Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-26-2010, 12:37 PM   #16
Veteran Member
VaughnA's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Virginia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,363
QuoteOriginally posted by WMBP Quote

Not sure I'd put it that way. I'd be okay if you'd said, "With a longer focal length you will need a much faster shutter to minimize the effects of camera shake." But it just SOUNDS wrong to me to suggest that wider focal lengths allow shorter shutter speeds. It's just just about camera shake: there's also subject motion. Shake reduction has less of an effect—that is, it's less important—with wide lenses. But if you are shooting sports with the 10-20, well, you may need a 1/500th sec shutter. And if you are shooting some part of a landscape (or the moon) with a 300mm lens, you may be able to put it on a tripod and take a 1 second exposure.

Anyway, we agree that the Sigma 10-20 with variable aperture is a great lens!

Will
Good point, I need a sharper brush when painting generalizations! I shoot primarily landscape and architecture and don't really think of my 10-20 as an action lens.

07-26-2010, 01:26 PM   #17
Veteran Member
WMBP's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,496
QuoteOriginally posted by VaughnA Quote
Good point, I need a sharper brush when painting generalizations! I shoot primarily landscape and architecture and don't really think of my 10-20 as an action lens.
No problem. I think MOST people don't think of it as an action lens. But I've used it to shoot dance in the studio, when I was close to the dancers and needed that extra wide angle to get the entire room. It's a sign of what a great lens it really is that it is so versatile.

Will
07-26-2010, 02:17 PM   #18
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by VaughnA Quote
QuoteOriginally posted by future_retro Quote
Is there that much of a difference between 3.5 and 2.8?
One stop is the difference.
Actually, f/3.5 to f/2.8 is 2/3 of a stop.

[/nitpick]
07-26-2010, 03:06 PM   #19
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by VaughnA Quote
One stop is the difference.
f/2.8 is one stop, but f/2.8 to f/3.5 is more like half a stop. Mathematically, it's a bit more than that, but it's pretty common to use f/3.5 to mark that half stop even though mathematically it should be more like 3.3. You'd have to actually measure the exposure to be sure.

For wide angle lenses especially, I do think you don't need to sweat the maximum aperture as much as you would normal or telephoto, since you don't need nearly so fast a shutter speed. It was suggested that this only applies to camera shake and not subject motion, but that's not really true. Subject motion is less problematic at wide angles for exactly the same reason that camera shake is - the same physical motion translates into less angular motion. Maybe not to exactly the same extent, but I don't find it difficult to get sharp candids or concert shots at 1/15" with my DA15.

Also, shallow DOF tends to happen more naturally anyhow just because you have to shoot from pretty close to a subject to represent it at a decent size. Although f/5.6 at 20mm does sound like a drag to me. But I certainly would not be worried about the difference between f/2.8 and f/3.5.


Last edited by Marc Sabatella; 07-26-2010 at 03:11 PM.
07-26-2010, 04:30 PM   #20
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
Given the OP has no nice lenses, I'd recommend a DA or FA prime. A DA40 is well under $400 and is a very versatile lens with terrific IQ.
07-26-2010, 04:49 PM   #21
Veteran Member
WMBP's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,496
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
Given the OP has no nice lenses, I'd recommend a DA or FA prime. A DA40 is well under $400 and is a very versatile lens with terrific IQ.
Precisely. I've said in this forum more than once that if I had to live with just one lens, well, it would be awfully hard to pick, but the 40 pancake would certainly be a finalist.

The downside of the 40 is that the OP has this focal length covered already with his kit lens. The Sigma 10-20 would extend his zoom range from 10 to 200mm.

But I agree, the 40 should be considered seriously. Sell the kit lens and try to pick up the 21 as well and the OP will be in terrific shape.

Future_retro: If you're wondering about the advantage of prime lenses, don't hesitate to raise the question. It's an obvious question, and one, I think, that many people aren't sure how to answer. I know I wasn't sure how to answer it for myself for years—until I started shooting with primes!

Will
07-26-2010, 05:39 PM   #22
Veteran Member
future_retro's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 572
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by WMBP Quote
Future_retro: If you're wondering about the advantage of prime lenses, don't hesitate to raise the question. It's an obvious question, and one, I think, that many people aren't sure how to answer. I know I wasn't sure how to answer it for myself for years—until I started shooting with primes!

Will
I appreciate that. Out of all the primes the DA 40 limited definitely seems like the one for me, although B&H is out of stock right now they let you put it in your cart for 330, a great price. I still have to see though.

I'm picking up an old 50mm f/2 off of craigslist tomorrow for 20 dollars, perhaps that will help me get a feel for primes.

I'm glad the older Sigma 10-20 is still a viable option. I usually shoot at at least f/11 when I go wide so I know I don't really need a fast super wide angle, it just seemed nice to have.

Maybe I'll settle on a Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 and DA 40mm Limited combo, a little pricey but worth it if I'm getting the best of both worlds, and at the same time being thrust into a new world of high quality lenses
07-26-2010, 05:51 PM   #23
Veteran Member
VaughnA's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Virginia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,363
QuoteOriginally posted by future_retro Quote

maybe i'll settle on a sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 and da 40mm limited combo, a little pricey but worth it if i'm getting the best of both worlds, and at the same time being thrust into a new world of high quality lenses
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
this

07-26-2010, 05:54 PM   #24
Veteran Member
future_retro's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 572
Original Poster
I also should clear up that I know 2.8 isn't the only identifier of a high quality lens, it just seems to be featured on most top of the line lenses so I was a bit disappointed that it was not on the new Sigma 10-20mm, but I can easily live with the older one

The best part about this thread is that the majority of the posts have been about lenses, so it's fairly easy to tell generally what I should be focusing my spending on

I really appreciate all this
07-26-2010, 08:56 PM   #25
Veteran Member
WMBP's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dallas, Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,496
QuoteOriginally posted by future_retro Quote
I also should clear up that I know 2.8 isn't the only identifier of a high quality lens, it just seems to be featured on most top of the line lenses so I was a bit disappointed that it was not on the new Sigma 10-20mm, but I can easily live with the older one.
Well, its mainly knowledgeable buyers who want fast lenses (f/2.8 or faster), and manufacturers have to go to some trouble to make a fast lens, so they simply tend not to bother doing so unless the less is optically high-quality, too. All of my f/2.8 lenses have been at least "pretty good." So, you're right, f/2.8 isn't a guarantee of excellence. But it's a good bet.

As to your thought of getting the older Sigma 10-20, plus a Pentax DA 40 f/2.8 limited, that's a nice idea. I think I'd be more inclined to get two primes. I'm not speaking here "if I were you." I am speaking for myself. Well, actually, that's kind of what I've done. I've sold most of my zooms and replaced them with primes. If I could have only two "normal" lenses, I think I'd be happy with the DA 40 and, oh, either the Pentax 15 (just under $500 right now), or the Pentax 21 (over $600, I think) or either the Sigma 24 or Sigma 28 f/1.8 primes. As it happens, I have the Pentax 21 and the Sigma 28. I also have the Sigma 10-20, and I love it. But I think I would be willing to trade it for the Pentax 15.


QuoteQuote:
The best part about this thread is that the majority of the posts have been about lenses, so it's fairly easy to tell generally what I should be focusing my spending on.
Well, let's see what matters to photography, in a general way.

The most important ingredient is LIGHT. In this sense, the best way to improve a photo (assuming that the composition is okay to start with) is to improve the light. If you can move the subject next to a nice full window, that's often a great thing to do. Shoot at a different time of day when the light's better. Or master artificial lighting.

The reason people don't jump to buy improved lighting first, is that mastering artificial lighting is REALLY REALLY DIFFICULT. Forget mastery. Simply getting consistently good results from artificial lighting takes knowledge, experience, skill, not to mention an investment in awkward stuff like umbrellas and screens and reflectors. Most amateurs (and not a few people who are taking money for their work) who simply slap a flash unit into the hot shoe risk making their photos WORSE rather than better.

So instead, some people improve their camera body (often hoping for better high-iso performance, that is, better sensitivity to light) and others go to improve their lenses. Improving your lenses is the better choice.

Light trumps lens, and lens trumps body.

Will
07-27-2010, 04:38 AM   #26
Veteran Member
ChooseAName's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Southeast USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 390
BTW, looks like Adorama has the DA 40 in stock for the same price as B&H. I'm just sayin'....

And $340 for a Limited lens seems like a complete steal of a deal to me. Unfortunately, when I was shopping around for my last lens purchase, 40 mm was a bit too close to 50 mm for my tastes. I didn't want to go longer than 35 mm. In the end, I went with the 35/2 for the combination of aperture and focal length. I am quite pleased with the sharp images it produces.
07-27-2010, 06:04 AM   #27
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,187
+1 for the DA40. While you already have the length covered, using a small prime (and they come no smaller) makes you feel much less conspicuous when shooting subjects and are great for those days when you want to bring just the camera - no accessories - for a day about town.

If you can stretch, I'd also consider the DA35 Macro. It's bigger and slower to focus than the DA40, but it can open up a whole new world of photography.
07-27-2010, 10:29 AM   #28
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Bangalore
Photos: Albums
Posts: 174
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
US$400-550 won't buy much in the way of sex or drugs....
made me burst my stomach...
07-28-2010, 10:21 PM   #29
Veteran Member
future_retro's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Western Washington
Posts: 572
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by VaughnA Quote
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
this
Check my signature!
07-28-2010, 10:34 PM   #30
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
QuoteOriginally posted by future_retro Quote
Check my signature!
WooHooo Enjoy!
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, da, flash, lens, op/tech, pack, pentax help, photography, tripod, wr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Should I be a good Pentax choirboy and buy a DA 15 Limited or buy the Sigma 10-20mm? tokyoso Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 42 03-14-2010 04:54 PM
SIGMA 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM Lens for PENTAX:To buy or not to buy? thelittlecar Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 21 12-31-2009 06:01 AM
For Sale - Sold: 12 Rolls Arista Legacy Pro 400 (aka Fuji Neopan 400) k100d Sold Items 1 11-22-2009 08:38 PM
Where do you buy the ND 400 filter? raider Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 10 02-25-2009 01:07 PM
Tokina ATX 80-400 or K mount 400?? WRB Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 01-12-2007 05:19 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:24 AM. | 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