UWA for a newbie

**GingerBeer** · 05-12-2010, 09:53 PM

I found this to be one of the toughest LBA decisions I have faced yet. I narrowed my choice to be between the: DA 12-24mm, DA 14mm and DA 15mm. Ultimately I went with the DA 14mm for the extra speed for lower light situations and closer minimum focus distance. As others have pointed out the DA 12-24mm is a bit more versatile because it's a zoom whereas the DA 15mm is a lot smaller & lighter than either so is less likely to be left behind when packing your gear.

Sometimes I wish I had the added versatility of the zoom and yet other times I wish I had the smaller DA 15mm but ultimately I am happy with my decision. My LBA hasn't quite yet reached the epic proportions where I have more than one UWA lens though. Good luck deciding.

aliquis · 05-12-2010, 11:09 PM

Sigma 12-24: Nikon Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Someones shoot of the Sigma 12-24 (which one?) at 19 mm.

lurchlarson · 05-13-2010, 01:08 AM

Gonna get a 16-50 myself and sell my kit.

EricT · 05-13-2010, 02:31 AM

Originally posted by aliquis

Sigma 12-24: Nikon Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Note that this is a full-frame lens. The equivalent APS-C lens would be the recently announced Sigma 8-16mm (!). Not yet available in Pentax mount, but I'm keeping an eye out for this lens.

**Lowell Goudge** · 05-13-2010, 04:49 AM

Maybe it is time to discuss design of a lens kit.

My own opinion of a lens kit, and others may disagree, is that you should have a backbone of good zooms, covering the range 10mm to between 135mm and 200mm (I will explain the difference in top end in a moment), plus some form of a plan for reaching 400mm. You should ultimately aim for a large portio of this range to be at F2.8, i.e. somewhere form 16-28 mm at the wide end to the top of the 135-200 range at the long end shoud be F2.8.

Some will cover this with the DA 12-24, the DA 16-50 and DA 50-135,
I have selected the Sigma 10-20, Tamron 28-75F2,8 and sigma 70-200F2.8, and cover the gap between 20 and 28 mm with my FA-J 18-35.

however you cover this range, this gives you a minimum kit of 3-4 lenses that can do a lot of things.

Then you fill out special needs with primes, a macro etc.

If you are tending to go ultra wide, why not. at some time you will replace the kit lens with something faster, but for the moment, extending the range of photography is more important than replacing the kit lens with sopmething faster. You can spend a lot of time on figuring out what you want in the middle to replace your kit lens once you decide on the ends of the kit.

The decision to go either 135 or 200 largely depends on your photography choices, and tastes. people who do a lot of wild life will take a longer lens, people who only want the 135 mm for close crops etc, will opt to save some additional weight in the kit. (a 70-200F2.8 weighs a lot more than a 50-135mm F2.8)

The other thing to consider is your plan for extra reach, out to 300 or 400mm.

- I use a sigma 70-200F2.8 and sigmas 1.4x and 2x TCs,. These are special TCs that only fit a handful of lenses because the design has the front element of the TC extend into the rear of the lens. At present these TCs are only compatible with screw drive focusing lenses. There are no new produced TCs compatible with SDM lenses.
- You can also go for a 300mmF4 prime if you only want the total reach and nothing in between many people here use the DA300F4 and add when they need even more the SMC-F 1.7X AF TC which is an interesting TC that has focusing elements built in, and can work with any lens, to gove AF correction within the range of manual focus you set on the lens.

Overall, my advise is to purchase quality lenses, perhaps spending a little more for the extra quality and speed, as opposed to looking for cheaper 1 lens does it all solutions, because you will eventualy end up replacing these lenses with the higher quality lenses (unless all you do is go out on a sunny day). While you spend more at the onset, overall you will spend less. Lenses can far outlast camera bodies, therefore lens quality should be a big deciding factor in the selection

wed7 · 05-13-2010, 08:21 AM

Guys, again I would like to thank you for all the concerted efforts you gave me on this.. specially to the guy above ^ ( a very comprehensive input imho

)

My gear includes my kit lenses (+55-300mm) and a M50 f1.4, and no wide angle lens, which is why I seek your help if I should buy one...

LBA maybe contagious but it is never incurable!

Thank you again.

KevinR · 05-13-2010, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by wed7

Guys, again I would like to thank you for all the concerted efforts you gave me on this.. specially to the guy above ^ ( a very comprehensive input imho

)

My gear includes my kit lenses (+55-300mm) and a M50 f1.4, and no wide angle lens, which is why I seek your help if I should buy one...

LBA maybe contagious but it is never incurable!

Thank you again.

Should you buy an UWA..??..my view definitely yes. Some views are just too wide otherwise.

Most of the UWA lens seem to be good to excellent. Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 suited my requirements and price tag. This is at 10mm. Slight vignetting, good rectilinear projection, good color, and so wide.. I wish I had bought this before my last holiday through a beautiful mountain trial.

Cheers
Kevin

Last edited by KevinR; 05-15-2010 at 04:20 AM.

05-13-2010, 04:49 AM	#20
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,891	Maybe it is time to discuss design of a lens kit. My own opinion of a lens kit, and others may disagree, is that you should have a backbone of good zooms, covering the range 10mm to between 135mm and 200mm (I will explain the difference in top end in a moment), plus some form of a plan for reaching 400mm. You should ultimately aim for a large portio of this range to be at F2.8, i.e. somewhere form 16-28 mm at the wide end to the top of the 135-200 range at the long end shoud be F2.8. Some will cover this with the DA 12-24, the DA 16-50 and DA 50-135, I have selected the Sigma 10-20, Tamron 28-75F2,8 and sigma 70-200F2.8, and cover the gap between 20 and 28 mm with my FA-J 18-35. however you cover this range, this gives you a minimum kit of 3-4 lenses that can do a lot of things. Then you fill out special needs with primes, a macro etc. If you are tending to go ultra wide, why not. at some time you will replace the kit lens with something faster, but for the moment, extending the range of photography is more important than replacing the kit lens with sopmething faster. You can spend a lot of time on figuring out what you want in the middle to replace your kit lens once you decide on the ends of the kit. The decision to go either 135 or 200 largely depends on your photography choices, and tastes. people who do a lot of wild life will take a longer lens, people who only want the 135 mm for close crops etc, will opt to save some additional weight in the kit. (a 70-200F2.8 weighs a lot more than a 50-135mm F2.8) The other thing to consider is your plan for extra reach, out to 300 or 400mm. - I use a sigma 70-200F2.8 and sigmas 1.4x and 2x TCs,. These are special TCs that only fit a handful of lenses because the design has the front element of the TC extend into the rear of the lens. At present these TCs are only compatible with screw drive focusing lenses. There are no new produced TCs compatible with SDM lenses. - You can also go for a 300mmF4 prime if you only want the total reach and nothing in between many people here use the DA300F4 and add when they need even more the SMC-F 1.7X AF TC which is an interesting TC that has focusing elements built in, and can work with any lens, to gove AF correction within the range of manual focus you set on the lens. Overall, my advise is to purchase quality lenses, perhaps spending a little more for the extra quality and speed, as opposed to looking for cheaper 1 lens does it all solutions, because you will eventualy end up replacing these lenses with the higher quality lenses (unless all you do is go out on a sunny day). While you spend more at the onset, overall you will spend less. Lenses can far outlast camera bodies, therefore lens quality should be a big deciding factor in the selection Last edited by Lowell Goudge; 05-13-2010 at 05:01 AM.

05-13-2010, 08:21 AM	#21
wed7 Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 1,421 Original Poster	Guys, again I would like to thank you for all the concerted efforts you gave me on this.. specially to the guy above ^ ( a very comprehensive input imho) My gear includes my kit lenses (+55-300mm) and a M50 f1.4, and no wide angle lens, which is why I seek your help if I should buy one... LBA maybe contagious but it is never incurable! Thank you again.

05-13-2010, 10:41 AM	#22
KevinR Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Cape Town, South Africa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 653	Originally posted by wed7 Guys, again I would like to thank you for all the concerted efforts you gave me on this.. specially to the guy above ^ ( a very comprehensive input imho) My gear includes my kit lenses (+55-300mm) and a M50 f1.4, and no wide angle lens, which is why I seek your help if I should buy one... LBA maybe contagious but it is never incurable! Thank you again. Should you buy an UWA..??..my view definitely yes. Some views are just too wide otherwise. Most of the UWA lens seem to be good to excellent. Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 suited my requirements and price tag. This is at 10mm. Slight vignetting, good rectilinear projection, good color, and so wide.. I wish I had bought this before my last holiday through a beautiful mountain trial. Cheers Kevin Last edited by KevinR; 05-15-2010 at 04:20 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
System comparison for weight, UWA and WR	juu	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	01-08-2010 02:43 PM
I want a UWA again! Sold mine a while back ...	jpzk	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	36	01-01-2010 07:56 PM
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 14mm f 2.8 asph / Rare UWA	geko5766	Sold Items	8	12-03-2009 12:29 AM
Sydney Airport - UWA and some butt shots	pop4	Post Your Photos!	8	09-05-2009 06:45 AM

05-12-2010, 09:53 PM	#16
GingerBeer Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Brisbane Posts: 126	I found this to be one of the toughest LBA decisions I have faced yet. I narrowed my choice to be between the: DA 12-24mm, DA 14mm and DA 15mm. Ultimately I went with the DA 14mm for the extra speed for lower light situations and closer minimum focus distance. As others have pointed out the DA 12-24mm is a bit more versatile because it's a zoom whereas the DA 15mm is a lot smaller & lighter than either so is less likely to be left behind when packing your gear. Sometimes I wish I had the added versatility of the zoom and yet other times I wish I had the smaller DA 15mm but ultimately I am happy with my decision. My LBA hasn't quite yet reached the epic proportions where I have more than one UWA lens though. Good luck deciding.

05-12-2010, 11:09 PM	#17
aliquis Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Örebro Posts: 207	Sigma 12-24: Nikon Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Someones shoot of the Sigma 12-24 (which one?) at 19 mm.

05-13-2010, 01:08 AM	#18
lurchlarson Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Oregon, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 681	Gonna get a 16-50 myself and sell my kit.

05-13-2010, 02:31 AM	#19
EricT Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Posts: 484	Originally posted by aliquis Sigma 12-24: Nikon Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review Note that this is a full-frame lens. The equivalent APS-C lens would be the recently announced Sigma 8-16mm (!). Not yet available in Pentax mount, but I'm keeping an eye out for this lens.