Pentax version of the Tokina 11-16 ...WHEN IS IT HAPPENING?


MarkD

Link Posted 17/01/2009 - 09:46
Anyone heard anything about either a pentax mount for the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 or more likely a Pentax branded version, preferably weather sealed?
I can't wait to get into debt on this one..... (hope the missus isn't reading this)
.........all the gear, no idea!
Me super, MX, LX, K5,DA 18-55WR, DA 17-70, DA 55-300, DA40 Ltd, FA50 1.4, Samsung D-Xenon 12-24,Samsung 100mm macro M50 1.7(x3), M28 3.5, M35 2.8, M100macro f4, M135 3.5(+others)

Unlocker

Link Posted 17/01/2009 - 10:15
This is one on my wish list too, would be a perfect compliment to our existing kit!

There is a possibility that we may make PMA in Vegas this year as we are on honeymoon, if we do make it, I will try my best to harass the Pentax staff to see what I can get out of them!

WebsiteBlogGearTwitterFacebook

pentaxian450

Link Posted 17/01/2009 - 12:51
Unlocker wrote:

There is a possibility that we may make PMA in Vegas this year as we are on honeymoon,

Good luck to you both. I hope you realize that photography is going to take a back seat to the reality of married life!
Yves (another one of those crazy Canucks)

Unlocker

Link Posted 17/01/2009 - 21:21
pentaxian450 wrote:

Good luck to you both.

Thanks Yves!

pentaxian450 wrote:
I hope you realize that photography is going to take a back seat to the reality of married life!

I bloody hope not!

WebsiteBlogGearTwitterFacebook

Gwyn

Link Posted 17/01/2009 - 21:53
Can we have the mythical 60-250 first please?

Mannesty

Link Posted 17/01/2009 - 22:52
Gwyn wrote:
Can we have the mythical 60-250 first please?

No!

If a DA* 11-16 were to become available, I could shed a lot of weight from my armoury. My DA 12-24 and 16-45 would go for a start.

Well, maybe that's a bit too hasty, and they're not that heavy either.
Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream

RichardDay

Link Posted 18/01/2009 - 12:29
It's a rather pointless lens IMO, it's range doesn't overlap the DA*16-50, which is needed as 16mm to 20mm is that len's weakest area, and the extra 1mm and 1 stop gain on the very excellent DA 12-24 is debatable. The only advantages (?) are SDM and WS, but I cannot see how either of these are really an advantage for a super wide lens.
Best regards
Richard Day

Profile - link - (click on About for equipment profile) - My Flickr site - link

Gwyn

Link Posted 18/01/2009 - 12:39
Mannesty wrote:

If a DA* 11-16 were to become available, I could shed a lot of weight from my armoury. My DA 12-24 and 16-45 would go for a start.

Well, maybe that's a bit too hasty, and they're not that heavy either.

Why would your 16-45 go? I can just about understand getting rid of the 12-24 if they brought out the 11-16, but not the 16-45.

I agree with Richard - it seems a pretty pointless lens as far as the Pentax lenses go. Maybe that's why Pentax haven't brought it out as a Pentax badged lens.

My need for the 60-250 is a bit less since I forked out on the 50-135, but I really do need something besides the Bigma at the longer end.

Mannesty

Link Posted 18/01/2009 - 13:32
Gwyn wrote:
Why would your 16-45 go?

I already have the DA* 16-50. I would only keep the 16-45 for my lightweight kit.
Peter E Smith

My flickr Photostream

MarkD

Link Posted 18/01/2009 - 21:09
I disagree that it is pointless lens. It's already selling well in Nikon and Canon mounts and both companies have their own lenses in tht range.
By keeping the zoom range short the optical quality can be kept high, it is already regarded as being much better than the Tokina 12-24 f4 ( sound familiar ?) and even bests the Nikon equivalent. It seems to me that as Hoya own Tokina and Pentax they are missing a trick by not bringing the lenses out in a pentax mount first. Wouldn't hurt Pentax camera sales having more top quality lenses available, under either brand name ( and first!)
I'm after a very good WIDE lens.(The fixed 14 is limiting - and expensive). The 16-50 range is covered by several very good, fast lenses so stopping at 16 to keep the quality high isn't an issue for me, or ir seems many Canikon owners. Bring it on and fast I say.
.........all the gear, no idea!
Me super, MX, LX, K5,DA 18-55WR, DA 17-70, DA 55-300, DA40 Ltd, FA50 1.4, Samsung D-Xenon 12-24,Samsung 100mm macro M50 1.7(x3), M28 3.5, M35 2.8, M100macro f4, M135 3.5(+others)

RichardDay

Link Posted 21/01/2009 - 09:08
MarkD wrote:
I disagree that it is pointless lens. It's already selling well in Nikon and Canon mounts and both companies have their own lenses in tht range.
By keeping the zoom range short the optical quality can be kept high, it is already regarded as being much better than the Tokina 12-24 f4 ( sound familiar ?) and even bests the Nikon equivalent. It seems to me that as Hoya own Tokina and Pentax they are missing a trick by not bringing the lenses out in a pentax mount first. Wouldn't hurt Pentax camera sales having more top quality lenses available, under either brand name ( and first!)
I'm after a very good WIDE lens.(The fixed 14 is limiting - and expensive). The 16-50 range is covered by several very good, fast lenses so stopping at 16 to keep the quality high isn't an issue for me, or ir seems many Canikon owners. Bring it on and fast I say.

I can agree that if your requirement is for UW only and you only need a limited zoom range, i.e treating it pretty much as a more versatile prime (effectively replacing the DA 14mm) and not as a more versatile wide angle zoom street lens, plus it's much better than the DA 12-24, then I can see some use for it.

I had a Sigma 10-20 and found that even with 20mm coverage I was very frequently changing back and forth to the 16-45 which I found much more versatile as it covered the range between 20 and 24mm which I use a lot. For that reason alone I would much rather have the DA 12-24.

However, I also found the extreme wide angles (below 14mm, i.e. over 90 FOV) produced far too much perspective distortion for my liking and for this reason I used the 10-20 much less than I expected and resorted back to using the 16-45 pretty much all the time, and for the very wide landscapes I prefer to stitch a few images using the DA 16-45, the result is much better as, IQ wise, sharpness, increased resolution and colour/contrast is vastly superior as well as having better perspective control, the result is much more realistic.

What I would really like to see would be a new DA* lens developed covering the range of 14 to 55/60mm, a 4x range (the DA 17-70 is 4.12x), with a minimum of f4.0 constant (I think f2.8 would stretch the design compromises too far), and of very high optical quality with lower distortion, edge softness and CA than the DA*16-50 at the wide end.

Also, for those who love the Limited construction, look and feel, why not use the same optical layout but with no SDM or WS, I'd be sorely tempted by that option!

A high hope I know, but that would be my perfect wide to short tele solution!
Best regards
Richard Day

Profile - link - (click on About for equipment profile) - My Flickr site - link

MarkD

Link Posted 21/01/2009 - 21:53
I suppose "much" better is a very subjective term . But it is sharper faster and has less CA than the 12-24. Could I live with the 12-24? Probably could, if I'm honest, but I want sharper and faster, especially if I'm paying 400+. Then it's a "buy it once, buy it right" deal for me.
If we all made do there wouldn't be any new toys like the DA* zooms. Why bother with the 60-250 when there's a perfectly good 55-300 available?
I must admit that being new to this digital lark, I hadn't considered stitching two photo's together. I'd always thought of that as a slightly dodgy point and shoot camera sort of thing, where the joins don't quite line up. I confess I haven't even delved very deeply into the free Pentax software yet as my mindset is still in the "do it in camera" camp. I will have to investigate just how good these photo software packages can be. I don't fancy spending 600 on photoshop though (or the hours to learn how to drive it!)so what packages would you guys recommend? Where should a digital novice start.Or is the Pentax/silkypix all I'll need for a while? I suppose I'll want lens correction tools soon enough as I can't see me buying too much top end glass....
.........all the gear, no idea!
Me super, MX, LX, K5,DA 18-55WR, DA 17-70, DA 55-300, DA40 Ltd, FA50 1.4, Samsung D-Xenon 12-24,Samsung 100mm macro M50 1.7(x3), M28 3.5, M35 2.8, M100macro f4, M135 3.5(+others)

Gwyn

Link Posted 21/01/2009 - 22:09
AS far as software goes get Photoshop Elements, it will do all you want, and more. From PSE 6 onwards the panorama stitching is amazingly good. I have been really impressed with it. You can get PSE 6 quite cheaply now, and PSE 7 is also not so expensive any more.
There is nothing wrong with stitching multiple photos provided it is done well imho.
I'd far rather do that than have an ultra wide lens.
That said I do have the Sigma 10-20 but I really don't like it for landscapes, and prefer to stitch if I have to.
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.