[Rush2112]

I found the last statement very interesting, see if you catch it:

"As appropriate, we shoot these with both full-frame and sub-frame bodies, at a range of focal lengths, and at both maximum aperture and ƒ/8. For the ''VFA'' target (the viewfinder accuracy target from Imaging Resource), we also provide sample crops from the center and upper-left corner of each shot, so you can quickly get a sense of relative sharpness, without having to download and inspect the full-res images. To avoid space limitations with the layout of our review pages, indexes to the test shots launch in separate windows."

Either that is a typo, or they have some sort of conversion adapter for another brand of body, don't you think? Or, they have themselves a FF pre-pro body. I doubt it is the latter because they only show the K10D as a test body, which to me is pretty lame. They should be able to afford a K20D body, if anything to see how well the lens resolves micro contrast, and its overall resolving power.

Either way they seem to come to near the same conclusion as DPR only they manage to do so without some sort of typical DPR backhanded nose upturned comment, which is why I always prefer I.R.'s reviews to DPR's.

Carl

p.s. oops forgot the link:
http://www.slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1247/cat/45

---

Last edited by Rush2112; 04-26-2009 at 03:50 AM. Reason: adding URL

[Paul Hunt]

Actually, I read that last statement as a blanket statement, generally pertaining to any lens tested - not specifically the DA15ltd.

I don't quite see how you came to this conclusion: "Either that is a typo, or they have some sort of conversion adapter for another brand of body"

Thanks for the link. I hadn't come across that site before.

Paul

[mattdm]

Either that is a typo, or they have some sort of conversion adapter for another brand of body, don't you think? Or, they have themselves a FF pre-pro body. I doubt it is the latter because they only show the K10D as a test body, which to me is pretty lame. They should be able to afford a K20D body, if anything to see how well the lens resolves micro contrast, and its overall resolving power.

That's boilerplate — it's there on the Olympus lens reviews too.

[Sailor]

Thanks for posting this, Carl. Like Paul, I was unaware of this site.

The lack of sharpness of the DA 15 reported in tests and annecdotal observations is a bit disappointing, but perhaps some sharpness has to be sacrificed to produce a 15 mm lens this small with very little distortion (the three laws of thermodynamics dictate you can't get sumpin' for nuttin'). Also, real-world shots that have been posted look very good - at least to my bleary old eyes.

Jer

[Erik]

Key word: "as appropriate". So, full frame is "not appropriate" with APS-C lenses, much like it is not appropriate to shoot a prime lens "at a range of focal lengths".

[Erik]

This review has a pretty embarassing fault though:

Tokina 12-24mm ƒ/4 AT-X 124 AF PRO DX ~$400 This is probably the strongest alternative. [...] If absolute sharpness is crucial and you don't mind trading away quite a bit of bulk to get it, though, the Tokina 12-24mm ƒ/4 AT-X 124 AF PRO DX (or the new, more expensive II version) may be a stronger choice.

¿Que? The Tokina 12-24 is not available in K mount...

[ManuH]

This review has a pretty embarassing fault though:

¿Que? The Tokina 12-24 is not available in K mount...

It is available as the Pentax DA 12-24/4. But they also talk about version II with motors which is not available to Pentax.

[Erik]

It is available as the Pentax DA 12-24/4. But they also talk about version II with motors which is not available to Pentax.

If you read the review you will note that in the section about alternatives, they first talk about the Pentax 12-24/4, then the Tokina 12-24/4, and conclude that the Tokina is the best alternative. Nowhere do they state that they are the same optical design, or that the Tokina is not available in K mount.

[GaryM]

Thanks for posting this, Carl. Like Paul, I was unaware of this site.

The lack of sharpness of the DA 15 reported in tests and annecdotal observations is a bit disappointing, but perhaps some sharpness has to be sacrificed to produce a 15 mm lens this small with very little distortion (the three laws of thermodynamics dictate you can't get sumpin' for nuttin'). Also, real-world shots that have been posted look very good - at least to my bleary old eyes.

Jer

It's sharp at f8, where I would use it 99% of the time, and it excels in almost every other way: distortion, flare, etc. This would be a good lens for architecture.

[Sailor]

It's sharp at f8, where I would use it 99% of the time, and it excels in almost every other way: distortion, flare, etc. This would be a good lens for architecture.

I'm thinking along the same lines, Gary. Besides, for me, the DA 12-24 or DA 14 are too big to lug around for the amount of use they would get. On the other hand, the DA 15 will fit in with my other DA Limiteds or could unobtrusively accompany my DA 18-250.

Jer

[Jonson PL]

It's sharp at f8, where I would use it 99% of the time, and it excels in almost every other way: distortion, flare, etc. This would be a good lens for architecture.

Yes, I don't think I'll find sharpness an issue in everyday shooting, (particularly if I like the rendering). But I'm very happily surprised my lack of distortion, and flare.


Thanks for the link to I.R.'s review. I actually find it a very good review.

Edit :
We discussed the DPr review, with Andy Westlake :
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1036&thread=31682688

The DPr review also compares to the Tokina version. It is common knowledge that the Tokina doesn’t come in Pentax mount, but that there is the Pentax 12-24/4 instead

[whatever7]

They could tested it on 5D body, but we already know it doesn't cover the FF area on a Pentax film camera.

[legacyb4]

Plastic filter threads? Is that correct?

Plastic filter threads? Is that correct?

He meant on the filter itself not on the lens which is entirely metallic (including the cap).

Radu

[benjikan]

If you read the review you will note that in the section about alternatives, they first talk about the Pentax 12-24/4, then the Tokina 12-24/4, and conclude that the Tokina is the best alternative. Nowhere do they state that they are the same optical design, or that the Tokina is not available in K mount.

The multi coating, SDM and external design are what differentiates the Pentax from the Tokina, but the optical formula is the same.