Pentax DA f/3.5-4.5 10-17mm Lens Fish-eye zoom lens for Pentax K-mount cameras at Crutchfield.com

Seems like a nice deal on this lens. Came across this during the DA35/50 frenzy and thought I'd post it separately.

[seventysixersfan]

Yes, that is a very good deal, possibly the lowest current price I've seen from a US retailer. Crutchfield is very reputable-- I've used them for plenty of stereo equipment in the past, but have never used them for camera stuff-- I only assume their excellent customer service applies to camera equipment too.

Now I just have to find some way to justify owning a fisheye zoom when I already have a rectilinear Tamron 10-24...

[tomwil]

$450 was the same price at the Pentax Webstore, until today.

At least you stand a better chance of getting it from Crutchfield, than Pentax!

[Takumar55]

$450 was the same price at the Pentax Webstore, until today.

At least you stand a better chance of getting it from Crutchfield, than Pentax!

That's actually how I found this deal. I checked around to see who else had it.

Sounds like a fun and highly regarded lens. I'm still thinking about it, but very tempted.

[carrrlangas]

Now I just have to find some way to justify owning a fisheye zoom when I already have a rectilinear Tamron 10-24...

Well, your 10-24mm starts at 108° angle of view and ends at 60° while the 10-17mm FE starts at 180° and ends at 100° (all diagonal AoV).. So they kind of complement each other.

Regardless, it´s my personal opinion, that real advantage of the 10-17 over any other ultra wide angle zoom is that it has the same dimensions and weight as the 18-55 kit lens (smaller if you take the reversed hood into account) and has a much smaller front element than the 10-24 or similars. This makes it really fun and easy to carry / hold.
I never tried anything wider than 16mm (80°) in rectilinear lenses but from the samples I´ve seen I think I rather non corrected lenses for wider than that.
I´ve also tried correcting distortion in PP and it works really good but corners can get soft or people deformed so you have to be keep it in mind when framing/composing for that purpose.

[seventysixersfan]

Well, your 10-24mm starts at 108° angle of view and ends at 60° while the 10-17mm FE starts at 180° and ends at 100° (all diagonal AoV).. So they kind of complement each other. Regardless, it´s my personal opinion, that real advantage of the 10-17 over any other ultra wide angle zoom is that it has the same dimensions and weight as the 18-55 kit lens (smaller if you take the reversed hood into account) and has a much smaller front element than the 10-24 or similars. This makes it really fun and easy to carry / hold.

Hmm.... yes, you're right about both points. Although I don't think my 10-24 is too heavy, it is definitely bulky, esp.with the massive hood attached (even reversed). Would be nice to have a lightweight zoom option at the ultra-wide end.

Ack. The fish-eye zoom wasn't on my radar. Now I'll have to think about it!!

[carrrlangas]

Ack. The fish-eye zoom wasn't on my radar. Now I'll have to think about it!!

Sorry for that! If it´s of any comfort, it´s almost as flare resistent as your DA15 and has the same great colors...

[Takumar55]

Hmm.... yes, you're right about both points. Although I don't think my 10-24 is too heavy, it is definitely bulky, esp.with the massive hood attached (even reversed). Would be nice to have a lightweight zoom option at the ultra-wide end.

Ack. The fish-eye zoom wasn't on my radar. Now I'll have to think about it!!

Count mount filters on it. Is that enough reason to not get it?