Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-11-2010, 09:41 AM   #1
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Manila, Philippines
Posts: 1,082
UWA for a newbie

Hi, I am still new at the stage of this new hobby, so far I find myself inclined at the wider end of my kit lens, any suggestions for a lens upgrade? Or should i stick with it?

Thanks

05-11-2010, 10:06 AM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Prague
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,198
Difficult question. Some people like the compactness of DA15, some the zoom of 12-24, some the close-up capability and speed of DA14, some like the Tamron 10-24 as it is cheap and some take the risk with Sigma 10-20.
I chosen the DA14.
05-11-2010, 10:11 AM   #3
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,563
Well Wed7, beware.... if you do get a wider lens, you'll be opening the door for LBA to sneak in!

Before you'll know you will also need a macro lens, then you need a very fast lens, then you'd find a tele for portrait and children closeups also nice, then you need a fish eye for its special effects, then you probably want to upgrade to some pro glass because of the better rendering, then you need a superzoom because it is handy for this city trip, then you've seen these lovely primes, a mirror lens, ..... , ..... , .....

Not to mention, one flash, another flash, a tripod, a monopod, a small bag, large bag, image tank, better PC, pro monitor, high res printer, software, backup ..... , ..... , .....

Beware!
05-11-2010, 10:45 AM   #4
Pentaxian
Just1MoreDave's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Aurora, CO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,858
The first thing I would do is look at other people's photos at 10mm through 16mm. I find that I don't really like the perspective distortion of a rectilinear lens at 10mm. I wouldn't avoid one of the zooms that go to 10mm, I just wouldn't value that extra range over one that only goes to 12mm.

You can also consider how important having a large maximum aperture is. I think it's less important for ultra wide angles, but if you're shooting in limited light all the time, it can be useful.

With that information, you can narrow down your list.

05-11-2010, 11:12 AM   #5
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NYC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,071
QuoteOriginally posted by bymy141 Quote
Well Wed7, beware.... if you do get a wider lens, you'll be opening the door for LBA to sneak in!

Before you'll know you will also need a macro lens, then you need a very fast lens, then you'd find a tele for portrait and children closeups also nice, then you need a fish eye for its special effects, then you probably want to upgrade to some pro glass because of the better rendering, then you need a superzoom because it is handy for this city trip, then you've seen these lovely primes, a mirror lens, ..... , ..... , .....

Not to mention, one flash, another flash, a tripod, a monopod, a small bag, large bag, image tank, better PC, pro monitor, high res printer, software, backup ..... , ..... , .....

Beware!
macro lens, check
fast lens, check
tele for portrait and children, check
fish eyes... eh...
pro glass, check
super zoom, NEVER
lovely primes, check, check check.
mirror lens, lol
one flash, check
another flash... soon
tripod check
monopod, check
small bag, check
large bag, check
image tank, DSLR!
better pc, check
pro monitor, check
high res printer, eh, I go to print shops
software, check
backup, check

Beware is right. All of this was accomplished in 2 months and the vast majority of my savings.
05-11-2010, 12:05 PM   #6
Site Supporter
SpecialK's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: So California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,899
QuoteOriginally posted by wed7 Quote
Hi, I am still new at the stage of this new hobby, so far I find myself inclined at the wider end of my kit lens, any suggestions for a lens upgrade? Or should i stick with it?

Thanks
The 12-24 is a great focal length with excellent quality. Many people like the Sigma 10-20 which is a little cheaper, and now slightly faster.
05-11-2010, 09:00 PM   #7
Veteran Member
Pentaxie's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kuala Lumpur Malaysia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 429
It depends. If you like the wider side of your kit lens, you may probably want to try the followings :
1) some primes like DA15 which is very compact, or DA14 for its speed
2) some of the zooms like 12-24mm, with some close-up capability or the Tamron 10-24mm for its price.
05-12-2010, 05:15 AM   #8
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,563
QuoteOriginally posted by hangu Quote
macro lens, check
fast lens, check
tele for portrait and children, check
fish eyes... eh...
pro glass, check
super zoom, NEVER
lovely primes, check, check check.
mirror lens, lol
one flash, check
another flash... soon
tripod check
monopod, check
small bag, check
large bag, check
image tank, DSLR!
better pc, check
pro monitor, check
high res printer, eh, I go to print shops
software, check
backup, check

Beware is right. All of this was accomplished in 2 months and the vast majority of my savings.
Hangu,

It could be worse. You could as well have bought:
- a second K-7 body for backup
- a battery grip
- a third (K-x) body for low light situations
- an extra 16-50 to accomodate that body
- 6 x 32Gb SD cards (2 per camera)
- softbox
- backdrop
- wireless trigger + receivers

and ....
- a C**** 7D for fast wildlife AF + 28-300mm lens opening up a whole new money pit...

- Bert

05-12-2010, 05:20 AM   #9
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: ÷rebro
Posts: 207
How expensive can you afford? Imho Tokina 11-16/2.8 seem like the best choice, tokina 12-24 for more range (and lower price?) at the cost of image quality or if you need something wider the sigma 10-20.

Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16/2,8 DX for Canon, 6880 SEK here, maybe it's not available in Pentax mount yet?

Tokina AT-X Pro 12-24/4,0 DX for Nikon/Fujifilm, 4995 SEK, 5495 SEK for canon
Pentax SMC-DA 12-24/4,0 ED AL IF, 9895 SEK.

Sigma EX 10-20/4,0-5,6 DC for Pentax/Samsung, 4695 SEK
Sigma EX 10-20/3,5 DC HSM for Pentax/Samsung, 6490 SEK


Rather crappy that one only get the Pentax versions, I guess there may be an advantage to that to but 3900-3400 SEK more for Pentax lens instead of Tokina?

The 11-16 doesn't seem to exist from Pentax yet, if ever?

Photozone don't have a review of the 10-20/3.5 sigma, interesting one, much faster than canons 10-22, must have a look at it.

For those prices without the tokina 11-16 option I guess I would go with the 10-20/4.0-5.6 from sigma.
05-12-2010, 05:34 AM   #10
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: ÷rebro
Posts: 207
Reading review over at lenstip:
http://www.lenstip.com/197.4-Lens_review-Sigma_10-20_mm_f_3.5_EX_DC_HSM_Image_resolution.html

"The above graph shows the behavior of the tested Sigma at the center of the frame. Two things are blatantly visible here: very high MTF values and even behavior for all focal lengths. Both these characteristics make Sigma 10-20 mm win a duel against most of the competitors. Such high values werenít there for Nikkor 10-24, or Tamron 10-24. Tokina 11-16 mm f/2.8 can take up a fight against Sigma, as after stopping down to f/3.5 (Sigmaís brightness) and taking into account the fact, that it was tested on a less dense with pixels Canon 20Dís sensor (the difference in MTFs of about 10%) it gives comparable results."

So, sharp in center. The nikon is 7980 btw ...

"Again, we have a very even behavior at all focal lengths and again MTF values that we canít complain about. Weíd want results of over 30 lpmm at the maximum aperture, but thatís about the only shortcoming we can notice. After stopping down to f/4.0, no matter what focal length is used, the image will be of at least good quality."

No comparisions with the others but they probably have reviews of those to.


Btw, I really like the look of Sigmas EX-glass. Looks more classy than those damn gold stripes "bumps."

Higher CA than in the slower model, should be correctable on RAW images though.


"So far, the perfect model to follow among ultra wide angle zoom lenses was the older Sigma 10-20 mm, which at the beginning, middle and end of the focal lengths range recorded distortion of values -0.88%, 1.3% and 0.9% respectively. The newest Nikon, Tamron or Tokina models didnít come out better than this. Particularly the first one was weak, recording the results of -3.77% at its widest angle.
The new Sigma lens, sadly, reached the level of other constructions of this type and can no longer be hold up as a model for others. At 10mm focal length we recorded noticeable barrel distortion of -3.05% value. Fortunately, thatís the only bad news, as with increasing focal length the problem with this aberration is of marginal significance. At 15 mm itís -0.34% and at 20 mm 0.30%."

So better on the slower cheaper one, though I'd rather take 10mm and some distortion than little/none but 12 mm ..

"Coma decreases noticeably with increasing focal length. At 10 mm the level of this aberration is too high, at 15 mm itís medium and at 20 mm little. Itís probably coma thatís responsible for slightly lower results at the edge of the frame, at f/3.5 and the range 10-15 mm."

"For a change, astigmatism is corrected perfectly. The mean difference between the horizontal and vertical MTF50 values amounted to mere 3.7%, which we consider a very good result."


"The slow Sigma 10-20 mm f/4.0-5.6 showed vignetting of just over 30%. Having slightly better brightness Nikkor 10-24 mm came out worse and showed light falloff in the corners of the frame of about 40%, no matter the focal length. Tamron 10-24 only at the shortest focal length reached 37% and for longer focal lengths showed vignetting of about 17-20%. The fast Tokina 11-16 mm came out quite well here, showing at the shortest focal length vignetting of about 36%, then decreasing to 20-27%."

"Unfortunately, Sigma 10-20 mm f/3.5 doesnít come out so well here. At the most difficult variation of the widest angle and f/3.5 aperture, vignetting reaches a huge level of 53% (-2.16 EV). Bad news is not over yet, as vignetting falls quite slowly with stopping down. At apertures f/4.0, f/5.6 and f/8.0 it amounts to 43%, 29% and 25% respectively.
Increasing focal length helps, but not as much as weíd expect. At 15 mm and the maximum aperture, light falloff in the corners of the frame amounted to 42% (-1.59 EV). Here, decreasing of vignetting is even slower when stopping down, as at f/4.0 vignetting amounts to 39%, at f/5.6 still reaches a high level of 32%, and at f/8.0 we have a value of 25%.
The maximum focal length isnít any better. At f/3.5 the level of this aberration was measured to be 43% (-1.61 EV), at f/4.0 itís 40%, at f/5.6 itís 35% and at f/8.0 - 26%."

"even having the Sun in the corner of the frame, itís hard to notice any light artifacts."


"However, Sigma decided to equip their lens in a silent HSM motor. It does, in fact, work noiselessly and very fast, as going through all the scale takes it less than 0.5 second, no matter the direction."

verdict: http://www.lenstip.com/197.11-Lens_review-Sigma_10-20_mm_f_3.5_EX_DC_HSM_Summary.html



If you don't want to spend too much and use it mainly outdoors get the slower sigma 10-20 and if you want to use it indoor ... wait/upgrade when/if the tokina 11-16 becomes available? Or get the faster sigma if you need it now.
05-12-2010, 05:39 AM   #11
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: ÷rebro
Posts: 207
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxie Quote
It depends. If you like the wider side of your kit lens, you may probably want to try the followings :
1) some primes like DA15 which is very compact, or DA14 for its speed
2) some of the zooms like 12-24mm, with some close-up capability or the Tamron 10-24mm for its price.
2 was interesting, I remember reading that about I think it was the tokina 11-16 vs the canon 10-22, how you could get closer with the canon 10-22.. Yet another factor I haven't thought off

The DA 14 was cheaper and is wider so without knowing more I would probably had choosen that one =p.

But I'd rather pick a zoom actually , unless there is a huge difference in image quality. 10, 14 and 22 mm isn't the same really =P
05-12-2010, 06:06 AM   #12
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Manila, Philippines
Posts: 1,082
Original Poster
U-W-A for a newbie

Guys, thank you for the fast and very informative replies, of course budget is always a factor to consider, but at my level at photography I just want to spend at something which will help me and encourage me to keep up in learning and optimizing the the item that I will buy. I know it really takes a lot of practice and some calculations ( I heard there is what they called "hyperfocal distance thingy") and I have started looking at images set upon 10mm focal length and I am always awestruck buy the images they create.

My preference would be light and compact for my k-x (DA15 ) but I am also attracted to zoom due to my limited experience as a photographer.

LBA??? Is this communicable?

Thank you for all the help.
05-12-2010, 06:42 AM   #13
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Finland
Posts: 191
The cheapest option could be DA 16-45. It is not as wide as the other lenses said. But 16mm compared to 18mm does make difference.
05-12-2010, 07:22 AM   #14
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tumbleweed, Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,107
QuoteOriginally posted by wed7 Quote

LBA??? Is this communicable?
Well, you are here on the Forums asking about lenses, so I would say it appears to be highly contagious!!!!

Wide angle lenses are generally not an inexpensive subject. They are difficult to design and expensive to make. The lenses are usually somewhat large, however the DA 15 is somewhat of an exception. They pull in and bend a lot of light - hopefully adding in as little distortion as possible along the way.

Probably one of the most inexpensive wide angle lenses is the Zenitar 16mm/f2.8 fisheye. Its a fisheye, but reasonably well controlled. I have seen some quite stunning images from it, and its depth of field is so deep, just about everything is in focus all the time. There are a lot of example images available on the web from the lens.

Rectilinear wide angle lenses do cost quite a bit more. The 16-45 is probably one of the better ones. Pentax does charge more than Tokina for essentially the same lens, however as observed Tokina does not support the Pentax K mount. There is a Tokina RMC 17mm/f3.5 that does have a Pentax K mount that is very good, and becomes available every once in a while.
05-12-2010, 08:52 PM   #15
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: ÷rebro
Posts: 207
QuoteOriginally posted by wed7 Quote
Guys, thank you for the fast and very informative replies, of course budget is always a factor to consider, but at my level at photography I just want to spend at something which will help me and encourage me to keep up in learning and optimizing the the item that I will buy. I know it really takes a lot of practice and some calculations ( I heard there is what they called "hyperfocal distance thingy") and I have started looking at images set upon 10mm focal length and I am always awestruck buy the images they create.

My preference would be light and compact for my k-x (DA15 ) but I am also attracted to zoom due to my limited experience as a photographer.

LBA??? Is this communicable?

Thank you for all the help.
Looking at some photos from say a 12-24 lens vs a 10-22 at the widest setting those 2 mm gives quite a lot more width. So I guess that's why I cared for zooms there since it makes quite a difference.

I have no idea how much experience matters, and if anything I will be less experienced than you, I don't even own a DSLR =P

The slower Sigma 12-24 seemed reasonable nice I think.

Guess it depends on what you will be using things for. If you want to throw a pentax 15 and one 31 mm in your pocket and shoot people in the streets or if you will have a car with you and can easily bring everything for landscape or indoor architecture use.

I think some of those wider zooms where pretty large, not pocket friendly =P
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!
camera, lens, pentax help, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:21 PM. | 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