[Nicolas06]

I couldn't care less about field curvature and border sharpness as long as they are not really bad. And I don't see the point in f/2.8 primes, might as well use a zoom then. I want something wide (24 mm), fast (at least f/1.8), quick (DC) and tough (WR) for documentary photography, where hardly anyone cares about curvature and border sharpness. It doesn't need to be DA Ltd. style tiny, but shouldn't be Sigma 35 'Art' big

Looks like we have pretty different priorities

Yeah, the things I want are nice rendering and that doesn't have soft border half of the time because in theory they are sharp but because of field curvature, well they are quite soft. DA15 and DA21 have the issue, the 21 to a lesser degree, but that's quite annoying.

I never have to complain of sharpness of the DA35ltd or the FA77, an FA50 is good too stopped down. Give me that overall and I'll be happy.

f/1.8 would be nice, but when I see the size of a FA31 f/1.8, I don't think you'll get a small 24mm. Ricoh will not make an APSC only lens when there already the 21 and there a lack from ANY WA prime. So either it will be a behemoh and fast, either I will need a moderate apperture like f/2.8...

As for why get a slow prime when there are zoom? Well just compare how you subjects will feel against a small f/2.8 prime or against a huge 24-70 zoom, and you'll get it.

[FantasticMrFox]

As for why get a slow prime when there are zoom? Well just compare how you subjects will feel against a small f/2.8 prime or against a huge 24-70 zoom, and you'll get it.

I have the very well regarded DA 35 f/2.4 and the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 - since I got the latter the former is collecting dust. If I pixelpeep the prime is sharper etc., but in practice I see little difference. Compared to a good zoom I would only use a prime for a fast aperture for low light or reduced DOF.

[Nicolas06]

documentary photography

Beside to me what documentary photography is not very precise and clear. I find many different definitions. Some say that any kind of photography that try to show the truth at it is. Some say it is photography that aim to change the world with photography as a propaganda and political tool. Some say it is just things depicted in a neutral, realistic way...

Subjects can be people, landscapes, wildlife, war, cities and buildings or factories... It is all about what you want to show, express and change.

The famous picture of the young dead migrant on the beach, the photographer went everyday, wandering for corpses because he knew that basically it was likely some would come there by the sea. He already seen several at the same place and was hoping he could find more to shot. It was not his first picture. But this one worked because the randomness of the sea brought a young child that at least on the picture looked dead but untouched. A contrast between the sad reality of the situation, and the vivid colors of his clothes. And of course the composition.

[PENTAX LEEBO]

When I was first considering a dslr there was lots to take in. Price, quality and durabilty was my focus. I didn't have vast amounts of money to play around with and just wanted a nice camera to take photos of things that interested me at any given time. I researched for about 8 months looking at Canon then Nikon, they all seemed great cameras I was torn between the Canon 70d and the Nikon d7100 and then I came across Pentax offerings first I liked the look of the K30 and then decided quickly on the K5ii for some reason. I liked the Canon 70d but I'd heard its dynamic range was lacking and the D7100 seemed way to complicated for someone who just wants to take decent photos. My decision still stands and have enjoyed everything I've learnt through going the Pentax route. The legacy primes and the back catalogue alone is worth the investment. Also been fortunate to get my hands on some and they're above my expectations of what an old piece of glass produces brilliant. Although a lot of young people may not take the time to research what it is they're looking for and go off what is recommended in store by a sales person. I went to a shop and the guy tried to sell me a Canon 1100d the really small one and I walked out thinking I must look a complete mug, they couldn't of paid me to take that camera for what I wanted a camera for. Pentax I now love using and one day may get my hands on a K1 if I ever get enough money together. I can dream I suppose. If you like take a look at some of my work here https://plus.google.com/u/0/+LeePinnington/posts

[Nicolas06]

I have the very well regarded DA 35 f/2.4 and the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 - since I got the latter the former is collecting dust. If I pixelpeep the prime is sharper etc., but in practice I see little difference. Compared to a good zoom I would only use a prime for a fast aperture for low light or reduced DOF.

Yep, different priorities

Just remember that you'll not get an APSC only fast 24mm f/1.8, that an FF one will be huge and the 18-35 already cover the apperture and offer the conveniance of a zoom

[FantasticMrFox]

Beside to me what documentary photography is not very precise and clear. I find many different definitions. Some say that any kind of photography that try to show the truth at it is. Some say it is photography that aim to change the world with photography as a propaganda and political tool. Some say it is just things depicted in a neutral, realistic way...

To me then you could take picture of anything with any kind of lenses

Documentary photography is neither the quest for ultimate truth, nor is it propaganda. It can be used for the latter, but usually it isn't. I use the term in lieu of photojournalism, because I am not a journalist but have still documented events and human conditions around me at varying points of my life (especially when I lived in Ghana).

In depicting the human condition certain focal lengths are more common than others. Hardly any photojournalist makes use of anything over 100 mm or UWA lenses. On full frame anything between 24 and 85 mm is usually used, and 35 is considered the most versatile focal length. On APS-C that's 24 mm.

[FantasticMrFox]

Just remember that you'll not get an APSC only fast 24mm f/1.8, that an FF one will be huge and the 18-35 already cover the apperture and offer the conveniance of a zoom

The Sigma 30 f/1.4 'Art' is relatively compact with a decent optical quality. But as you said, with Pentax concentrating on FF lenses in the near future it may take years until they will release APS-C primes again (I wouldn't go so far as claiming that they never will). And if Sigma ever makes a little 24 mm brother for the 30 'Art', it may not come for Pentax

[PENTAX LEEBO]

Documentary photography is neither the quest for ultimate truth, nor is it propaganda. It can be used for the latter, but usually it isn't. I use the term in lieu of photojournalism, because I am not a journalist but have still documented events and human conditions around me at varying points of my life (especially when I lived in Ghana).

In depicting the human condition certain focal lengths are more common than others. Hardly any photojournalist makes use of anything over 100 mm or UWA lenses. On full frame anything between 24 and 85 mm is usually used, and 35 is considered the most versatile focal length. On APS-C that's 24 mm.

The 15-30mm f2.8 looks almost to be an ideal lens on full frame. If it were a bit faster. I'd be most definitely after that combo with the K1 for landscape and general walk around it would be fab

[Nicolas06]

Documentary photography is neither the quest for ultimate truth, nor is it propaganda. It can be used for the latter, but usually it isn't. I use the term in lieu of photojournalism, because I am not a journalist but have still documented events and human conditions around me at varying points of my life (especially when I lived in Ghana).

In depicting the human condition certain focal lengths are more common than others. Hardly any photojournalist makes use of anything over 100 mm or UWA lenses. On full frame anything between 24 and 85 mm is usually used, and 35 is considered the most versatile focal length. On APS-C that's 24 mm.

I understand a bit better you needs now, but I asked because basically when I searched the net this was what I found for the possible definitions depending of who you ask.

They say photojournalism main difference is that they go after the breaking news, the moment, while documentary photography is more on a longer time frame and so allow for more in deph things.

The moment changed quite a bit apparently. Before picture were published on magazines, on paper and had more power. Theses days, the photographer that do that tend to show their work on art galeries so they kind of lost most of their initial audience.

[Nicolas06]

The 15-30mm f2.8 looks almost to be an ideal lens on full frame. If it were a bit faster. I'd be most definitely after that combo with the K1 for landscape and general walk around it would be fab

Depend heavily if your are outside or inside but I think FantasticMrFox would have more use of a 24-70 then as the 15-30 is more like an UWA and most of his coverage outside what FantasticMrFox aim for.

Anyway, thinking of it, while the wide apperture is useful, many time I think a flash may actually be more key for indoors. Too wide apperture blur everything and prevent from getting people and their enviroment in focus for me.

Again, different priorities?

[PENTAX LEEBO]

Depend heavily if your are outside or inside but I think FantasticMrFox would have more use of a 24-70 then as the 15-30 is more like an UWA and most of his coverage outside what FantasticMrFox aim for.

Anyway, thinking of it, while the wide apperture is useful, many time I think a flash may actually be more key for indoors. Too wide apperture blur everything and prevent from getting people and their enviroment in focus for me.

Again, different priorities?

Have to admit not a great fan of flash I feel done right it is good but can always tell a flash photo and am never keen. Flash has a tendency to blow the background away and even bounced you can tell. I like Bruce Gildens approach but looking at his work puts me of further. Maybe something I'd have to practice to understand more thanks Nicholas

[elvinhaak]

Well, it certainly depends on what you need and want...
For me - not to heavy, should be able to handle it wherever I go without the need of a car so the whole gear should stay under about 5 kgs max - the most I use is an easy and fast to use zoom.
For my work for making pictures for an internet-shop (with both parts of 3mm and 3 meters) a good zoom is very practical to use fast and switch. In generally I use a Sigma 18-200 for that. A bit too much DOF many times but it works fast and of course it is a light and easy to use lens with the in-body-stabilisation of Pentax.
At festivals outside, I like to take the WR-lenses of the kit, very easy to use and never mind if somebody throws a 'glass' of bear on it, just get some water and rince it of. Rain? no problem, the lens and body can take it and it is still very light in combination of lifting and working with it. And If I would brake the lens? They are relatelive cheap ...
A 'fast' lens with wide aperture sounds nice, but for these things I generally need to be fast and need a good DOF ... not practical if everything is getting out of focus...
When farther away, I take the 18-250 out of the bag inside on safe places (where no sand or beer is likely to flow through the air) which generally does the job very well, also in making little movies.

For my hobby birds it is different but again Pentax is my friend. I lately looked and asked around for otherr lenses around the 500mm length but they simply don't excist or are costing more then a car. That is for Nikon, Canon, Sony or Pentax, the same stuff. But I can use my older lightwait prime of a couple of 100 grams costing less then 400 Euro's because of the stabilisation inside the lens, or the zoom.
AF? somewhat useless on these distances. Yes, tried it with a lens that costs a car on a body from Nikon (by the way, the lens is availlable for Pentax) but the AF is consistently focussing at the wrong distance (there is always something in the way even if it is another bird that flies around), and with for example a K-30 this is way easier and more practical. Besides that now I can take a normal zoom with me besides the body and lens and batteries and with the Nikon it was even over the max weight with only the tle-zoomlens attached to the body...
For the lens of the cost of a car I would actually easely take a body of another brand with it besides my normal Pentax. Although the menu's on the Nikon are a pain in comparison to Pentax. They want to make it so complicated...

Flash.... is not 'really' allowed in most places I take pictures apart from the things for the webshop. No problem for that with extra lights and multiple flashes. Can be done even wireless or with slave-trigger.

[Tony Belding]

Pentax was always a little too slow to adopt some technologies: bayonet mount and devastatingly, both AF and digital.

Can we add EVF to that list yet?

---------- Post added 05-02-16 at 11:28 PM ----------

- Pentax don't have a mouthpiece. A local wedding photographer is a mouthpiece for Fuji. Even though fuji's new mirrorless is younger than pentax, its turnaround is quite quick. Before long, people like Zack Arias who was singing praises for Medium Format a couple years ago is now saying who needs a full frame when they can have a Fuji. Pentax don't have this.

If you do a search on YouTube for "mirrorless camera", it'll turn up video after video produced by Sony with pros lecturing about why they switched to the A7 -- and sometimes standing in front of a big SONY logo while they give the talk.

[totsmuyco]

It's the era of electronics. The company who cannot innovate fast will be left behind. Smaller and lighter cameras, with fast AF and good image quality is what majority are asking. Maybe MILC delivers these requirements.