Site Sponsors
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 51 to 91 of 91

Thread: Pentax lenses

  1. #51
    Senior Member ecsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tax State
    Posts
    549
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Jono
    Your pics using the 35 macro gave me a difficult road to travel, but in the end it was the 100 which won out, for distance to subject. But, as with most macros, the lens is beautiful for alot of other things.
    Joe

  2. #52
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by ecsh View Post
    Ok, had the 15 LTD and 77 LTD. Sent the 15 back. It was way too soft wide open, and did not get sharp until 5.6-8. A couple of guys on the Pentax forum told me not to bother with another copy, as thats how it is. The 77 is sharp wide open, and sharper at F4. Its a keeper. Great range for me in a small package. Got the newer 100 2.8 macro WR, and its sharp wide open as well. Beautifully made also, as well as small. What a nice lens that is. Have the 50-135 on the way to see how that is now.
    Fun times ahead.
    Joe
    Joe
    My 15 Lim. looks ok in the center (not supersharp but also not soft), but at f3 heavy Vignetting and soft corners. The corners get acceptable at f5.6, and IMO really ok at f8.0
    So at f4 I would use it only for subjects where you do not pay much attention to the corners, but other than that it looks fine.
    On theplus side you have good contrast, not much if any flare, solid color, small size (quite important for me).

    I also agree that for a lens used mainly as macro 100mm would be more usefull than 35mm because of distance to subject.
    The charme for me of the 35 is that it is a small normal lens sharp and still with very nice bokeh, and the macro is the add on.

  3. #53
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    EU
    Posts
    325
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Photozone measurements agree pretty much with that. But I have to say I find it a pleasant lens to use. If I shoot landscapes, I use f/8 anyhow and if I shoot objects at a closer range, the main object is usually in the center which is very sharp even at f/4. But it's certainly not a perfect lens.




  4. #54
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by ecsh View Post
    Jono
    Your pics using the 35 macro gave me a difficult road to travel, but in the end it was the 100 which won out, for distance to subject. But, as with most macros, the lens is beautiful for alot of other things.
    Joe
    HI Joe
    When I (briefly) had the K7, I had the 16-50 (which I didn't then like) and the 100 (which I did).
    Now I'm thinking about the 100 again, just over the last few few days I've been having such fun with the two zooms (16-50, 60-250), they both focus pretty close, and in the snow we've been having it's been great not worrying about them getting wet (which they certainly have!).

    Just this guy you know

  5. #55
    Senior Member ecsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tax State
    Posts
    549
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    The WR part of the 100 is the best part. We have more than our share of crummy weather in New England.
    Joe

  6. #56
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,867
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    What would actually be a good lens lineup for the K5?

    1) I thought about either zooms - 16-50 and 50-135 for a fast version or 60-250 for more reach

    2) or a combination of primes and 1 zoom - DA15, DA35, DA70 and either 50-135 or 60-250.

    I might prefer the 50-135 to the 60-250 because of speed as well as I want to use it as fast portrait lens.

    Thoughts?

  7. #57
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    What would actually be a good lens lineup for the K5?

    1) I thought about either zooms - 16-50 and 50-135 for a fast version or 60-250 for more reach

    2) or a combination of primes and 1 zoom - DA15, DA35, DA70 and either 50-135 or 60-250.

    I might prefer the 50-135 to the 60-250 because of speed as well as I want to use it as fast portrait lens.

    Thoughts?
    I personally have steered away from the DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 because of decentering defects with early units and a seemingly high failure rate with the SDM AF mechanism (which may or may not be addressed in recent copies). Granted these lenses are both highly-rated by Pentax users.

    Also, with the excellent high-ISO abilities of the K-5, the need for fast zooms is diminished (if you really need the speed, then you can get some primes).

    With that said, may I present an alternative kit (this is what I'd personally get if I were starting over):

    DA18-135 DC WR - this would be the ideal walkaround/travel lens, a step up in quality from the 18-55 kit lens. It's also weather-sealed and uses the new DC motor which is faster and just as quiet as the SDM used in the DA* lenses (and probably more reliable).

    DA*60-250 - this seems to be a superb zoom that is under-appreciated, IMHO. It is, however, a bit pricey.

    And some primes to round things out:

    DA15, the new DA35/2.4 (not to be confused with the DA35/2.8 Ltd Macro), DA70/2.4, DA100/2.8 WR Macro (not only does this offer 1:1 macro, but it has also been shown to be an excellent portrait lens)

    This kit should suffice for general photography - I've tried to strike a good balance here between cost and performance (which is why I didn't include FA Ltds). Obviously more specialized applications will require some adjustments.
    Last edited by photogerald; 5th December 2010 at 21:57.

  8. #58
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by ecsh View Post
    The WR part of the 100 is the best part. We have more than our share of crummy weather in New England.
    Joe
    Also the compact size, compared to other 90 and 100mm macro lenses (yes, the Pentax is also FF compatible). See this comparison:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/inferno10/5227899281/
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/inferno10/5228493864/

    The Pentax has a 49mm filter diameter, compared to 58mm and 67mm for the Canon and Canon L, and is just over half the weight of the Canons.

  9. #59
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Well, I don't think the tests said that it was poor at 135mm, just that it was less than stellar (unlike the 60-250).
    Interestingly, the 200mm figures for the 60-250 are as good as those for the 200 DA f2/8 (nobody seems to have tested the f4 ).

    I quite agree about the fixed length lens, tromboning is most un-esthetic, but I don't think it has a huge effect in real life.

    The extra stop is always nice - but much less of an issue when you have really useable high ISO

    But from a little experience (and lots of reading) the 60-250 seems to be a great lens (the tripod mount is great too), and together with the 16-50 it makes a compact kit with a 24-387 focal length range - not bad.
    Actually, there was an FA*200/4 macro, which is legendary and quite rare.

    Anyways, the DA*60-250 does seem to be an excellent lens. And according to the Photozone tests it outresolves the DA*200/2.8 @ 200mm. I personally feel that the DA*200/2.8 might be a bit overrated (I have the FA* version of this lens, which is nearly identical). It suffers from some CA and PF in high contrast areas. However, it does have a very nice rendering which makes it nice for outdoor portraits. This is why I haven't parted with mine even after getting the excellent Sigma 70-200/2.8 EX (original version).

    I just realize I've done a lot of talking, so here are some photos taken with my FA*200/2.8:






  10. #60
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Terry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York City
    Posts
    6,955
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1145

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Welcome to the forum!

  11. #61
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    3) I also found out that my 16-50 seems to have a very slight problem at the wide right site with a slight softness; not a big deal but also not 100% perfect IMO
    Sounds like a decentering defect. I would take it back too.

  12. #62
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,867
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by photogerald View Post
    I personally have steered away from the DA*16-50 and DA*50-135 because of decentering defects with early units and a seemingly high failure rate with the SDM AF mechanism (which may or may not be addressed in recent copies). Granted these lenses are both highly-rated by Pentax users.

    Also, with the excellent high-ISO abilities of the K-5, the need for fast zooms is diminished (if you really need the speed, then you can get some primes).

    With that said, may I present an alternative kit (this is what I'd personally get if I were starting over):

    DA18-135 DC WR - this would be the ideal walkaround/travel lens, a step up in quality from the 18-55 kit lens. It's also weather-sealed and uses the new DC motor which is faster and just as quiet as the SDM used in the DA* lenses (and probably more reliable).

    DA*60-250 - this seems to be a superb zoom that is under-appreciated, IMHO. It is, however, a bit pricey.

    And some primes to round things out:

    DA15, the new DA35/2.4 (not to be confused with the DA35/2.8 Ltd Macro), DA70/2.4, DA100/2.8 WR Macro (not only does this offer 1:1 macro, but it has also been shown to be an excellent portrait lens)

    This kit should suffice for general photography - I've tried to strike a good balance here between cost and performance (which is why I didn't include FA Ltds). Obviously more specialized applications will require some adjustments.
    Many thanks for this - agree that the lineup with primes is a good alternative, especially in combination with the 60-250.

  13. #63
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    What I can add so far is that my Kit lens (18-55WR) seems to be not the sharpest lens specially at the long end end short distances.
    I therefore check out the 16-50/2.8 now.
    Another alternative in that range is the DA16-45/4 (which might be difficult to find new). It's a step up from the 18-55 kit, and has less distortion than the DA*16-50/2.8 @ 16mm.

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    I am also planning to look into the primes and find it hard to decide.
    I think it would be 15 and 21 (for the focal length)
    The merits of the DA15 Ltd are its compact size, excellent contrast/flare resistance, colour, and low distortion. The catch is some softness in the corners at wider apertures. It is also said to have significant field curvature, which excerbates the corner weakness in tests (charts). But I think if you understand this, there are certainly reasons to like this lens.

    The DA21 Ltd seems to be an ideal WA walkaround. It does have some distortion (more than the DA15), however there are those who swear by this lens.

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    , but then its hard to choose between 31,35macro,40 and 43, and between 70 and 77.
    I got some recommendations for the 43 in the K5 thread.
    On the other side I read that the 40 and 70 do focus a little faster (shorter focus thread) and I would like the smallish size, lower price, and they seem to be good wide open too. (a little slower of course than 43 and 77).
    Yes, the DA Ltds (40 and 70) do focus faster than their FA Ltd counterparts. They also have a more "clinical" rendering. They are sharp wide open and have a more even resolution (center to corner). On the otherhand, the FA 43 and 77 have at times a "3D-like" rendering. It's for you to decide if this is worth the added cost.

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    From reading around the 31 seems to be one of the best ones, but then I dont know if I find the focal length that usefull.
    Yes, the FA 31 is quite special, but oh dear the price.

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    The 35....can it replace a 40 or 43? Its said to be sharp- but how clinical is it? Is it ok for portrait from short distanceor is it too sharp? How is the bokeh?
    Or would you skip both 40 and 43 and get the 55 as a portraint lens?
    I don't mean to confuse matters, but you might also consider the new DA35/2.4. This budget offering is actually based on the FA35/2, though the bokeh seems to have been improved.

    As for the DA*55/1.4, personally I'm not sold. It is expensive and has slow AF. But it does seem to perform very well. I just don't think I'd choose it over the less expensive FA 43/1.9.

  14. #64
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by TEBnewyork View Post
    Welcome to the forum!
    Thanks Terry! I look forward to some great discussions with everyone here.

  15. #65
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by ptomsu View Post
    Many thanks for this - agree that the lineup with primes is a good alternative, especially in combination with the 60-250.
    No problem! I hope it helps you with your decision.

  16. #66
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Peter,
    as you probably know I have decided for 15,21,35,70 (got those on a good deal mint-otherwise I might have started with only 2 primes) and 50-135.

    The 16-50 sample I tested didnt convince me at f2.8 (it was quite good at f4 upward though) and this was one reason besides size why I went for the primes.
    If I will use the Pentax a lot I might however endup in the future checking out another sample of the 16-50 for flexibility and weather proof built.

    Take a 21 and 70 prime as a 2 lens kit and this will not need a bigger bag than a M9 with a 35 and 80mm lens.

  17. #67
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Pentax lenses

    HI there Gerald
    And welcome from me as well - your shots with the 200 f2.8 look splendid, and I stand corrected on the f4!

    Funny about the 16-50, I'm becoming more and more enthusiastic about it, perhaps it's just that I've learned not to shoot wide open at 16mm when I want really sharp corners! But, truth is I want sharp corners for landscapes, and that really isn't the time I'd be expecting to need f2.8.

    I did consider the 16-45, which seems to have a good write up, but in the end I went for the faster lens.

    I'm very much in love with the 35 DA macro - I think it does a decent job for casual people pictures, has a perfectly respectable bokeh (not common with 35s, even those made by Leica) and it has the double advantage of being a really good macro lens . .. . .and it's very small! Obviously it'd be nice if it was weather resistant, but maybe you can't have everything!

    The 100 WR will be next on my list. As for the other primes - I'm not so interested, as, if I want to shoot something with a minimum focus of 0.7 metres which is small and quality, I'm more likely to pick up something else!

    I hope you enjoy it here . . . . and don't find it too civilised! (if you want a bit of dispute, just head off for one of the S2 threads )

    all the best

    Just this guy you know

  18. #68
    Senior Member m3photo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    1,043
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    28

    Re: Pentax Pancake Primes

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    Take a 21 and 70 prime as a 2 lens kit and this will not need a bigger bag than a M9 with a 35 and 80mm lens.
    Excellent walk-around setup. I had the K10D back then and I took it with these two little lenses on a cruise around the Mediterranean. I posted the images on PBase. Here is the link to "A Day in Florence", there are pages on Capri, Rome, Malta and Tunis also. I will be definitely getting the K-5, when funds allow, to have an even better setup (mostly the quiet shutter!).

    http://www.pbase.com/m3photo/florence

  19. #69
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Pentax lenses

    HI There Michael
    The camera really is lovely.
    Unfortunately, my 16-50 which passed it's brick wall tests rather well does turn out to be 'decentered' it actually reared it's ugly head at 35mm at f8 - most unexpected. Now I'm trying to decide whether to get it replaced, or to send it to Pentax to get it fixed.
    Still, sending lenses back, is something us Leica users are definitely used to!

    Just this guy you know

  20. #70
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI There Michael
    The camera really is lovely.
    Unfortunately, my 16-50 which passed it's brick wall tests rather well does turn out to be 'decentered' it actually reared it's ugly head at 35mm at f8 - most unexpected. Now I'm trying to decide whether to get it replaced, or to send it to Pentax to get it fixed.
    Still, sending lenses back, is something us Leica users are definitely used to!
    My M9 and 24,50,75+135mm just came back from Leica for calibration

  21. #71
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Still, sending lenses back, is something us Leica users are definitely used to!
    Really? Is it because you folks have such high standards or does Leica have "issues" too?

  22. #72
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI there Gerald
    And welcome from me as well - your shots with the 200 f2.8 look splendid, and I stand corrected on the f4!

    Funny about the 16-50, I'm becoming more and more enthusiastic about it, perhaps it's just that I've learned not to shoot wide open at 16mm when I want really sharp corners! But, truth is I want sharp corners for landscapes, and that really isn't the time I'd be expecting to need f2.8.
    Thank you Jono as well for the welcome!

    I just saw your latest post about your DA*16-50 being decentered - I'm sorry to hear that, I thought this was a thing of the past with this lens.

    If you didn't already have that "something else", I would take this oppurtunity to push the DA15 Ltd for landscapes - compared to the 16-50, it's wider, has less distortion, and presumably has better contrast/colour/flare resistance. Yes it needs to be stopped down for best corner performance, but you'd be doing that anyways for landscapes right?

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    I did consider the 16-45, which seems to have a good write up, but in the end I went for the faster lens.
    That's understandable - not only is the DA*16-50 faster, it's got the weather sealing and silent AF motor.

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    I'm very much in love with the 35 DA macro - I think it does a decent job for casual people pictures, has a perfectly respectable bokeh (not common with 35s, even those made by Leica) and it has the double advantage of being a really good macro lens . .. . .and it's very small! Obviously it'd be nice if it was weather resistant, but maybe you can't have everything!
    Yes the DA35 Ltd does have a big fan following. I've been able to resist - so far.

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    The 100 WR will be next on my list. As for the other primes - I'm not so interested, as, if I want to shoot something with a minimum focus of 0.7 metres which is small and quality, I'm more likely to pick up something else!
    Let me guess - that something else starts with an "M" and ends with a "9"?

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    I hope you enjoy it here . . . . and don't find it too civilised! (if you want a bit of dispute, just head off for one of the S2 threads )

    all the best
    Thanks again, I'm sure I'll like it here.

  23. #73
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by photogerald View Post
    Really? Is it because you folks have such high standards or does Leica have "issues" too?
    maybe both.
    Shooting at f1.4 on ff with a sharp lens does lead to a very small tolerance regarding totally accurate Focus.
    This is not allways the case in my experience. If I shoot a portrait I want the eye sharp - we are tlaking about mm.
    Leica Lenses I had to send in was allways and only to adjust focus, everything else has allways been great.

  24. #74
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by photogerald View Post
    Really? Is it because you folks have such high standards or does Leica have "issues" too?
    Hi Gerald.
    I think that "low tolerance" might be a better description than "high standards'

    I got my 16-50 replaced, and the new one is pretty much the same, but on the other side

    The 100 wr is lovely though, and although the focusing is a bit noisy, it seems to focus so fast (even in [email protected] light).

    Just this guy you know

  25. #75
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    maybe both.
    Shooting at f1.4 on ff with a sharp lens does lead to a very small tolerance regarding totally accurate Focus.
    This is not allways the case in my experience. If I shoot a portrait I want the eye sharp - we are tlaking about mm.
    Leica Lenses I had to send in was allways and only to adjust focus, everything else has allways been great.
    Oh ok, I get it now - with rangefinders the focus calibration is critical.

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi Gerald.
    I think that "low tolerance" might be a better description than "high standards'
    Which is very understandable given the cost of that glass.

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    I got my 16-50 replaced, and the new one is pretty much the same, but on the other side
    How frustrating! So what are you going to do now? Get it replaced again, or return it outright and go for a different option?

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    The 100 wr is lovely though, and although the focusing is a bit noisy, it seems to focus so fast (even in [email protected] light).
    Yeah, that's the benefit of having the AF motor in-body - these lenses will benefit from improvements to the body (as has been the case from K20D -> K-7 -> K-5).

  26. #76
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by photogerald View Post
    How frustrating! So what are you going to do now? Get it replaced again, or return it outright and go for a different option?
    From http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/re...ssage=37172274

    "If you can get a decent copy then yes, it's a good lens.
    That is the problem.... getting a good one.

    My local camera store said the DA*16-50 was the most inconsistent lens they had ever sold.

    Goods ones were excellent while the worst were abysmal mainly due to decentering issues

    I have one myself.
    Its already had a SDM replacement.

    It's a little soft wide open, good from around F4 but still not in the same league as the FA Limiteds for sharpness."


    It was because of reviews like this that I ended up getting the DA16-45 a few years back. And with the price hikes I would be even less likely to get the DA*16-50 now. However, if you really need the constant f2.8 *and* weather sealing, there are no alternatives.

    If your requirements are more flexible, I hear the Tamron 17-50/2.8 is pretty good (disregard the comments about slow AF in other mounts as in Pentax mount this lens uses the in-body AF motor). Pentax also has the DA17-70/4 and the latest version of the Sigma 17-70/2.8-4.5 is said to be quite good as well.

    Also, the new DA18-135 DC WR is actually looking to be nice lens. It's got weather sealing and has a new fast and silent in-lens DC motor (faster than SDM). IQ is said to be a noticeable step up from the 18-55 kit lens, and if it's not wide enough you can pair it with the DA15 Ltd. It's also quite compact - when retracted, it's about the same length as the 18-55 and just slightly fatter. I'm actually thinking of replacing my DA16-45 with the DA18-135, not because of any IQ issues but rather because I find the range to a bit limited for walkaround/travel use.

  27. #77
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Pentax lenses

    HI Gerald
    Quote Originally Posted by photogerald View Post
    How frustrating! So what are you going to do now? Get it replaced again, or return it outright and go for a different option?
    Quote Originally Posted by photogerald View Post

    Also, the new DA18-135 DC WR is actually looking to be nice lens. It's got weather sealing and has a new fast and silent in-lens DC motor (faster than SDM). IQ is said to be a noticeable step up from the 18-55 kit lens, and if it's not wide enough you can pair it with the DA15 Ltd. It's also quite compact - when retracted, it's about the same length as the 18-55 and just slightly fatter. I'm actually thinking of replacing my DA16-45 with the DA18-135, not because of any IQ issues but rather because I find the range to a bit limited for walkaround/travel use.
    Well, that's what I did - swapped it for the 18-135 and the 15 limited (plus a bit of cash).

    First impressions of the 18-135 are a bit mixed, but I'll give it the benefit of a proper work out - I'm not expecting miracles, small 7x zooms should not be expected to produce the same results as a fixed focus lens!. As for the 15 limited, I'm aware it's soft in the corners wide open - I'll be testing it to see if I can live with that.

    More Later!

    Just this guy you know

  28. #78
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    135
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    46

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    HI Gerald
    First impressions of the 18-135 are a bit mixed, but I'll give it the benefit of a proper work out - I'm not expecting miracles, small 7x zooms should not be expected to produce the same results as a fixed focus lens!. As for the 15 limited, I'm aware it's soft in the corners wide open - I'll be testing it to see if I can live with that.

    More Later!
    I am quite interested to hear how you find it. I bought the K-5 primarily for bad-weather days and seem to have settled upon the 21 and 40 limiteds for when the rain/snow goes away and the kit for when I need the WR. I'm happy with the limiteds but it would be nice to have a somewhat better-IQ WR lens that is less bulky than the 16-50. Of course a WR limited in the 35-50 equiv FOV range would also be fantastic but don't know if something like that is coming.

  29. #79
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Well, that's what I did - swapped it for the 18-135 and the 15 limited (plus a bit of cash).

    First impressions of the 18-135 are a bit mixed, but I'll give it the benefit of a proper work out - I'm not expecting miracles, small 7x zooms should not be expected to produce the same results as a fixed focus lens!. As for the 15 limited, I'm aware it's soft in the corners wide open - I'll be testing it to see if I can live with that.

    More Later!
    Hi Jono, I just replied to your post about the DA18-135 in the other thread. Actually, I got confused and also started commenting about the DA15 Ltd in that thread. So to keep things aligned, I've removed that comment and put it here:

    Regarding the DA15 Ltd's "soft" corners, it's been said that this lens has high field curvature, so the poor corner performance on test charts might not show up in real world non-flat subjects. Let us know what you find.

  30. #80
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by MPK2010 View Post
    I am quite interested to hear how you find it. I bought the K-5 primarily for bad-weather days and seem to have settled upon the 21 and 40 limiteds for when the rain/snow goes away and the kit for when I need the WR. I'm happy with the limiteds but it would be nice to have a somewhat better-IQ WR lens that is less bulky than the 16-50.
    Right now it's looking like the DA18-135 could fit the bill - in the range of 18-55mm it appears to be excellent. We're still waiting for some "professional" reviews of it, and I'm also sure Jono will let us know his thoughts once he gets better acquainted with his.

  31. #81
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by photogerald View Post
    Right now it's looking like the DA18-135 could fit the bill - in the range of 18-55mm it appears to be excellent. We're still waiting for some "professional" reviews of it, and I'm also sure Jono will let us know his thoughts once he gets better acquainted with his.
    . . . . the "un-professional" review eh?
    One thing I can say categorically - it's MUCH better than the kit lens.

    Just this guy you know

  32. #82
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    15mm limited

    Hi there
    Whilst testing out the 18-135, I popped the 15mm limited on the tripod as well. I have a nice test area which gives quite a lot of depth with detail at each depth.

    As reported, this lens is soft on the corners at f4 - as Tom? suggested, I think this is more to do with curvature of field than an optical fault.

    Basically, my test shot is of a shed, with the foreground coming towards you, and trees going away at the top.

    The top corners (away from the point of focus) were actually quite sharp, whereas the bottom corners were very soft. This has improved by f5.6, and is really not an issue by f8.

    The centre seems to be really good at all focal lengths, as others have said, colour and contrast is excellent, and the lens is a lovely thing. Definitely a keeper.

    Either the 18-135 or the 15mm will fit in a coat pocket easily, which makes it great to go out with the K5 and these two lenses.

    I put my feelings on the 18-134 in a different thread.

    all the best

    Just this guy you know

  33. #83
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: 15mm limited

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    Hi there
    .... 15mm limited on the tripod as well. I have a nice test area which gives quite a lot of depth with detail at each depth.
    ...The centre seems to be really good at all focal lengths...
    Hi Jono, how does the centre do at 20mm?

  34. #84
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: 15mm limited

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    Hi Jono, how does the centre do at 20mm?


    I meant all apertures (silly me)

    Just this guy you know

  35. #85
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    By the way - I am glad you like the lens!

  36. #86
    photogerald
    Guest

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    . . . . the "un-professional" review eh?
    One thing I can say categorically - it's MUCH better than the kit lens.
    Well by "professional" I was referring to the likes of dpreview, photozone, etc.

    Any Joe can post their thoughts on the internet and have people say "I read it on the interwebs so it must be true!" Yes, those Joes would be you and I.

  37. #87
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by photogerald View Post
    Well by "professional" I was referring to the likes of dpreview, photozone, etc.

    Any Joe can post their thoughts on the internet and have people say "I read it on the interwebs so it must be true!" Yes, those Joes would be you and I.
    Well, it would appear that this Joe don't know his aperture from his focal length, so I'd treat everything he says with deep caution

    Just this guy you know

  38. #88
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,115
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses


    This works nicely for me. It's about what I want to carry, and work the way I want to work. Others choose other solutions, each with their own compromises.

    Life is good. ;-)
    It's funny how times change and why we move out of a brand and why. Anyway, I was going to ask, I notice you are in San Jose. That's not too far from where I am, in particularly where I work right now. I was thinking if you had the free time this weekend and you were willing to do this, if I could meet with you and if you don't mind for me to try a few things on the E-5.

    I am looking in particular for JPEG engine detail preserved as the ISO climbs up (1600, 3200, 6400). I think this would make me do a quick call on keeping/returning the K-5 though it looks like I am keeping.

    Also some lower light AF. I get the impression the E-5 will AF better.

    - Raist

  39. #89
    Senior Member ecsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tax State
    Posts
    549
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Sent my copy back to Adorama. The center was actually still soft on mine up to F8 when it would start to come out of its coma. Others on the Pentax forum have told me not to bother with another copy, as that is how they found their copy(s) as well. Will pick up a new copy after the first of the year, or whenever my body comes back home from the dreaded AA Filter disease. ;^((
    Joe

  40. #90
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Pentax lenses

    Quote Originally Posted by ecsh View Post
    Sent my copy back to Adorama. The center was actually still soft on mine up to F8 when it would start to come out of its coma. Others on the Pentax forum have told me not to bother with another copy, as that is how they found their copy(s) as well. Will pick up a new copy after the first of the year, or whenever my body comes back home from the dreaded AA Filter disease. ;^((
    Joe
    Hi Joe
    Mine's fine at the centre, even at f4. I guess I was lucky (unlike the 16-50!).

    I also have the filter disease (just a couple of spots off centre at f22) , but not so that I've seen it in any photographs. I thought I'd leave it for a week or so, and then try and get it replaced in the shop before Christmas when they have new stock.

    To be honest I can live with it, but I'll try and get something sorted.

    all the best

    Just this guy you know

  41. #91
    Senior Member ecsh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tax State
    Posts
    549
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Pentax lenses

    At F11, it was a mess. I normally do not shoot that anyway, but it was the ramblings on the net that made me look. At first, it looks just like dust. Since all the Pentax stuff tells you to avoid blowers, i did a wet clean. No difference. So, i went back to most of my pics, and in 75% or so, you could not see it. Problem is, one word, resale. I like the camera enough to keep it, until something else this nice and small and well built comes along
    Joe

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •