release an affordable lens with an optical performance to match. Everything needs to be as good as or better than CaNikon, but considerably cheaper.

Pentax is dooomed

[aleonx3]

People buy the 16-85 because of very versatile focal range, especially the wide end. If it was 18mm (or actually 18,7mm to equal to 28mm on FF), I guess nobody would buy it.

The general sentiment is that 18mm not wide enough for landscape photographers, however, for others like some of us city travellers, it probably would do just fine. Image rendering of people gets much distortion on the wide-end. For me, I would buy that lens on the FF if the image rendering is that good like the 16-85.

[monochrome]

The general sentiment is that 18mm not wide enough for landscape photographers, however, for others like some of us city travellers, it probably would do just fine. Image rendering of people gets much distortion on the wide-end. For me, I would buy that lens on the FF if the image rendering is that good like the 16-85.

I think our poster needs to visit the 24~70 club thread. Those landscapes are on an APSc sensor, and they're fabulous. Bokeh of the portraits at short end is also very nice.

[reh321]

The general sentiment is that 18mm not wide enough for landscape photographers, however, for others like some of us city travellers, it probably would do just fine. Image rendering of people gets much distortion on the wide-end. For me, I would buy that lens on the FF if the image rendering is that good like the 16-85.

For years, whichever APS-C camera I was using, the lens that starts at 18mm has been the one which I use the most.

[aleonx3]

- af ois not on par with canikon
-kit lens is slow and short
flash sync not 1/250---

bla bla bla...

stop ranting and go buy the gear you wanted from beginning...a d810....usre it will cost double considering the 24-70 but you will be happy and you will cure your complex of inferiority towards your canikon friend,

+10, I have yet to find a single D810 or 5DIII owner/users (I am only talking about event photographers) whose work/image that wows me that leaves me wanting for those gears.... Pentax is doomed no matter what because camera buying habit is mostly just for the gear head.

[FantasticMrFox]

+10, I have yet to find a single D810 or 5DIII owner/users (I am only talking about event photographers) whose work/image that wows me that leaves me wanting for those gears ...

I can send you a link to one right now

[aleonx3]

I can send you a link to one right now

Thanks FantasticMrFox, I will be glad to entertain... the ones I am most interested are event photos with people shots - no distortion and no white pale faces. Please PM me... and I would like to be humbled.

[FantasticMrFox]

Thanks FantasticMrFox, I will be glad to entertain... the ones I am most interested are event photos with people shots - no distortion and no white pale faces. Please PM me... and I would like to be humbled.

Sorry, I misread and thought you have only seen convincing D810 results from event photographers, and would like to see others now The one I was referring to is a Swiss astrophysics postdoc who takes amazing landscape and night sky images in Latin America.

[skierd]

I just wanted it to be a constant aperture,higher end, and slightly wider 24-105 lens so it was something I'd consider buying. I'm sure it'll be good for the kit lens crowd, and far superior to the old 28-105 F and FA versions, just not what I was hoping for.

Maybe we'll see a D FA Limited WR zoom in the near future?

[jatrax]

Maybe we'll see a D FA Limited WR zoom in the near future?

Doubt it. But I'm hoping for a D FA*24-105 f/4 Though I suppose that is unlikely as well.

[Heie]

but f5,6 is f5,6; e.g. you actually cannot make portrait shots with this lens.

And I was talking about portraits with a background (environmental portraits, is it correct expression?), not studio portraits

Dont act like you don´t únderstand. I meant typical portrait with blurred background. F5,6 on APSC doesn´t really give you much of a background blur.

I've been doing it wrong this whole time

ALL THE FOLLOWING: K-5 IIs, DA 18-135 WR @ f/5.6

---

PENTAX K-5 IIs, DA* 55 @ f/5.0 (will you concede one third of a stop?)



PENTAX K-5 IIs, DA* 60-250 @ f/5.6



PENTAX K-5 IIs, DA 18-135 @ f/5.6



PENTAX K-5 IIs, FA 77 LTD @ f/8.0



PENTAX K-5 IIs, DA* 16-50 @ f/7.1

---

but it won´t be very suitable for landscapes (28mm is not wide enough)

Quite possibly my favorite landscape shot ever taken, K-3, DA* 16-50 @ 28mm:



But I know...I know. You were probably referring to 28mm on FF, which would make that one 42mm on FF (which is WAY narrower!!)

I wouldn't even know where to begin with the landscapes I've shot at 18mm on APS-C (28mm on FF)...

-Heie

[reh321]

Quite possibly my favorite landscape shot ever taken:

Attachment 298909

K-3, DA* 16-50 @ 28mm.

But I know...I know. You were probably referring to 28mm on FF, which would make that one 42mm on FF (which is WAY narrower!!)

I guess I got lost on this one. Since you took this one @28mm on a K-3, you would have needed a lens @42mm to get this beautiful view on a K-1, and taking it @28mm would have given a much wider view. Is that a correct interpretation of what you were saying?

(BTW - thank you for fitting some beauty into this discussion)

[bertwert]

Amazing shots @Heie