Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-10-2016, 03:27 PM   #106
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 7,698
QuoteOriginally posted by todd Quote
Trounce as well because it weighs 27.7 ounces more than the FA20. Solution: You need both.

Spoken like a true Lens Buying Addict, Todd ... see you at the meeting next month!

03-10-2016, 04:12 PM - 1 Like   #107
Pentaxian
todd's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Basement
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,805
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
see you at the meeting next month!
Don't save me a seat. I am pretty sure I am faaar from hitting my bottom... As long as you're asking me and not my wife!
03-10-2016, 05:32 PM   #108
Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,726
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
That solidifies my opinion of the Pentax FA* 24 as one of the worst * quality lenses ever made.
I have to admit that the Pentax auto-focus lenses available in 1995 {presumably mostly FA series} were the primary reason I went from Pentax to Canon {because I was comparing those lenses to Canon's USM lenses} when I went to auto-focus that year
03-10-2016, 05:55 PM   #109
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 213
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I have to admit that the Pentax auto-focus lenses available in 1995 {presumably mostly FA series} were the primary reason I went from Pentax to Canon {because I was comparing those lenses to Canon's USM lenses} when I went to auto-focus that year
I almost switched to Canon about that same time, but I got a ridiculously good deal on a PZ-20 and 28-105/100-300 outfit. If not for that and a small pack of lenses that were hard to replace in Canon at the time, the Elan was a heck of a camera back then... and their 28-105 was so much quieter than the Pentax one (though the Pentax one sure took a lot of good photos...)

I'll admit to a big sigh of relief when I mounted the 16-50 on my K10 for the first time and it focused like the USM lenses from the 90s... it felt modern...

-Eric

03-10-2016, 05:58 PM   #110
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,730
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
Norm, I'm pretty sure the FA*24 wasn't out yet, when that 24mm comparison was published in the 80s. I'm pretty sure it was introduced in 1991.
I pretty sure the edges of the FA*24 are way to soft for a landscape lens. But this is just one test of one lens. Maybe it was a lemon.

03-10-2016, 07:30 PM - 3 Likes   #111
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,245
I must have missed the memo about the FA*24 being a terrible lens.

Wide open....







f/4



And stopped down a bit





03-10-2016, 07:37 PM   #112
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,730
Definitely good enough for web sized images, I'll add those to the knowledge base.
03-10-2016, 08:43 PM   #113
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,576
QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
must have missed the memo about the FA*24 being a terrible lens.
Wide open....
Clearly a dud lens. I'll do you a favour: I'll send you $5 for postage, you send the lens to me, and you will never need to be embarrassed about using it ever again.

03-10-2016, 08:59 PM   #114
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,245
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Clearly a dud lens. I'll do you a favour: I'll send you $5 for postage, you send the lens to me, and you will never need to be embarrassed about using it ever again.
I appreciate the gesture, but I might hang onto it until I can give it a workout on the K-1
03-10-2016, 09:23 PM   #115
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Marietta, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,048
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I pretty sure the edges of the FA*24 are way to soft for a landscape lens. But this is just one test of one lens. Maybe it was a lemon.
It is said that what it lacks in sharpness, it makes up for in contrast and color...

Also, I've seen a few breathtaking landscapes taken with it. I assume they were all at least f/8 - and even by that photozone lens standard, at f8 the center is "excellent" and the borders are "very good".

Lest we forget, it's a Jun Hirakawa lens, so it won't win prizes for outright sharpness...
03-11-2016, 06:16 AM   #116
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,730
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
It is said that what it lacks in sharpness, it makes up for in contrast and color...

Also, I've seen a few breathtaking landscapes taken with it. I assume they were all at least f/8 - and even by that photozone lens standard, at f8 the center is "excellent" and the borders are "very good".

Lest we forget, it's a Jun Hirakawa lens, so it won't win prizes for outright sharpness...
Given the resolution bump it will get from being on a 36 MP sensor, who knows, it may end up being a star. It does have that 77 ltd. characteristic curve, but the 77 keeps it's edges up close to excellent at ƒ5.6 and ƒ8 where as at least on the lens tested for this chart, it doesn't really give you that one aperture setting where it just blows everything else out of the water.

If a lens gives me one exceptional setting, I'm generally happy with it. If it's s better average kind of lens all the way through it's range, not so much. That doesn't inspire me.

I can buy an 18-135 for 24mm ƒ5.6 and ƒ8 and all I think about very sharp centre at 24mm, excellent edges @5.6 and ƒ8. That people would call the lens "soft on the edges", well, it's also excellent on the edges. You can see the lens either way. Anyway, the 18-135 and Tamron 17-50 are my current 24mm lenses, and I've seen nothing that convinces me that should change.

I really think to make my FF functional I think I'm going to need the 15-30 for landscape eventually although I'll start off with the FA -J 18-35, and DA 35 2.4, 40 XS and FA 50 1.7. A also have a SIgmama 70 macro and Tamron 90 macro, so the mid range zoom is probably never going to happen for me. I have lots of primes in that range.

Interesting Sandy almost uses the lens as a portrait /macro type lens, which is it's curve characteristic. I never really thought of 24mm as a portrait FL, but it seems to work nicely for that, for environmental portraits.

Last edited by normhead; 03-11-2016 at 06:41 AM.
03-11-2016, 06:41 AM   #117
Loyal Site Supporter
WPRESTO's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Massachusetts
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,550
I have not gone through all the recommendations here, so excuse me it I repeat earlier posts.
1) The Pentax FF 15mm had/has a good reputation but it is BIG and still commands a premium price, high enough that the 15~30 would be a better choice (IMHO).
2) The Laowa 15mm is very good to excellent in the center, not so great at the corners but improves more and more as stopped down (best across the frame @ f16, where it's almost unnecessary to focus). It's probably better than the Samyang 14mm as best I can tell from published reviews.
3) The 17mm Tokina is a very good WA, but SFAIK was made only in K, not PKA mount (had one of these for my LX, liked it immensely).
4) The Tamron Adaptall 2 17mm had a very good reputation, and could be fitted with a PKA mount if you can find both.
5) I had a Pentax 20~35 FA which was very good.
6) For super wide, the current Sigma 15mm fish-eye has an excellent reputation.
7) I had a Pentax 16mm fish-eye that was 100% satisfactory, but it is a rare lens, so good luck finding one.
03-11-2016, 07:47 AM   #118
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,245
I now also have a FA20/2.8 on the way, so it will be very interesting to see how it stacks up against my FA20-35/4 on the K-1, and on APS-C against the the DA21/3.2

My testing on film has convinced me the DA10-17 covers full frame from about 15mm, so I reckon my wide needs should be covered for now, until I can no longer resist the siren call of the DFA15-30/2.8
03-11-2016, 11:18 AM   #119
Pentaxian
Hattifnatt's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 2,054
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
I would expect it to trounce the FA20 despite that being a prime, Hattifnat. Possibly the best wide angle zoom in the world.
QuoteOriginally posted by todd Quote
Trounce as well because it weighs 27.7 ounces more than the FA20. Solution: You need both.
What I'm afraid of is that I will get the 15-30 because I expect it to be the best option, then I'll get the FA20 because it's cheap and I like primes and I have to get both, then in 2017 Pentax will release a new FF wide angle prime which I will just MUST have also.

Not to mention that after I've seen Sandy's pics I also want the FA*24.

QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
I'd love to see what a photographer as capable as you would do with it!
I think you're giving me too much credit but thanks!
03-11-2016, 12:04 PM   #120
Pentaxian
todd's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Basement
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,805
QuoteOriginally posted by Hattifnatt Quote
then in 2017 Pentax will release a new FF wide angle prime which I will just MUST have also.
This is why I got the FA20, which I love and am so glad I happened upon a good deal for. And if you don't get an FA20, I promise to try my very hardest to make you regret it.

I'm sure our 15-30 shooters are going to be on the same mission to make me wish I had it, but I really don't want a lens that big/heavy. The FA20 is perfect imho to tide over until our next new UWA FF prime arrives.
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!
5d, af, angle lens, canon, crop, dslr, ff, filter, filters, full frame, full-frame, holder, image, k-1, k1, lens, lenses, macro, pentax, pentax k-1, samyang, sensor, tamron, ultrawide
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best sharp wide angle lens? (For wedding group shots) NeilGratton Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 36 07-06-2016 04:30 PM
Best Wide Angle Lens for Pentax Kx ArtyDiana Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 30 11-21-2014 07:40 AM
Best performing wide angle K mount lenses? Raffwal Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 09-24-2014 08:10 AM
Wanted - Acquired: Wide / Ultra Wide angle lens for my K-5 GWARmachine Sold Items 3 03-23-2013 12:03 AM
Best wide angle for K-5 IIs djc737 Pentax K-5 8 09-29-2012 08:14 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:31 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