|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-16-2018, 03:02 PM
|
| |
There's very little FE effect at 17mm. It's already going away by 12mm. It's nearly a normal wide angle at 17mm. I typically don't even bother correcting after 13mm unless I'm shooting something with obviously sharp, straight lines (like a building).
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-16-2018, 07:48 AM
|
| |
Funny you post those, because I was browsing through Flickr photos for this lens yesterday I kept coming across yours (including some you just posted) and thinking to myself "this guy really knows how to use this lens".
That mortar/pestle and the beach scene definitely show the lens is capable of more than I'm getting out of it.
My thoughts are similar to everyone else here, which is why I haven't sold it already. Yes, I could probably get a better dedicated prime fisheye, but the whole point of this lens is versatility - as both a creative effect FE closer to 10mm and as a defishable UWA closer to 17mm. I don't think it'd use an 8mm fish eye enough to justify carrying it around. But what I am wondering is if I'd get more use out the 12-24 as a hiking/nature walk around. Based on the great pics posted here though, I'll keep at it with this thing for now. I'll stop down further and pay better attention to nailing exposure.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-15-2018, 02:27 PM
|
| |
Those are nice, especially the 2nd and 3rd.
Mine all had at least -1EV dialed in as well, but I probably needed to go further since it blows highlights so easily. It does look like all yours were all at f11 and I'm typically shooting at a max of f8. Maybe I'll try stopping down a bit more next time and see if the situation improves at all.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-15-2018, 01:12 PM
|
| |
Glad I'm not the only one. Maybe it's a consequence of not being able to have a (meaningful) sized hood and such a protruded front element.
I don't have experience with any other fish eyes, but maybe someone else can chime in. I do really like the lens and the 10-17 zoom has the potential to give great walk around versatility, but the daylight issues really kill it for me. If that's all it's got, I guess it turns into a very specialized lens for me. The low-light images are excellent.
Thanks for the compliments. I actually lit that sign by painting it with a headlamp during the exposure. lolol
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
01-15-2018, 10:13 AM
|
| |
By way of some background... I originally bought this lens as a light weight, ultra-wide walk around for non-serious picture taking because I use my Sigma 10-20 for paid work and don't want to risk it getting smashed when I trip while hiking. It's also large and has an obnoxious hood. The 10-17 is small and weighs nothing.
However, I've noticed some severe limitations and/or me just failing to understand and use the lens properly. I realize it's a specialty lens, and that's not where my issue is. Everyone knows it's a fringing MONSTER, but that's easily corrected in post and not really my issue either.
My issue is with the extraordinarily sub-par rending in anything but absolutely flawless lighting conditions or low-light conditions. In direct sunlight it washes out instantly. It blows highlights like no body's business and seems to reduce my cameras' dynamic ranges to that of a cell phone. It has some of the flattest rendering of any lens I own, if used in anything remotely resembling bright light or a high dynamic range scene. I typically come home with minimal or no keepers from any daylight shooting, especially this time of year with the low-angle sun. Most of the shots have that extremely digital, fake look as if I took them with my cell phone. Re-saturating and adding contrast in post just turns them into cartoons.
These issues seem to be confirmed by browsing through the DA 10-17 group on Flickr. Browsing through my own photos taken with the lens, every good photo it took was at golden hour or night. If the attachments work in proper order, you should see what I'd consider three terrible photos followed by three acceptable photos. Not surprisingly, all the bad photos were taken during the middle of the day and all the nice photos were taken after the sun had set.
Am I missing something or is this the best this lens can do in direct sunlight? I'm shooting stopped down to around f8, plus or minus a couple stops. I've tried to use bracketed shots, but even though that helps the dynamic range issue, it doesn't fix the micro-contrastless flat rendering. From both my own shots and those on Flickr, shooting from 12-17mm seems to help quite a bit, but by 12mm you've already lost most of the FE and kind of defeats the purpose of the lens.
Any other suggestions? Any example photos that show it CAN produce decent photos in midday light?
|
