Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-06-2009, 06:17 PM   #16
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
It's way easier to make a lens that distorts than one that doesn't. Not sure where you read that fisheyes are more expensive than other wide angles, but as you are seeing, it isn't really true.

05-07-2009, 09:22 AM   #17
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,329
QuoteOriginally posted by res3567 Quote
I read that it is an awesome lens.

Is that why it is so expensive?

I always thought fisheeyes were among the most expensive wide angle lenses.
I think it's the 35/2 that's the expensive one, not the 35/2.8 macro (relatively speaking). I'm not sure why - would like to know, too. I have a Vivitar 35/1.9 that I picked up for $60 and am wondering if the Pentax 35/2 would perform any better to justify the price...
05-07-2009, 09:53 AM   #18
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,315
QuoteOriginally posted by res3567 Quote
... <snip> ...
But the Pentax 10-17 is way cheaper than the 12-24.

Is it because the 12-24 is a constant aperture and the 10-17 is not?
No, it is because the DA 12-24 is a much more complex design. It is much easier to build a fish-eye lens than a rectilinear lens, and to get the low distortion values of the 12-24 is even more difficult.
05-07-2009, 10:08 AM   #19
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,104
I had the DA14, big mistake selling it. It was used for the majority of my 2 week trip through the Canadian Rockies and area last year, here are some samples; Road Trip 2008 Photo Gallery by ajuett at pbase.com

05-07-2009, 02:18 PM   #20
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by OregonJim Quote
I think it's the 35/2 that's the expensive one, not the 35/2.8 macro (relatively speaking).
The FA35/2 regularly sold for $300; the 35/2.8 Macro sells for considerably more.

QuoteQuote:
I have a Vivitar 35/1.9 that I picked up for $60
Well, OK, but is that an autofocus lens? Was that the price brand new? In today's dollars?

QuoteQuote:
am wondering if the Pentax 35/2 would perform any better to justify the price...
I don't know about the Vivitar, but the FA35/2 is one of the sharpest lenses Pentax has ever made. Outrageously high resolution & MTF scores.
05-08-2009, 02:38 AM   #21
Veteran Member
res3567's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Houston Tx.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,876
QuoteOriginally posted by Canada_Rockies Quote
No, it is because the DA 12-24 is a much more complex design. It is much easier to build a fish-eye lens than a rectilinear lens, and to get the low distortion values of the 12-24 is even more difficult.
Ok. Now I get it. It makes a lot of sense per your explanation. Fisheyes do give a lot of distortion because of their design and I have read reviews that the 12-24 has excellent distortion control.

Thanks Albert!
05-08-2009, 02:41 AM   #22
Veteran Member
res3567's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Houston Tx.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,876
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
The FA35/2 regularly sold for $300; the 35/2.8 Macro sells for considerably more.



Well, OK, but is that an autofocus lens? Was that the price brand new? In today's dollars?



I don't know about the Vivitar, but the FA35/2 is one of the sharpest lenses Pentax has ever made. Outrageously high resolution & MTF scores.
I think I read a review many years ago about the 35/2 in POP Photo.

They compared it to the 20-35( I think)

It was rated as sharper than the zoom because it is a prime.

I need to look at my vast collection of magazines I have not thrown away to be sure.
05-08-2009, 08:20 AM   #23
Veteran Member
Jewelltrail's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,180
QuoteQuote:
rburgoss: 2) The DA14 f/2.8 is two stops faster than the new DA15.
The Da 14 is only 1 stop faster than the new Da 15.

QuoteQuote:
ajuett I had the DA14, big mistake selling it. It was used for the majority of my 2 week trip through the Canadian Rockies and area last year, here are some samples; Road Trip 2008 Photo Gallery by ajuett at pbase.com
ajuett: Thanks for posting these very nice shots with the Da 14--I was looking for something like these to help me determine my next lens purchase.

05-08-2009, 08:30 AM   #24
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,329
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
The FA35/2 regularly sold for $300; the 35/2.8 Macro sells for considerably more.
You're right - a quick search revealed 35/2's going for mid-$200's, and 35/2.8's going for around $400. Guess I had them reversed.

QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
Well, OK, but is that an autofocus lens? Was that the price brand new? In today's dollars?
Today's dollars, yes. New or AF, no. Just (mint condition) MF. Didn't realize there was an AF version of the 35/2.

QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
I don't know about the Vivitar, but the FA35/2 is one of the sharpest lenses Pentax has ever made. Outrageously high resolution & MTF scores.
Good to know - thanks.
05-08-2009, 08:42 AM   #25
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 1,104
QuoteOriginally posted by Jewelltrail Quote
The Da 14 is only 1 stop faster than the new Da 15.

ajuett: Thanks for posting these very nice shots with the Da 14--I was looking for something like these to help me determine my next lens purchase.
1 stop can make all the difference and it's better than bumping up ISO. That's just my personal opinion. Saying that, I used the DA14 at f/9 for the majority of the time, mainly for landscape shots in good weather.

Jewelltrail, np, I really do regret selling the lens it was a beauty. Oh well, you live and learn.
05-08-2009, 09:02 AM   #26
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by OregonJim Quote
Today's dollars, yes. New or AF, no. Just (mint condition) MF. Didn't realize there was an AF version of the 35/2.
Yes, that's the one that gets discussed in these forums often, usually as people try to figure out whether to get the FA35 or the DA35 or the DA40 as their "normal" lens. There has been more discussion lately regarding the FA35 as it seems it may have been discontinued and is becoming harder and harder to find new.

I hadn't realized you were talking about one of the older MF versions. As I understand it, those actually weren't nearly as good. Unlike some lenses where they took the existing lens design, slapped on a AF mechanism and some electronics and called it good, the FA35 was a totally new design. Definitely not worth paying hundreds for one of the older 35's when the best one is about the same price.
05-08-2009, 09:09 AM   #27
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by ajuett Quote
1 stop can make all the difference and it's better than bumping up ISO. That's just my personal opinion. Saying that, I used the DA14 at f/9 for the majority of the time, mainly for landscape shots in good weather.
Well, yeah, and you're not alone in that. That's kind of the point - for "most" people in "most" situations, a 14mm or 15mm lens just isn't likely to be used at f/2.8 very often. Not that you couldn't come up with creative uses for large apertures, but if you're going out of your way to use a wide angle lens to get a lot of "stuff" into the scene, most of the time, you'd want as much as that stuff to be in focus as possible - and handholdability is seldom a big concern at those focal lengths either, even in fairly dim light.

FWIW, I keep going back and forth on whether my next major lens purchase with be the DA15 or DA21. I'm leaning back toward 21 now. Not because I'm not sufficiently impressed by what I've seen of the 15 or the reviews it has received, but just because I am pretty sure I'd find 21mm a more useful FOV more often. The only thing that makes me a little sad about that thought is the idea that it would probably replace my M28/2.8 in my bag; with the 15mm, I'd have more incentive to carry both. What I'd really want is a "pancake" 17mm or 18mm, though.
05-08-2009, 09:30 AM   #28
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bronx NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,607
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
*snip*
FWIW, I keep going back and forth on whether my next major lens purchase with be the DA15 or DA21. I'm leaning back toward 21 now. Not because I'm not sufficiently impressed by what I've seen of the 15 or the reviews it has received, but just because I am pretty sure I'd find 21mm a more useful FOV more often. The only thing that makes me a little sad about that thought is the idea that it would probably replace my M28/2.8 in my bag; with the 15mm, I'd have more incentive to carry both. What I'd really want is a "pancake" 17mm or 18mm, though.
Marc, is there a reason you're not considering the FA 20mm F2.8? Is it because of the relatively slow F2.8? I own this lens and it's rapidly becoming a favorite, especially since graduating to the K20D. On a digital camera, it's a moderately wide lens with excellent contrast and color rendition. And like most pentax primes it's got good bokeh.

NaCl(it's a good garden lens...high praise from me)H2O
05-08-2009, 04:01 PM   #29
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by NaClH2O Quote
Marc, is there a reason you're not considering the FA 20mm F2.8?
Because it isn't much smaller than my DA18-55 II (it's shorter but just as wide - wider at the front element - and somewhat heavier). For the few wide angle shots I take, I'm happy perfectly happy with the performance of the kit lens at 18mm. It's just way bigger than I really want to have in my bag just for the very occasional use it would get when I am otherwise shooting with primes. So I tend to use the 18-55 & 50-200 on hikes and so forth where I know I'll appreciate the wide angle and telephoto and don't care about speed and have the luxury of stopping down. But more often, I carry the 28, 40, and 70 (and/or perhaps the 100 or 135 at the long end), and having a real wide angle lens is really something of an afterthought. I want something I can have with my "just in case" but not have to make room for.

The M20/4 is another one I am considering. I've bid on a couple, but never followed through to win. One went the other day for only $168. No idea what it would have taken to to beat out whoever got that, but they sure got a good deal!

If I got the 15, I might consider replacing the 28 with a 24.
05-09-2009, 12:14 AM   #30
Veteran Member
Jewelltrail's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Rhode Island
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,180
QuoteQuote:
ajuette: Jewelltrail, np, I really do regret selling the lens it was a beauty. Oh well, you live and learn.
Well then, go buy another. I saw this recently at our Marketplace:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/photographers-marketplace/59014-sale-pent...2-8-ed-if.html
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!
angle, angle lens, camera, lens, pentax help, photography, photos
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Best wide angle lens A.M.92 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 06-29-2010 02:21 PM
looking for a wide angle lens lazyeye Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 05-12-2009 02:51 PM
Wide angle lens? needtime2scrap Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 02-25-2009 09:29 PM
What wide angle lens? switters Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 11-02-2007 01:59 PM
Wide Angle Lens Toshi Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 09-26-2006 03:04 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:27 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