Problems using *ist DS with 3rd party lenses?!?

I am considering a *ist DS. I don't particularly like the range of lenses Pentax offers. I'm after fast lenses as I am not fond of flash photography. The smc 28-70/2.8 seems rather bulky and expensive compared to good 3rd party offerings.

So this is what I have in mind:
- *ist DS body
- Tamron SP AF 28-75mm F/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) Macro [this one got rather splendid reviews it seems]
- Tamron SP AF 17-35mm F/2.8-4 Di LD Aspherical (IF) [this one doesn't seem to be quite as good as the above, but still OK]

And possibly later at some point (when the money might have grown back :roll:
- Sigma 70-200mm F/2.8 EX APO IF

Now in the thread about the underexposure problem with the camera, George Lazarette mentioned the following:

> Are you using third party lenses?
> (Some lens chips are incompatible -especially Sigma's)

What's all this about then? Where can I find out more details? It is the first time I hear this.

And knowing that I cannot reliably use 3rd party lenses would be a definite show-stopper for me. Then I'd have to wait for an EOS with spot-metering or so.

Would be such a bugger. The *ist DS is one of the very very few digital cameras I handled that felt like a proper camera, just take that aperture-stop-down-lever -- doesn't it make your eyes glaze over?

Cheers,
Joerg

P.S.: this issue of underexposure worries me too -- it's a lot of money out of my pocket and I would want the camera to work as advertised.

I have heard that Sigma refuse to pay a royalty to camera manufacturers to obtain information on the data which the lens passes to the camera. As a result, when a new camera comes out, older lenses may not be as compatible as they might be.

I don't know how true all this is, but I have also heard that Sigma has been known to re-chip older lenses where a problem has been observed.

I haven't heard anything similar in relation to other lens manufacturers.

Bear in mind too, that this alleged problem with under-exposure seems only to affect a very few people, but of course they will make a noise about it. You won't hear from people saying "guess what, I bought a camera and the exposure system works". Just as you don't hear people saying that their new car starts first time (unless they are former Trabant owners).

My point about the make of lens being used was one of a list of possible causes of an infrequent problem. If you don't plan to use Sigma lenses, then the point is probably completely irrelevant. If you do want to use Sigma, my advice would be to do some research, and if possible check out the lens on the camera before buying.

Coming to your choice of lenses, I think it is true that Pentax's affordable zooms don't tend to have very wide apertures, and I also think you'll find this is true of all the camera manufacturers. If you want a good, wide aperture, zoom from a camera-maker, it will not be cheap.

Personally, I would also be inclined to look at prime lenses in your position, given not only that you want wide apertures, but also that zooms invariably perform least well at extremes of the range, and also at wide apertures. Primes will be cheaper, sharper, smaller and often capable of one or two stops more than any f2.8 zoom. The quality will be much better. If you haven't tried a really good prime lens, you will be amazed at the difference.

Try for instance the Pentax-FA 20mm 2.8, the Pentax-FA (or F, though I believe the FA is better) 28mm 2.8, the Pentax-FA 35mm 2.0, the Pentax-F/FA 1.4/1.7, the Pentax-FA 77mm 1.8, the Pentax-FA 100mm 2.8,
and the Pentax-F/FA 135mm 2.8. I have several of these (bought mainly on Ebay without completely breaking the bank), and they are superb, especially the 50, 77 and 100. The 24mm 2.0 is also a magnificent lens, as are the various 85s.

Cheaper second-hand manual-focus versions can be found on Ebay. The Pentax M lenses, in particular, are very small, and it is no great hardship to carry two or three around with you.

G

The Sigma EX 70-200 F2.8 works fine with my *ist D.
The Tamron also does. But both manufactures have minor problems with quality control . It is reported that some Tamrons XR-DI 28-75, made in China, do not perform as good as the Japan ones.
My above mentioned Sigma has a faulty cemented lens. Since I bought it used on ePay I have no waranty anymore. It has no effect on the pictures.




Hope I get some Euros back from the former owner.
Newer digital optimized lenses generaly tend to underexposure. Blown out lights will destroy a picture forever. I used to shoot in RAW. So I can correct the exposure just to the point I want.

-Linus-

I have said it many times before, but I really do think the Pentax lenses are better.

There are also good reasons for some of the professional lenses being so expensive, such as the 28-70mm f2.8 mentioned above. This lens has superb optical and mechanical quality and a relatively large and constant aperture. It is heavy and bulky but it should last a lifetime of hard use.

There are some good independent lenses, but in general I have never been that impressed. I remember picking up a very sloppy Sigma 18mm at an exhibition, and the rep said "Well, it has had a lot of use", but then again so it would in professional use, and I wouldn't expect a Nikon or Pentax lens to go in the same way....

Only bought one non pentax lens for my Ist Ds. Sigma 55-200 no problems at all there, very happy.

Oh I see.
I had not heard about any systematic underexposure problem in a number of reviews both on-line and in a magazine.

Good point. Again thanks for sharing.

But the trying out bit is where I might have a problem. The dealer I found here in Darmstadt, Germany can get me the lenses but has not got them in stock for the Pentax mount. Only Nikon and Canon.
With my analog SLR I only use primes. And as fast as I can possibly get them: 25/2.8, 50mm/1.4, 85mm/1.4 and 135/2.8. This is just great. The 50mm and 85mm are my favourites, also focal length wise.

Now, if I try to get lenses like this for the APS size sensor, I need something like a 55mm/1.4 and a 33mm/1.4 and they are hard to come by. No?

You have a point. I might have another look into available primes. This would not be working out as a cheap (or even affordable) affair... So I wonder: is digital photography worth all this for me right now or should I go for solid quality budget zoom lenses (as mentioned in my original post) for the time being and possibly upgrade later.

I also wonder whether (and when) Pentax (and others) will widely deploy full frame sensors such as the ones in the top-of-the line Canons or Kodaks? Ever? Zoom lenses are more flexible in this respect, if you see what I mean.

Cheers and thanks for sharing your thoughts,
Joerg

Oh, good to hear.
What a bummer. So how do I find this out then? If I hold the box in my hand, does it have a 'Made in China' or a 'Made in Japan' sticker on it? That would still leave me with the problem of finding a dealer with the lenses in stock.

Oh no no nooo, this is all too much. Should I just stay analog? But a working digital setup is so convenient and that marvellous experience of immediacy. No wait for the lab.

Bohoooo.

Good luck.

Cheers,
Joerg

The Tamron is F/2.8 also and the optical quality of it seems rather good (I admit this is hearsay, have not seen it myself). I cannot make statements about the build quality as I have not handled the Pentax lens.
Yes, you do have to cherry-pick. And that was one of my original points/questions -- am I free to choose 3rd party lenses or am I likely to run into problems such as incompatibilites?

Cheers,
Joerg

Joerg,

The 50mm 1.4 can be had on Ebay for less than $200, and the 28mm lenses for rather less (my 28mm cost me about $70). These are equivalent to 75mm and 42mm FOV in 35mm terms, which is not far from the 50mm and 85mm you were talking about.

If you can do without autofocus, then the M lenses are available for much less money.

Furthermore, if you do have compatibility/quality problems with third party lenses on Pentax, then it is highly likely that you will experience similar problems with other makes of camera.

Very few people regret switching to digital. If you use quite a lot of film, then a DSLR will pay for itself quite quickly.

G

I have an *ist D and I can say it works exceptionally well with the Tamron XR Di 28-75 lense. Also, I have a couple of AF Sigma lenses (including a 170-500 APO) the results of which I also find wonderful wih the *ist D.

I had the lenses prior to the aquistion of the *ist D and believe the metering of this camera performs more reliably the my MZ-S.

As to the lenses, I have to admit, I have purchased most of my lenses used (except for the Tamron and one Sigma) and have found it is tough to find Pentax lenses (save for some older primes) in the used market. Even when purchasing new, the offering of Pentax lenses seems "thin" compared to the third party offering. I recall, when purchasing the Tamron, I did look at a comparable Pentax lense (it was a standard one they were offering as part of a "kit" --can't remember the model) and purchased the Tamron even though it was a few more dollars. The Tamron just seemed to feel better and, for me, seemed to offer a better "brightness" in the view finder.

The majority of my lense collection are the older manual focus style (both zooms and primes). I have found that these also work very well on the *ist D after setting the function to accept lenses other than "A" in the menu and selecting the manual focus setting.

I was able to purchase the *ist D at the same price as the *ist Ds and wanted the "D" for the compatibility with the CF card and the fact it has a PC socket for remote flash (although my local camera shop says they sell a lot of conversion "kits" for the other makes which fit the hot shoe).

Overall I'm very pleased with the camera and find the fully automatic functioning to perform admirably.

Al

Jörg,

Have a look at this Forum http://forum.digitalfotonetz.de/index.php

I don't know if you're registered there.

-Linus-

Thanks for the pointer!

Cheers,
Joerg

Have been looking into the available primes again and I now almost wonder why I nearly went astray.

The limited edition lenses 31/1.8, 43/1.9, 77/1.8 seem to deliver outstanding picture quality. The 50/1.4 is about 77mm in 35mm format equivalent. The 20/2.8 could possibly make a nice moderate wide angle lens for landscapes and the like. So why did I think of something else than this? Again thanks George for raising this point.

What's the difference between the DFA and the FA lenses? There are 50/2.8 and 100/2.8 macro lenses both in DFA and FA. Pentax say the DFA is good for both classic and digital photography but it all sounds very much like spiel to me. Experiences anybody?

I am not quite 100% sure yet whether I will cave in now and go out to buy the *ist DS. But if I do, I think I'll go with primes again, as I did in analog photography.

Cheers,
Joerg

Hi,
Just ot confuse the issue further - I always prefer primes however if you do wanrt a zoom, the 28-70/F2.8 may be a little bulky but it is a superb performer. It's list price is high but I was about to buy the Sigma version but fortunately just before I did I found a second hand Pentax on boxed and in near mint condition. I only had to pay about the same as I would for a new Sigma and only about £60 more than a second hand Sigma EX. To me that is far beter VFM.

Kim