|
Forum: Pentax K-01
04-29-2019, 04:34 PM
|
| |
I know you've asked this question of AstroDave, so I hope you and he won't mind me responding here...
I know of no other comparable lens in K-mount that beats the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 in terms of frame-wide image quality. But, as a constant f/2.8 aperture lens, it's quite bulky and heavy. Although this is a very general statement, you really can't hope for a variable aperture lens to achieve the same results at the same focal lengths and apertures unless you're looking to stop down somewhat on both lenses. For example, at f/3.5 I wouldn't expect the 18-135 to perform as well as the Sigma 17-50 at f/3.5 if you were to examine the whole frame. Maybe at f/5.6 they'd be similar, and at f/8 they'd be much closer. The same at 50mm, though I'd expect the Sigma would pull ahead even further here, at least at faster apertures.
The 18-135 is just a very different lens to the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8. The former is more versatile in terms of focal length, while the latter is better within its more limited range, but heavier and bulkier as a result...
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
04-29-2019, 04:26 PM
|
| |
It depends greatly on which NEX bodies you're considering, and the lenses (obviously :p). Earlier NEX bodies don't, IMHO, have image quality comparable to your K-01. Later ones might.
Looking at the Kurt Munger review for the 16mm pancake, it really needs to be stopped down for decent frame-wide performance (unsurprisingly). Whether you can work with the poor edge performance at wider apertures will depend on your use cases and preferences. Quoted from the conclusions of his review:
"This lens was designed for the purpose of being pocketable, inexpensive, and a platform for a couple of add-on converters, like a fish-eye and ultra wide. Sony did a good overall job with this lens, and I would consider the optical results good, but not great. Let's ponder the good things; sharp in the centers, even wide open; very compact, and able to fit in the front pockets of relaxed fit jeans, or in a womens purse; and very low noise when focusing, which is great when shooting video. A few things that could be changed for the better, say in version II, is color fringing control, mid-section sharpness, and ghosting control."
Or, in other words, you get what you pay for :o
As for Sony menus, they're awful, but not insurmountable. I have the A7 MkII, released November 2014, and I just don't like the menus. But I've used them for a while now, and I have no problem working with them. I still prefer Pentax menus by a country mile, though...
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
04-29-2019, 03:05 PM
|
| |
I have a reasonable amount of experience with a lot of equipment - Pentax certainly, but also Sony, and a smattering of others. I'm definitely no expert, though, but nor am I a complete beginner, and I'd like to help if I can :)
May I ask what the aps-c mirrorless camera and lens options are that you've considered, and what the additional cost would be if you sold your K-01 and used the funds towards that mirrorless purchase?
I should, at this point, add that I'm not a Pentax "fanboy" (I hate that word, but in this context it's useful). What I mean to say is, I'm not blinkered to other systems - in fact, I shoot Sony in addition to Pentax, and I'd quite happily shoot other systems too if they suited my requirements. I see nothing wrong with switching or adding systems. But, there are always many factors to weigh up. And the free market has a way of influencing the value of things (especially used) such that, if one option is significantly cheaper than another, there's typically very good reasons for that...
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
04-29-2019, 02:42 PM
|
| |
It might be easier if you tell us which other options you've considered with costs that you find acceptable. That way, we can suggest alternatives within those cost boundaries. If you're considering a $150 lens for the K-01, but you'd also accept spending considerably more (as you'd have to) for a decent GR series camera, it's not really a fair or useful comparison. My point being, you're not going to get a $150 lens for your K-01 that's going to give you comparable results to a GRII, for example :o
|
|
Forum: Pentax K-01
04-29-2019, 02:13 PM
|
| |
It would be my pleasure :D
Good glass remains relevant long after a specific model of digital camera has been superseded, or failed and become uneconomical to repair. I'm using glass from the 1950s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, 00s and 10s on my DSLR and mirrorless cameras. They're all still relevant, they all give great pleasure and many give fantastic results. I can enjoy them whatever body I choose to put them on. Adding a great new (or old) lens to your kit is a long-term and versatile investment that will deliver enjoyment and value long after your K-01 has given up.
Of course, fixed lens compact cameras like the GR series have a huge advantage in terms of size and portability, making them ideal for certain situations and applications where your K-01 and SLR lenses would be less than optimal. So, the choice and justifications ultimately need to be yours and yours alone...
|
