Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-12-2009, 11:17 AM   #1
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,575
the joy of wide angle and FF

I've never been much into wide angle, but for a recent project I was shooting inside an 8'x40' space and needed as much coverage as I could get. I picked up the 16-35/2.8 for the 5D2 and headed down to the location. Took a few hundred stills as well as some video. Was happy with the results and I finally got some "looks" that I previously hadn't been able to achieve shooting the DLux4 @ 24mm and Pentax @ 24mm (effective).

Saturday I went to a friend's wedding and snapped a hundred or so shots. I just took the 24-105/4 and oddly enough I found myself really missing the range between 16-24mm. Then today I was doing a walkabout with the 70-200/4 and realized that I "see" that range pretty well.

Interesting. I'm wondering about a "kit" that is 16-35/2.8, 50/1.2, 70-200/4. I never thought I'd be into wide, but being forced to shoot it opened my eyes (so to speak).

10-12-2009, 05:40 PM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,169
I've found that "standard" zooms are great for traveling or when you aren't doing any "serious" photography. The 24-105 is my default lens on the 1Ds II, but when I have something specific in mind it rarely if ever ends up on there. My 15-30 or 85/1.8 usually get called into play, or the Sigma 50 if shallow DOF and pretty OOF areas are the goal.

Your kit suggestion sounds like a really great one for FF. The 16-35 is a very respectable lens, but I just can't give my 15-30 up since it's so so sharp and only cost me $220 used... noisy and slow AF but who cares at 15mm?
10-12-2009, 07:24 PM   #3
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tri-Cities, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,784
If I hadn't returned to Pentax, I would have ended up with a 17-40mm/4, 50mm/1.4, and a 70-200/4 on my old Canon.


QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
Interesting. I'm wondering about a "kit" that is 16-35/2.8, 50/1.2, 70-200/4. I never thought I'd be into wide, but being forced to shoot it opened my eyes (so to speak).
10-13-2009, 03:37 PM   #4
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,610
QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
I've never been much into wide angle, but for a recent project I was shooting inside an 8'x40' space and needed as much coverage as I could get. I picked up the 16-35/2.8 for the 5D2 and headed down to the location. Took a few hundred stills as well as some video. Was happy with the results and I finally got some "looks" that I previously hadn't been able to achieve shooting the DLux4 @ 24mm and Pentax @ 24mm (effective).

Saturday I went to a friend's wedding and snapped a hundred or so shots. I just took the 24-105/4 and oddly enough I found myself really missing the range between 16-24mm. Then today I was doing a walkabout with the 70-200/4 and realized that I "see" that range pretty well.

Interesting. I'm wondering about a "kit" that is 16-35/2.8, 50/1.2, 70-200/4. I never thought I'd be into wide, but being forced to shoot it opened my eyes (so to speak).
dude, we had the 10-20 sigma available to us for years now!

which technically is the 15-30 equivalent, granted its not 2.8 but who cares! :P

10-13-2009, 05:40 PM   #5
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,575
Original Poster
a) I don't like Sigma
b) I do like 2.8

10-15-2009, 03:14 PM   #6
edl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 457
QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote

Interesting. I'm wondering about a "kit" that is 16-35/2.8, 50/1.2, 70-200/4. I never thought I'd be into wide, but being forced to shoot it opened my eyes (so to speak).
That's basically what I have for the D700 - not exactly, but I have the 18-35/3.5-4.5, 50/1.8, and 70-200/2.8. I also have the 85/1.4 because that's one lens I had to have.

I plan on ditching the 18-35 for the 17-35/2.8.

I also have a $170 Tamron 24-135 for a no-brainer walkaround, it's decent for snapshots.
10-15-2009, 04:11 PM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,337
I've opted for zooms over primes, for the most part

I've opted for zooms over primes, for the most part.

My first eos mount lens purchase was LN "used" 14mm f2.8 Tamron. I believe Tamron has discontinued it.

Then a year or so later I added brand new:

Canon made

16-35mm 2.8L II
50mm f2.5 Macro
24-70mm 2.8L and I got an exceptional copy. Lots of bad press on earlier ones.
100mm f2.8 USM Macro
70-200mm 2.8L IS
300mm f4 IS. I really considered the 2.8 IS and should have bought it for $950 less last Christmas 2008. I won't pay 25% more now so I wait for dollar to yen exchange trade to improve.
1.4x II TC
2x II TC
12mm II Extension Tube
25mm II Extension Tube

The 12mm turns my 70-200mm 2.8L IS into a handy image stabilized fast aperture macro zoom and it retains all metadata with no additional effort, of course.

I guess my kit is complete as I bought both cable releases and fast aperture glass focus screens and grid screen too for my pair of 5D Classics. Still I'll likely add 17mm f4 Rotating Tilt& Shift. Its stuck at launch price so I hope it's cost won't inflate further. I'll wait till next Spring before our next big trip and get what should be the most innovative wide angle prime ever made: 17mm TS:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=cart_accessories&A=details...=606803&is=USA

I've always been drawn to ultrawide imaging. Canon does not let me down. Glad I bought when I did as everything went up in price. I added Nikon just to drive their 14-24mm 2.8: The King of Ultrawide Imaging. No regrets, just a bit of complications since the wife LOVES my D700. It replaced Pentax for her. She likes it so much I added 70-300 VRII right before it popped up an additional $130.

I find it amusing Pentaxian Dudes plead for smaller and smaller cameras and my wife choose bigger D700: The biggest Dslr I own.

QuoteOriginally posted by nostatic Quote
I've never been much into wide angle, but for a recent project I was shooting inside an 8'x40' space and needed as much coverage as I could get. I picked up the 16-35/2.8 for the 5D2 and headed down to the location. Took a few hundred stills as well as some video. Was happy with the results and I finally got some "looks" that I previously hadn't been able to achieve shooting the DLux4 @ 24mm and Pentax @ 24mm (effective).

Saturday I went to a friend's wedding and snapped a hundred or so shots. I just took the 24-105/4 and oddly enough I found myself really missing the range between 16-24mm. Then today I was doing a walkabout with the 70-200/4 and realized that I "see" that range pretty well.

Interesting. I'm wondering about a "kit" that is 16-35/2.8, 50/1.2, 70-200/4. I never thought I'd be into wide, but being forced to shoot it opened my eyes (so to speak).



Last edited by Samsungian; 10-15-2009 at 04:32 PM.
10-15-2009, 05:18 PM   #8
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
I like using my 10-24mm Tamron with my K-7 indoors for HD video and stills. At 10mm I could shoot video of my 11 month old grandaughter when she is over three days a week holding the camera with one hand and almost no focusing needed. For stills I use the built-in flash @24mm and it works great at 2ft or more distance.
10-15-2009, 05:38 PM   #9
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,610
from personal experience the canon distorts enough to notice...

here is a sigma at 10mm on my K20, the horizon is flat as a ruler


http://fork.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p788670741-4.jpg


here is my buddies canon 16-35 @ 16 (or maybe even less) on a Film camera.

Pavel Kounine | Around & About the Resort
10-15-2009, 05:41 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,169
QuoteOriginally posted by Gooshin Quote
from personal experience the canon distorts enough to notice...

here is a sigma at 10mm on my K20, the horizon is flat as a ruler


http://fork.zenfolio.com/img/v1/p788670741-4.jpg


here is my buddies canon 16-35 @ 16 (or maybe even less) on a Film camera.

Pavel Kounine | Around & About the Resort
The Sigma 10-20 does have some impressive (lack of) distortion numbers. Its "big brother", the 12-24 does as well. If the 12-24 performed better overall I'd swap my 15-30 for it, but the resolution falls apart pretty badly towards the edges.
10-15-2009, 05:58 PM   #11
Veteran Member
maxwell1295's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Long Island, New York
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,703
I know one wedding photographer who shoots with the exact same setup (16-35,50,70-200) except he's using the 2.8 IS version of the long zom. His WA stuff is amazing.

I haven't felt the need to go ultra wide. When I shot Pentax, I primarily used the 16-50, 50-135, along with the DA35 and FA50. Now that I'm shooting full frame, I'm pretty much shooting at the same focal lengths (24-60mm, 70-200mm, 85mm). I'm comfortable with those lengths even though my 85 has a pretty bad BF issue.

What I don't have is a DA35 equivalent. Then again, there is no DA35 equivalent......that lens is in a class by itself.
10-15-2009, 06:02 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,337
Most of these Sigmas and Tamron are aps-c

Most of these Sigmas and Tamron are aps-c.

Nostatic added a canon full frame dslr to his pentax kit.

I've never read, well seen great images from Sigma 12-24. If you shoot full frame why put up with horrible corners?


Two versions of 16-35mm 2.8L exist. The 1st one and a couple years ago canon redesigned it from ground up. Its knows as "II". I like the "II"lens alot & never shot with version #1. However when it comes to ultrawide imaging the Nikon 14-24mm is incredible and in alot of ways better than the canon as its a rectilinear at 14mm and 15mm too. I considered buying a $300 UK adapter from 16-9.com and wait for 8 or 9 months for delivery but instead bought a D700 new to drive it for $2,000 more than a custom made G series to eos adapter would have run me. Thus, the why I own two brands of full frame gear.

Nikon G - Canon EOS Adapter

I still like K20D with my 105mm f2.5 macro. Very cool set up. Inbody Shake reduction is sweet with this old series one macro.
10-15-2009, 06:08 PM   #13
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,169
QuoteOriginally posted by Samsungian Quote
Most of these Sigmas and Tamron are aps-c.

Nostatic added a canon full frame dslr to his pentax kit.

I've never read, well seen great images from Sigma 12-24. If you shoot full frame why put up with horrible corners?
Exactly. That's why I love my 15-30 -- razor sharp all the way to the corner. Some barrel distortion but no big deal unless you are shooting things with lots of straight lines and even then it's relatively easy to fix.
10-15-2009, 06:12 PM   #14
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,575
Original Poster
I have pondered getting a D700 simply to shoot the 14-24 along with an 85/1.4, mostly in low light. I find the 16-35/2.8II "good enough" though, so that saves me a lot of money...
10-15-2009, 06:42 PM   #15
Veteran Member
pcarfan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dayton, Ohio
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,978
Hey! didn't realized you got yourself the mkII, what a sweet camera. I know everything about is good except I keep hearing of the AF...what are your thoughts on the AF-C. Congrats.
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!
24mm, angle, range
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Misc Wide angle wllm Post Your Photos! 6 12-07-2009 09:57 AM
Wide Angle Primes? iht Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 8 06-23-2009 04:57 AM
Which wide angle should i go for ?? Bossy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 03-22-2009 05:05 AM
which wide angle? Ken Eremko Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 08-06-2008 09:53 AM
Wide Angle daacon Monthly Photo Contests 0 06-23-2008 02:00 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:54 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