18-55 DA replacement
Posted 18/08/2010 - 10:51
Link
Personally I believe the DA12-24 to be both a much better lens and a much more useful lens than the DA*16-50, regardless of any Limited or star designations. It is absolutely distortion free at 24mm, very good at the wide end and usable from wide open. The DA*16-50 has rather middling performance and the SDM motor is haunted with failure. I rather dislike the distortion the few times I played with one, plus it is far too heavy and bulky for my liking. I see people using it without the hood in order to keep the size down, which is false economy.
One will often see pro shooters with a wide and tele zoom, leaving the range in-between uncovered, or maybe switching to a fast fifty when needed. The DA12-24 fits this plan.
But everyone likes to shoot differently. personally I have little use for tele and am happy with the DA12-24 and FA77 as a two-lens kit for much of my travels.
Seeing the price hike on the horizon I managed to trade the excellent DA35 macro for my DA12-24, which was a great deal IMO. Some day when I have money I will have to buy back the DA35, but in the meantime I have the wide end covered.
One will often see pro shooters with a wide and tele zoom, leaving the range in-between uncovered, or maybe switching to a fast fifty when needed. The DA12-24 fits this plan.
But everyone likes to shoot differently. personally I have little use for tele and am happy with the DA12-24 and FA77 as a two-lens kit for much of my travels.
Seeing the price hike on the horizon I managed to trade the excellent DA35 macro for my DA12-24, which was a great deal IMO. Some day when I have money I will have to buy back the DA35, but in the meantime I have the wide end covered.
Posted 18/08/2010 - 12:46
Link
rparmar wrote:
Personally I believe the DA12-24 to be both a much better lens and a much more useful lens than the DA*16-50, regardless of any Limited or star designations. It is absolutely distortion free at 24mm, very good at the wide end and usable from wide open. The DA*16-50 has rather middling performance and the SDM motor is haunted with failure. I rather dislike the distortion the few times I played with one, plus it is far too heavy and bulky for my liking. I see people using it without the hood in order to keep the size down, which is false economy.
One will often see pro shooters with a wide and tele zoom, leaving the range in-between uncovered, or maybe switching to a fast fifty when needed. The DA12-24 fits this plan.
But everyone likes to shoot differently. personally I have little use for tele and am happy with the DA12-24 and FA77 as a two-lens kit for much of my travels.
Seeing the price hike on the horizon I managed to trade the excellent DA35 macro for my DA12-24, which was a great deal IMO. Some day when I have money I will have to buy back the DA35, but in the meantime I have the wide end covered.
I totally agree and REALLY want one now but just cannot afford it ! I have the two kit lenses to cover up to 200, I also have a M50 (only F2 but only a fiver !) and a M200 F4. Possibly another M or A lens a bit longer and a macro and I will be happy (for at least a week !)
Personally I believe the DA12-24 to be both a much better lens and a much more useful lens than the DA*16-50, regardless of any Limited or star designations. It is absolutely distortion free at 24mm, very good at the wide end and usable from wide open. The DA*16-50 has rather middling performance and the SDM motor is haunted with failure. I rather dislike the distortion the few times I played with one, plus it is far too heavy and bulky for my liking. I see people using it without the hood in order to keep the size down, which is false economy.
One will often see pro shooters with a wide and tele zoom, leaving the range in-between uncovered, or maybe switching to a fast fifty when needed. The DA12-24 fits this plan.
But everyone likes to shoot differently. personally I have little use for tele and am happy with the DA12-24 and FA77 as a two-lens kit for much of my travels.
Seeing the price hike on the horizon I managed to trade the excellent DA35 macro for my DA12-24, which was a great deal IMO. Some day when I have money I will have to buy back the DA35, but in the meantime I have the wide end covered.
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
10412 posts
18 years
Dordrecht,
the Netherlands
Completely understand the 12-24 and 16-50 are totaly different ranges, I was using this as an example of how much the price of the 12-24 seems to have been inflated beyond exchange rate ...
12-24 has no focus motor and is neither limited ar * range, where the 16-50 is. Threfore, cost to produce 12-24 is significantly less than the 16-50 but the street price at the moment is roughly the same.
Also don't forget ultra wide lenses are harder to design than more normal lenses, it isn't just the production cost to consider.
But indeed the price of that lens almost doubled
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ