The issue underlying all these silly threads about what Pentax isn’t doing accuse Pentax of not doing what others (Fuji, Hasselblad) are doing. All the requests for this or that new feature are tinged with the color of Pentax Must Do This To Stay Relevant. Sorry I colored your post with that tint.
A request for a lens so short relative to the frame diameter that it doesn’t exist in
any format just seemed a bit off the wall.
Now, I own the first version of that Sigma 12-24, and have owned and used it for a very long time. Even on my 5D Classic, it’s good in the center but not sharp at all in the corners. But I didn’t realize there was a Mk II before the Art, which was apparently improved over my Mk I. Maybe it’s the Mk II you are describing. I still use it on the very rare occasion when I want something that wide, but even interiors lose geometric relevance when the lens is that short.
But Roger Cicala, who does I think the best lens testing in the biz, thought very highly of the Canon lens, with enough testing to resist a fanboy accusation.
https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/02/canon-11-24-f4-l-mtf-tests/
I don’t own it, and the latest 16-35 would be in front of it in line. But the shutter is dying on my 5DII and I haven’t been willing to buy its replacement, now that I have the 645z, so I haven’t been lens shopping for Canon EF in a long time.
Rick “who overdosed on ultrawides a decade or so back” Denney
Last edited by Sandy Hancock; 01-18-2020 at 11:47 PM.
Reason: Keeping the eyes on the ball