Pentax aficionados

[Mark Blue]

I bought my wife the Pentax Kx for Christmas as I had mentioned a month or two ago in another thread Jim S. had started about the K5. It comes with the standard lens, which is an 18-55 mm zoom lens. I'm pretty new to the DSLR equation, so I thought I'd throw this question out to the folks who know this stuff inside and out. I also decided to buy a UWA lens and went with the Pentax Zoom Fisheye SMCP-DA 10-17 mm model based on some searching I did here on the forum, as well as some reading I had done on the Pentax forums. It seems from what I gather that for structure shots a person needs a wide angle lens to get the entire supercell in the frame, otherwise you have to drive farther away.

I noticed that B&H also had a Pentax Super Wide Angle SMCP-DA 12-24 mm lens that I also considered. I probably should have asked before ordering, but do you think she'll be happy with this setup, or did I make the wrong choice? My wife is my chase partner, so I wanted to upgrade her from the crappy point and shoot Sony she has now. I can only hope I did the right thing, but if not I can always exchange it after the holidays.

 

[Jason Boggs]

I bought my wife the Pentax Kx for Christmas as I had mentioned a month or two ago in another thread Jim S. had started about the K5. It comes with the standard lens, which is an 18-55 mm zoom lens. I'm pretty new to the DSLR equation, so I thought I'd throw this question out to the folks who know this stuff inside and out. I also decided to buy a UWA lens and went with the Pentax Zoom Fisheye SMCP-DA 10-17 mm model based on some searching I did here on the forum, as well as some reading I had done on the Pentax forums. It seems from what I gather that for structure shots a person needs a wide angle lens to get the entire supercell in the frame, otherwise you have to drive farther away.

I noticed that B&H also had a Pentax Super Wide Angle SMCP-DA 12-24 mm lens that I also considered. I probably should have asked before ordering, but do you think she'll be happy with this setup, or did I make the wrong choice? My wife is my chase partner, so I wanted to upgrade her from the crappy point and shoot Sony she has now. I can only hope I did the right thing, but if not I can always exchange it after the holidays.

Great gift for your fellow mate and chase partner. Don't know any answers to your questions, but I'm sure she'll love the camera!

 

[Mark Blue]

Yeah, she makes out like a bandit at Christmas as I don't know when to say when...

 

[Scott Bennett]

I wish I knew more about the Pentax lenses but I have the Sigma 10-20 on my K-x and I love it...

If you want a Pentax DA 50-200 I would make you a real good deal on one, I have an extra just sitting on my desk.

Typically I run a 50-200 on my K200d and the 10-20 on the K-x.

Nice thing about the K-x is it does 720p video so you could do some cool timelapes on the wide angle you got.

 

[Darren Addy]

The key word in your description of the 10-17mm was fisheye. You are correct that you need wide for good dramatic storm structure shots... but there are two kinds of wide: fisheye and rectilinear. Fisheye lines can be very dramatic and make great photos, but for many things they look unnatural. Rectilinear wide will still show some distortion, but only at the very edges of the frame.

I recommend looking for examples of images shot with your prospective lenses (like on Flickr or PentaxForums).

You will love the K-x and the kit lens is pretty darn good. For a wide, a lot of people really like the Pentax DA 12-24mm (rectilinear). I'm a bang-for-the-buck kinda guy and so I got bought a used Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 (rectilinear) for about half the money (and got 10mm on the wide end, instead of 12mm). It is a wonderful lens, IMHO.

 

[Mark Blue]

Thanks for the suggestions gentlemen. I was a little worried about the fisheye lens as I had noticed that a couple of sample photos looked "curved up" near the edge of the picture. The pictures actually looked like what I imagine seeing things through a fisheye would look like if one could actually do that. I'm sure there's a professional term for "curved up at the edge", but that's the only layman way of describing it I can think of that makes sense. I did learn something though from the post, so that's a good thing (rectilinear vs fisheye). I'll be able to return it if I decide to and now I have a homework assignment to help me learn more.

If you still have that lens in late January I'll check with you Scott since her birthday is in early February. What types of shots do you take with that particular lens - zooming in close?

 

[Darren Addy]

Yes, but a fisheye is not just curved up at the edges, it is curved lines all the way across. It is just that it becomes more pronounced at the edges. (Imagine the line of an egg: It is all curved, but curves more at the edges.)
Take the fisheye and take the picture of the inside of a room for example. The ceiling line at the other end of the room will bow up, and the floor line at the other end of the room will bow down. What this means is that unless you put your horizon line exactly in the middle, it is never going to be flat. This is not true with a rectilinear.

 

[Scott Bennett]

If you still have that lens in late January I'll check with you Scott since her birthday is in early February. What types of shots do you take with that particular lens - zooming in close?

Yea if you are far away... the pic on my avatar was taken with said lens.

 

[Mark Blue]

You're right Darren, remember that I'm new to this so I can't speak very intelligently on the whole subject. It is curved like an egg, just much more so at the edges where it really caught my attention. I'm checking out those other lenses you all recommended as I don't think that "effect" is something I want to look at on all future pictures involving a wide angle.

I met you last year at the Chasercon streaming booth Scott, I don't know if you remember or not. I am tentatively interested since it appears to be a less expensive lens compared to the UWAs I've been looking at.

 

[Esa Tuunanen]

I'm checking out those other lenses you all recommended as I don't think that "effect" is something I want to look at on all future pictures involving a wide angle.

Here's review of both Pentax "uncorrected" fisheye lens and corrected rectilinear lens and also some example photos (of architecture) in last page:
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/132-...5-45-edif-fisheye-review--test-report?start=1
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/133-pentax-da-12-24mm-f4-al-ed-if-review--test-report?start=1
Like said in last page of fisheye lens review its distortion can be corrected with processing but that won't happen without loss in quality as pixels have to "compressed and stretched" in various parts of the image.

And that abovementioned Sigma:
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/146-sigma-af-10-20mm-f4-56-ex-dc-pentax-k-review--test-report?start=1


And Merry Christmas...
Here weather is warming up, only -15F now and maybe just warm 0F tomorrow...

 

[Darren Addy]

A few examples from the Sigma 10-20mm on Pentax. (Thread is coming up on 1000 replies).

 

[LinkeS]

I use the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 on my K-X and love it, especially at 10mm. If you do go with the Sigma make sure that it is sharp across the entire frame as some copies are sharp in the center and really fall off on the left and right sides. The first copy I purchased had this problem and even after sending to Sigma for recalibration, the fall-off was still noticeable.

At first I thought the lack of focus on the edges was a problem with the photographer (me ) but after reading some threads and performing some tests recommended on Pentax Forums and Flickr I decided to return it to Amazon. No hassle from Amazon with the return and got a new one with 10 days...ran the same tests and it was sharp as a tack.

Just some FYI so don't be put off by the sharpness issue, the Sigma 10-20mm is an awesome UWA lens and probably my favorite in the bag....just wanted to mention it so you and/or anyone else gets one that performs as it should .

Here's a link to Flickr were they discuss the sharpness issue (there are others on there as well):
http://www.flickr.com/groups/sigma10-20/discuss/72157600223685658/

I think the link Darren provided also has some discussion on the sharpness as well. If not, I know there are a few other threads on Pentax Forums that talk about it.

One other wide angle you may want to consider is the Pentax DA 15mm Limited f/4. It's a prime and not nearly as wide as the Sigma but it produces some of the most beautiful images I've ever seen on a Pentax.

 

[Darren Addy]

For those looking at the Sigma 10-20mm (Pentax or not) keep in mind that there are two versions, a f4-5.6 and a f3.5. The f3.5 gains you a stop and a half of light at the one end and a half stop at the other. Whether that is worth another $220 or so, is up to the individual photographer. I'm pretty darn happy with the slower version myself, but I'm a bang-for-the-buck (AKA cheapskate) kinda guy.