Pentax DA15 or Sigma 8-16?

I'm thinking to buy a DA 15mm, while SRS offers a very good price for Sigma 8-16mm. But I'm not sure if any ND filter kit will work on it. Can anyone give some advice for me?

I can't comment on the Sigma but I did buy the Tammy 10-24 18 months ago!

I have hardly used it.

I bought a DA15 two weeks ago, it has not been off my camera since.

There is nothing wrong with the Tamron, it is sharp enough and gives the massive FOV that 10mm affords = all in all a fantastic wide zoom.

However it is big, plastic, and a zoom, so you can vary the composition by zooming in and out etc.

The DA15, is for me easier to use. I can point the camera and if I like what I see I can click. I can't zoom in and out and wonder which zoom setting is best to change the view I have to move my own a**. The prime reason I prefer my wide prime over my wide zoom is because it is a prime and it makes me think more and suits my style of photography!

Just last night.....
[IMG]http://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/3398/large/1_15-.jpg[/IMG]

My advice - If you are thinking about the DA15 - Get it! If you don't you will always be casting a sideways glance at the DA15!

Any of the superwide zooms are great lenses, and at 8mm!, but what they are not is a Pentax DA 15mm f4 ED AL Limited.

After all that rambling - When I walked into SRS 18 months ago I could have saved myself the cost of the superwide zoom (which is now in a drawer) if I'd have just got he DA15 in the first place!

MZ

Hi Liang
The Sigma 8-16mm and ND filters such as Lee, from what i have read, I think you won't be able to use them unless you rig up a custom filter holder yourself, the problem is that the Sigma 8 -16 is very bulbous, and this will make any filter prone to vignetting as the filter will need to be a lot further away from the front end of the lens. I doubt that there are currently any screw in filter either, but I am sure that if the lens really takes off, someone will see a gap and make a solution. I think it looks like a very interesting lens though.

The 15 suffers from problems re. ND filters too, as the inbuilt hood complicates attaching them without causing vignetting.

The 15 is a lovely lens with the impeccable finish of the Ltds, and its relative width alongside it's diminutive size makes it a very attractive and practical lens. Optically it's probably no improvement on the DA12-24 - better in some ways (CAs, flare resistance - which is amazing), worse in others (not as sharp wide open at the edges - the 12-24 must be one the sharpest zooms about). Don't know how it compares to the Sigma.

Most people who are lucky enough to own a DA 15mm Ltd really like the lens. It does take a while to get the best out of it but it is worth the effort.

Its known drawbacks of needing to be stopped down for best results regarding vignetting and sharpness in the corners are more than compensated by its rendering and flare resistance.

The great advantage is that it is small and takes up minimal space in the camera bag or can be carried in a pocket. This means that you are more likely to have it with you when needed. The WA zooms tend to be large and heavy.

The new Sigma 8-16mm looks amazing, very sharp across the whole frame.

I wish Pentax had a wide DA* zoom. Even an 11-16 would be good, although I have no idea how good that Tokina design is.

EDIT: Just checked the Canon review of the Tokina 11-16 on photozone. Amazing resolution figures. Looking at photos from the Sigma is seem just as good and wider!

Sorry - I know this doesn't directly answer your question but I can't recommend the Pentax DA12-24 enough, it outperforms the DA15 in almost all areas according to DPreview.

What you lose in practicality due to the DA15mm compact size you gain in the very useful focal range - I recently used the DA12-24mm as a walkabout lens for 70% of my shots on a recent trip to China - low distortion means it's great for architecture (unlike the Sigma 10-20 I previously owned). The downside is obviously price but decent used ones appear from time to time.

Just my thoughts anyway

Simon

I've got the Sigma 10-20, but looking at all the pictures taken with it I think only a handful were at a length other than 10mm. So it is effectively a 10mm prime in the way I use it, with all composition done by moving around rather than zooming.

The distortion that comes with that lens is automatically corrected in post processing so I've never really thought about it.

I find the idea of 8mm strangely compelling. Although the DA15 is highly regarded it is like a medium telephoto in comparison to 8mm with about half the field of view of the Sigma. Looking at this link http://darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/2010/06/29/field-test-sigma-af-8-16mm-f4-5-5-... the last picture in particular illustrates to me the incredible view that 8mm can give.

Have you got a plug in that corrects the 10mm distortion automatically?

I try and keep to 12mm with the 10-20mm as I don't like the extreme distortion at the edge of the frame, and it goes away as you zoom in!

I can understand your enthusiasm for the 12-24 Simon, but I think reviews only tell you so much about a lens. The sharpness & lack of distortion it displays are exceptional, and as you point out the focal range is actually very handy in day to day shooting. However, I've not been so taken with the colours the 12-24 produces (unusually for Pentax lenses - IMO the 17-70, for eg., which I know you also have, is stronger in this regard). And from my impressions so far, though it's early days yet as I only got it very recently, the 15 Ltd's do have a certain character about them. Also, I'm guessing that anyone who does consider the DA15, must in part be considering it for its small size - and this really is a big plus.

The Sigma 8-16 does look an interesting proposition, karma mechanic, but the distortion in the shots of the chair and building in the link you posted are really quite unpleasant. If a lens is going to do that then you might as well consider the DA10-17 which also distorts but in a different way, is even wider, and opens up a whole world of possibilities. It's also pleasingly small, if not as small as the DA15.

I agree with your points here Mhuni - the colour/contrast of the 12-24 probably falls somewhere between the Tarmon 70-300 I used to own and the DA 17-70 and perhaps quite similar to the Sigma 10-20 - some shots do benefit from a slight tweak in saturation/white balance to get the best from them and overall I do prefer the Pentax colour/contrast. Obviously lens size is specific to individual needs and as i always carry a backpack it's a non-issue for me, the zoom range is more important, I can see how those who prefer to travel light go for the 15mm though and I've seen some terrific shots from it.

When remembering my Sigma 10-20 I can't exactly agree with the comment by Karma mechanic about "automatic corrected" distortion at 10mm - I tried both the widely respected PTlens plug-in and CS4 and was unable to correct the distortion, at 12mm it was much less of an issue though and more easily corrected

Simon

I've just shot a picture of a piece of wall, deliberately exploiting the worst possible distortion that the Sigma shows along the edges when set to 10mm. This is completely uncorrected:

http://www.infrared.webspace.virginmedia.com/Other%20Pictures/slides/Sigma1020uncorrected.jpg

In Bibble I would normally have the 'lens correction' ticked, so instead I'd see:

http://www.infrared.webspace.virginmedia.com/Other%20Pictures/slides/Sigma1020corrected.jpg

I concede that the correction in this case is far from perfect, but much better than the raw version. It must be said that the skirting and frieze in this case are deliberately placed in the area prone to the worst distortion. It was actually quite hard to get the framing perpendicular to the wall since at 10mm the slightest misalingment becomes a huge perspective shift.

Regarding the fisheye effect, it simply doesn't do it for me, but rectilinear (ok, the odd bit of bend here and there) ultrawide does.

Yeah I like a bit of perspective distortion too, but I agree with Mhuni that in the chair and the house shot, the effect could have been better exploited.

The 8-16mm looks an excellent lens, and apparently outperforms both the 10-20 and the 12-24. The sharpness looks fantastic, better distortion than the 12-24 at 12mm.

IMHO you can't even compare the DA15mm, it's just a different sort of lens, and a very desirable one... but not a UWA.